PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L Lasagna

Publications and source records attributed to L Lasagna.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Balancing risks versus benefits in drug therapy decisions.

The regulation of foods and drugs in the United States has repeatedly been increased in response to unjustified marketing claims or instances of dramatic harm from these substances. Because drugs are never safe or effective for everyone, the guiding principle for physicians should be to use pharmaceuticals in such a way as to maximize benefit and minimize harm.

Advertising↗

Drug safety discontinuations in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Spain from 1974 through 1993: a regulatory perspective.

The objective of the present study was to compare the number of new chemical entities (NCEs) and new biologicals entities (NBEs) approved for marketing during the period 1974 through 1993 in the United Kingdom, the United States, and Spain that were subsequently discontinued (removed from the market, withdrawn, or whose license was allowed to lapse) while a question of safety existed. Of the products approved during the two decades of the study period, a total of 29 drugs were subsequently discontinued for safety reasons in at least one of the three countries (United Kingdom: 20 safety discontinuations; United States: 10; and Spain: 16). These represent 3% to 4% of all drugs introduced in these countries, an increase compared to the period from 1964 through 1983, when approximately 2% of all NCEs were discontinued for safety reasons. The therapeutic classes most commonly associated with safety discontinuations were the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (nine drugs), vasodilators (four drugs), and antidepressants (three drugs). U.S. companies or their foreign subsidiaries were involved as originators (patent-holders and/or developers) of approximately 40% of the drugs discontinued for safety reasons.

Animals↗

Research and development costs for new drugs by therapeutic category. A study of the US pharmaceutical industry.

The clinical period (i.e. clinical trial and long term animal testing) development costs of a random sample of new chemical entities (NCEs) were examined for differences in average cost. All of the NCEs studied were first tested in humans between 1970 and 1982, and were classified for the purposes of the study by therapeutic class. The costs of unsuccessful projects were included with those of projects that resulted in US marketing approval. Including income forgone from expending funds before returns are earned ('time costs'), the capitalised (i.e. out-of-pocket plus time) clinical period costs per approved NCE were $US70, $US98, $US103 and $US163 million (1993 dollars) for anti-infective, cardiovascular, neuropharmacological and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, respectively. Combining the data for all therapeutic categories, the mean clinical period cost per approved NCE was $US93 million. Omitting costs associated with unsuccessful projects, the mean capitalised clinical period costs for approved NCEs ranged from $US7.1 million (for topical steroids) to $US66.7 million (for cardiovascular agents) [1993 dollars]. The estimates of total clinical period costs per approved NCE depend on average out-of-pocket clinical phase costs, attrition rates across phases (i.e. the rates at which compounds drop out of active testing), the probability of marketing approval, and development and regulatory review times. Phase attrition and approval rates are the most important sources of variability in total clinical period costs between therapeutic categories. Development cost estimates by therapeutic category did not correlate strongly with US sales in the fifth year of marketing. Cardiovascular NCEs had much higher than average sales revenues, but clinical development costs for these drugs were only slightly above average. Conversely, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs attained average sales revenues, but had much higher than average development costs.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗