J Clin Pharmacol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kaitin, K.
Right arrow Articles by Lasagna, L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kaitin, K.
Right arrow Articles by Lasagna, L
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Articles

The new drug approvals of 1990, 1991, and 1992: trends in drug development

KI Kaitin, M Manocchia, M Seibring, and L Lasagna

Efforts to speed the development and review of new drugs have increased sharply in recent years. This report, which is the third in a series on trends in drug development, examines the new drug approvals of 1990, 1991, and 1992. During the 3-year study period, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 79 new drugs, 74 of which met the Center for the Study of Drug Development's definition of a new chemical entity (NCE). Of the 74 NCEs, 36 (49%) were considered by the FDA to represent notable therapeutic gains and were selected for "priority" review (i.e., drugs rated 1P, 1A, 1AA, and 1B), and 38 (51%) were considered to represent little or no gain and received "standard" reviews (i.e., drugs rated 1S and 1C). Investigational new drug application (IND) filing and new drug application (NDA) submission dates on all 74 drugs were obtained from responses to our manufacturer surveys as well as from FDA and public sources. The mean length of the clinical phase (IND filing to NDA submission) was 6.1 years and that of the review phase (NDA submission to approval) was 2.6 years. Of the 74 NCEs, 43 (58%) were available in foreign markets at least 1 year before U.S. approval, with a mean of 5.6 years of foreign marketing. In general, 1990 to 1992 figures are similar to those in the last half of the 1980s.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
M. K. Olson
Managing Delegation in the FDA: Reducing Delay in New-Drug Review
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, June 1, 2004; 29(3): 397 - 430.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
M. K. Olson
Response Examining the Determinants of Drug Review Times: Considering Alternative Approaches
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, June 1, 2004; 29(3): 443 - 450.
[PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1994 by the American College of Clinical Pharmacology