Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35561071›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational science2022

A detailed analysis of expedited regulatory review time of marketing authorization applications for new anticancer drugs in the US and EU.

Fabiany da Costa Gonçalves, Ebru Demirci, Alex Zwiers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Fabiany da Costa GonçalvesZwiers Regulatory Consultancy, Oss, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5178-3955
Ebru DemirciZwiers Regulatory Consultancy, Oss, The Netherlands.
Alex ZwiersZwiers Regulatory Consultancy, Oss, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-5492-9139

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of expedited regulatory approval programs used by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA), type of product (small molecule or biotechnology-derived product) and consulting scientific advisory committees on the regulatory review time of the marketing authorization applications (MAAs) for new anticancer drugs. A dataset composed of 76 new anticancer drugs was constructed. The date of submission of the MAAs in the United States and the European Union were comparable. The typical review time of MAAs was 136 days shorter in the United States (201 days [median]) than in the European Union (337 days [median]). The type of product did not have a high impact on the review time. The review time of the MAAs for drugs undergoing priority review in the United States or accelerated assessment in the European Union at the stage of review of MAA was generally shorter than that for drugs following the standard regulatory pathway. The regulatory pathway using at least one expedited regulatory program at the stages of drug development, review of MAA, and approval of drug in the United States (172 days [median]), and that at the stages of review of MAA and approval of drug in the European Union (183 days [median]) enabled the shortest review time of MAAs. Referral to advisory committee meeting increased the review time of MAAs for drugs undergoing one or more expedited regulatory approval programs in the United States and the European Union close to that for drugs undergoing the standard regulatory approval pathway.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic AgentsDrug ApprovalEuropean UnionHumansMarketingUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID35561071
PMCPMC9372420

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.