ArticleClinical and translational science2024
Continued cancer drug approvals in Japan and Europe after market withdrawal in the United States: A comparative study of accelerated approvals.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Challenges in Implementing Revocation of Oncology Drugs Under Conditional Early Approval in Japan: Regulatory Insights From Comparisons With FDA/EMA.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Leveraging managed access with life-cycle reassessment in Asia-Pacific: advancing the learning of health system matters for innovative medicines in oncology.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2025Article
- Regulatory Disparities Between US Accelerated Approval and Japanese Authorization of Oncology Drugs: An Analysis of Evidence Quality.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Added Therapeutic Benefits of Top-Selling Drugs in Japan: A Cross-Sectional Study Using Health Technology Assessment.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- US FDA-accelerated approvals and subsequent withdrawals: influence on Japanese clinical oncology practice guidelines.Investigational new drugs · 2025Article
- Direct oral anticoagulant approvals by four major regulatory agencies: a cross-sectional analysis of premarket and postmarket evidence.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Continued cancer drug approvals in Japan and Europe after market withdrawal in the United States: A comparative study of accelerated approvals.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- An Empirical Analysis of Anti-Cancer Drug Lags in South Korea.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regulatory authorities must balance ensuring evidence of efficacy and safety of new drugs. Various regulatory pathways, such as the accelerated approval program in the United States (US), allow authorities to quickly approve drugs for severely ill patients by granting market authorization based on surrogate end points and pending confirmatory trials. In this cross-sectional study, we considered 23 indications of cancer drugs that received accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) but were subsequently withdrawn as of April 2023. Our investigation extended to assessing the regulatory status of these accelerated approvals in the European Union (EU) and Japan, examining relevant regulatory documents and identifying factors contributing to the withdrawal in the United States. Comparing regions, we found that for 52% (12/23) and 30% (7/23) of withdrawn accelerated approvals in the United States, sponsors had also sought marketing authorization from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA), respectively. As of the April 30, 2023 study cutoff date, 83% (10/12) of drug-indication pairs remained approved by the EMA, while the PMDA retained 100% (7/7). For these indications, the time from FDA withdrawal until the study cutoff date ranged from 0.23 years to 11.45 years for EMA approvals (median: 1.28 years) and 1.10 years to 11.45 years for PMDA approvals (median: 3.22 years). These findings highlight substantial regulatory discrepancies concerning cancer drugs with unconfirmed benefits. Addressing these discrepancies may involve requiring pharmaceutical companies to confirm clinical benefits using more robust end points and fostering international harmonization in regulators' assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.