FDA learned two important lessons from the Avandia debacle. First, the agency needs to be a better communicator—which means telling the public more about what it knows (and doesn’t know) about the safety of marketed products. But Avandia is also leading the agency to rethink what should be required to demonstrate safety, especially for chronic care therapies. Both could mean big changes for industry.
By Kate Rawson
You couldn't blame FDA if it never wanted to think about Avandia again.
Join thousands of industry professionals who rely on Pink Sheet for daily insights
Already a subscriber?
Advanz Pharma would have had to show that the European Commission’s decision to revoke Ocaliva’s conditional marketing approval risked causing serious and irreparable harm, according to lawyers from Van Bael & Bellis.
This is your final call to participate in the survey to better understand our subscribers’ content and delivery needs. The deadline is 20 September.
We are conducting a survey to better understand our subscribers’ content and delivery needs. If there are any changes you’d like to see in coverage topics, article format, or the method in which you access the Pink Sheet – or if you love it how it is – now is the time to have your voice heard.
A new pilot aims to take Brazil closer to ‘digital transformation.’
New members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices suggested concerns beyond myocarditis, questioning whether test-negative observational studies are giving an incorrect picture of effectiveness.
The plan could curtail a period of pricing flexibility for newer subcutaneous versions of important oncology drugs.
Lawyers explain how changes to rules around drug advertising and promotional activities under the EU pharma reform package could impact companies operating in the bloc, with one legal expert advising companies to “monitor developments closely.”
