Perceived Implications of Current Conflict of Interest Policy in Individuals Accepted or Rejected for Participation in Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committee

Author:

Shimada Yuichi J.,Hair Kyle,Faerber Adrienne,Zimmerman Christian G.,Houchin Timothy,Hart Robert A.,Gibb Matthew D.,Homma Shunichi

Abstract

ABSTRACTBackground and ObjectiveThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies on advice from scientific and medical experts to make approval decisions about new prescription medications and medical devices. Therefore, it is crucial that FDA Advisory Committees (ACs) include the most knowledgeable scientists and clinicians in the decision-making process. However, to ensure that the advice is free from biases, current FDA policy often excludes those most qualified from participating in ACs due to perceived conflicts of interest (COI). The objective of the present study is to elicit opinion among subject matter experts regarding current FDA COI rules and regulations.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using formal, self-administered online survey consisting of 14 questions, 3 of which addressed perceived implications of current FDA COI policy. We send a formal online survey to study subjects via Qualtrics. Study subjects were 1) individuals who participated in FDA ACs and 2) those who were interested in participating in ACs and had completed FDA COI paperwork but rejected by the FDA due to COI. The outcome measure is response to the 3 questions about the perceived implications of current FDA COI policy. Responses were scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale.ResultsAmong 403 study subjects (200 AC members and 203 individuals who were rejected due to COI), 145 (36%) responded to the survey including 90 AC members and 55 rejected individuals. Respondents included 41 (28%) females. 97% were holding MD or PhD degrees. 88% were age 46 and over, and 66% had more than 25 years in practice. The primary findings were that 49% of respondents agreed that the current FDA regulations lead to a lower quality of experts on ACs, 72% agreed that current policies exclude qualified experts from serving on ACs, and 48% agreed that FDA policy lowers the overall quality of AC input, to at least a “moderate” extent (19%-37% to a “high” or “very high” extent).ConclusionsThe prevailing opinion among respondents to the formal survey is that current FDA COI policy has the potential effects to lowering quality of experts, excluding qualified experts, and lowering overall quality of AC input. The present report elucidates a potential need for the FDA to discuss the benefit and risk of the current AC COI policies.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference22 articles.

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Basics - Fact Sheet: FDA at a Glance. Silver Spring, MD: U.S. Food and Drug Administration: 2018. Retrieved January 27, 2019, from https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm553038.htm.

2. Federal advisory committees, policy expertise, and the approval of drugs and medical devices at the FDA;J Public Adm Res,2011

3. Evaluation and regulation of oncology drug approval: finding the right balance;JAMA Oncol,2016

4. Financial Conflicts of Interest and the Food and Drug Administration's Advisory Committees

5. Disclosing the conflicts of interest of US food and drug administration advisory committee members;JAMA Intern Med,2017

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3