The FDA and Antibiotics: An Unsettled Agency of Many Minds

About two years ago, the FDA began tightening the statistical standard that companies must meet to demonstrate the efficacy of antibiotics in clinical trials. Meeting that heightened burden of proof meant, in certain instances, substantially increasing trial size and duration-leading some drug companies to drop particular development programs, and even pare back on their development of antibacterials altogether. At the time, the FDA's treatment of antibiotics seemed, to many, part of a broader trend towards a more cautious and conservative approach to drug approval. But it turns out that rather than evidencing a concerted agency effort to more closely scrutinize the effectiveness of antimicrobials, the new policy was apparently instituted by a statistical-minded faction within the FDA whose influence shot up in the absence of strong central leadership. Indeed, that intra-agency power balance has now apparently shifted in favor of medically oriented officials who are more sympathetic to the practical problems faced by antibiotic drugmakers. But while pharmaceutical company officials voice optimism that they will be able to work out a reasonable new set of efficacy guidelines with the FDA, there's a lingering concern that the power vacuum at the top of the agency will continue to create uncertainty and unpredictability for an industry whose long-term development cycles make it so dependent on regulatory consistency.

by Jeffrey Dvorin

"The United States Food and Drug Administration and the End of Antibiotics." So read the heading of a piece contained...

Read the full article – start your free trial today!

Join thousands of industry professionals who rely on In Vivo for daily insights

  • Start your 7-day free trial
  • Explore trusted news, analysis, and insights
  • Access comprehensive global coverage
  • Enjoy instant access – no credit card required

More from Business Strategy

AI In Biologics Discovery: The Expensive Bet On Unproven Promise

 
• By 

Despite limited evidence of commercial impact, pharmaceutical companies are making massive strategic investments in AI biologics platforms. The question isn't whether the technology shows promise; it's whether that promise can translate to measurable business results.

Turning Defense Into Attack: Snapshots Of A Changing Medtech Market And How To Respond

 
• By 

Against a backdrop of shifting trade policies, the end of multilateral market approaches and renewed focus on supply chain resilience, medtechs are doubling down on innovation in products and processes – using AI – and keeping unmet needs and outcomes in the center of the target.

AI Agents Set To Reshape Biopharma’s Workforce And Operations

 
• By 

While biopharma companies experiment with genAI, agentic AI is rapidly shifting the work paradigm towards one of autonomous digital workers that can handle entire process flows.

Mapping Biopharma’s AI Strategy: From Custom Datasets to Foundation Models

 
• By 

Biotech companies are pursuing diverse AI strategies beyond expensive custom data generation: foundation model fine-tuning, data-efficient computational methods and targeted proprietary datasets. In Vivo takes a look at some examples.

More from In Vivo

Podcast: Acuitas CSO On CRISPR Delivery Breakthrough And Next-Gen Lipid Nanoparticle Technology

 
• By 

In Vivo sits down with Ying Tam, CSO at Acuitas Therapeutics, to discuss the company's role in delivering the first personalized CRISPR treatment to an infant and the clinical implications of new lipid nanoparticle technologies.

BioBytes: AI-Related Deals In Q2 ‘25

 
• By 

When it came to AI-related deals, the second quarter of 2025 was characterized by mostly modest financings.

Titans Of Pharma: Lilly’s Ricks Tops Big Pharma Pay Chart

 

The big pharma CEO with the highest-valued compensation in 2024 was David Ricks of Eli Lilly, while Pfizer and J&J executives slipped into third and fourth place behind AbbVie's now retired chief Richard Gonzalez. European firms brought up the rear.