IBJNews

FDA deal with drugmakers raises user fees 6 percent

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Drugmakers such as Pfizer Inc. and Eli Lilly an Co. have agreed with regulators on a 6-percent increase in review fees as part of reauthorizing the drug-approval process through fiscal 2017.

The deal, disclosed in part Thursday, would renew for five years a federal law funding Food and Drug Administration evaluations of brand-name drugs. Congress must approve the accord before the law expires on Sept. 30, 2012.

The increase is expected to add $40.4 million to user-fee revenue in fiscal 2012, bringing the fiscal 2013 total to $712.8 million, Karen Riley, a spokeswoman for the FDA, said in an e-mail. The agency in turn will have to meet with companies in the midst of reviews to raise concerns and ensure that evaluations are carried out in a timely way.

The agreement “should allow more timely access to safe and effective new medicines,” said David Wheadon, senior vice president for scientific and regulatory affairs at lobbying group the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, in a written statement.

Drugmakers fund about 60 percent of the cost of agency reviews, according to the FDA. The agreement includes additional review time for the agency to fit in extra meetings, extending the window for reviews after submitting applications to eight months from six months, and 10-month periods to 12 months.

The FDA and the industry also agreed to meet 12 days before the agency convenes advisory panels that evaluate drugmaker applications, giving companies time to gather needed data, according to the draft.

The agreement includes a third-party review of whether the FDA is meeting drug-review goals, according to the draft.

Drug safety also will be strengthened through standardization of the requirements for risk strategies the FDA mandates of some medicines and support for the use of an online drug safety tracking system to assess post-market risks, Wheadon said.

The last time user fees were reauthorized in 2007, Congress gave the FDA new responsibilities to promote drug safety including requiring risk strategies for some drugs, which caused the agency to slow its review process.

Jim Greenwood, president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a lobbying group in Washington for biologic drugmakers, said in a statement the agreement “would restore FDA’s review performance.”

Companies such as New York-based Pfizer and Eli Lilly of Indianapolis have been discussing with the FDA a user-fee renewal since July 2010. Medical-device companies such as New Brunswick, N.J.-based Johnson & Johnson are in separate talks on fees they pay the agency for product reviews.

The device industry rejected the agency’s proposal to more than double fees to $770 million across five years from $295 million, according to meeting minutes. Manufacturers are insisting on a safeguard against 11th-hour requests from regulators that the industry says delay approvals, according to Steve Ubl, president of the Advanced Medical Technology Association in Washington, D.C.



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. A Tilted Kilt at a water park themed hotel? Who planned that one? I guess the Dad's need something to do while the kids are on the water slides.

  2. Don't come down on the fair for offering drinks. This is a craft and certainly one that belongs in agriculture due to ingredients. And for those worrying about how much you can drink. I'm sure it's more to do with liability than anything else. They don't want people suing for being over served. If you want a buzz, do a little pre-drinking before you go.

  3. I don't drink but go into this "controlled area" so my friend can drink. They have their 3 drink limit and then I give my friend my 3 drink limit. How is the fair going to control this very likely situation????

  4. I feel the conditions of the alcohol sales are a bit heavy handed, but you need to realize this is the first year in quite some time that beer & wine will be sold at the fair. They're starting off slowly to get a gauge on how it will perform this year - I would assume if everything goes fine that they relax some of the limits in the next year or couple of years. That said, I think requiring the consumption of alcohol to only occur in the beer tent is a bit much. That is going to be an awkward situation for those with minors - "Honey, I'm getting a beer... Ok, sure go ahead... Alright see you in just a min- half an hour."

  5. This might be an effort on the part of the State Fair Board to manage the risk until they get a better feel for it. However, the blanket notion that alcohol should not be served at "family oriented" events is perhaps an oversimplification. and not too realistic. For 15 years, I was a volunteer at the Indianapolis Air Show, which was as family oriented an event as it gets. We sold beer donated by Monarch Beverage Company and served by licensed and trained employees of United Package Liquors who were unpaid volunteers. And where did that money go? To central Indiana children's charities, including Riley Hospital for Children! It's all about managing the risk.

ADVERTISEMENT