News in brief | Nature Reviews Drug Discovery

You have full access to this article via your institution. Download PDF LANDMARK US HEALTH-CARE REFORM BILL PASSED Credit: BANANASTOCK The health-care reform legislation signed into law by

President Barack Obama in March has varying implications for the drug industry. THE LOWDOWN: After months of debate and negotiation, legislation on the most substantial changes to US

health-care provision in decades was completed in March. Among the core reforms is the provision of health-insurance coverage for the ∼32 million people who are currently uninsured in the

United States. This expansion of the health-care market is anticipated by analysts to provide a major boost to sales of branded pharmaceuticals, although the extent of the increase is

unclear owing to the growing emphasis on the use of generics. In return, the pharmaceutical industry will provide ∼US$90 billion in fees and discounts in pricing for Medicaid and Medicare,

the US health-care insurance programmes for those with low incomes and those over the age of 65, respectively. For example, there will be a narrowing of the 'doughnut hole' within

Medicare Part D prescription-drug coverage (a coverage gap that an insured person reaches once they have passed a pre-stated cost threshold; above this threshold, they pay 100% of their

prescription costs until they reach a higher threshold at which costs are shared with the insurer again). Pharmaceutical companies that have biologics capabilities and biotechnology

companies are anticipated to benefit from the inclusion in the bill of 12 years of data exclusivity for the developers of pioneer biologics before generic competitors can use such data in

regulatory submissions. This is part of a newly established pathway for approval of follow-on products (also known as biosimilars; _Nature Rev. Drug Discov._ 7, 479–488; 2008) and was

considered a triumph for biologics manufacturers, as the US administration and the Generic Pharmaceutical Association had sought substantially shorter periods of data exclusivity. Small

companies could benefit from the provision of a tax credit known as the Therapeutic Discovery Project Credit. It is limited to companies that have fewer than 250 employees and have invested

in projects in 2009–2010 that aim to prevent or treat disease (including preclinical and clinical research activities), develop molecular diagnostics to guide therapeutic decisions or

develop products that aid drug delivery or administration. $1 billion has been allocated for this tax credit over 2 years. Another provision in the bill established the Cures Acceleration

Network, a new competitive grant programme at the National Institutes of Health that aims to speed the translation of basic discoveries into treatments, through individual awards of up to

$15 million per year, with an annual budget of ∼$500 million. COALITION TO REDUCE DEVELOPMENT TIME OF TB DRUG COMBINATIONS  Image courtesy of R. Butler and J. Carr at the Centers for Disease

Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. The Critical Path Institute, The Global Alliance for TB drug development (TB Alliance) and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have launched

an initiative to accelerate the development of combination therapies for the treatment of _Mycobacterium tuberculosis_ (TB) infection. THE LOWDOWN: On 18 March, the Critical Path to TB

Regimens (CPTR) initiative was launched. Bringing together ten pharmaceutical companies — Anacor Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson (J&J),

Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Sanofi–Aventis and Sequella — and scientists from the US FDA, the aim is reduce the time that it takes for combination therapies to be approved. In parallel with

the clinical development of promising regimens, the CPTR will address regulatory challenges that will “allow for the most efficient, accurate, and robust evaluation and application of these

new testing models.” They also plan to address issues related to the lack of clinical trial capacity and funding. The current treatment for drug-susceptible TB is a four-drug regimen

(isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutol and pyrazinamide) taken for 6 months or more, which the CPTR highlighted took ∼24 years to develop. The CPTR thinks that, by testing promising regimens of

investigational therapies early in their clinical development, they can reduce the overall development time to ∼6 years. Another key aim is to develop regimens that will shorten the 6-month

treatment time. This could increase patient compliance to a regimen, thereby reducing the risk of drug resistance developing owing to inadequate control of the bacterial infection. According

to the World Health Organization, in some areas of the world, one in four people with TB is infected with a drug-resistant strain. There are six new investigational drugs in clinical trials

for the treatment of TB. Four are in Phase II: PA-824 (Chiron/TB Alliance), a nitroimidazole agent; TMC-207 (Tibotec, a subsidiary of J&J/TB Alliance), a diarylquinoline agent; LL-3858

(Lupin), an unspecified agent; and OPC-67683 (Otsuka), a nitro-dihydroimidazo-oxazole-derived agent. Two are in Phase I: AZD-5847 (AstraZeneca/Quintiles), an oxazolidinone agent, and SQ-109

(Sequella), a second-generation ethambutol analogue. In addition, the TB Alliance is developing more than 20 preclinical projects that it hopes will feed into future trials run by the CPTR.

REGULATORY GUIDANCE HIGHLIGHTS PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES CHALLENGE Credit: GETTY Recent guidance from the FDA on the clinical evaluation of products for the treatment of irritable bowel

syndrome (IBS) emphasizes that a suitable instrument for measuring clinical signs and symptoms of IBS that are reported by the patient is not available. THE LOWDOWN: In their draft guidance,

which was published in March 2010, the FDA recommended that a multi-item patientreported outcomes (PRO) instrument should be developed that captures all of the clinically important symptoms

of IBS. The FDA acknowledged that such an instrument does not exist at present and recommended strategies for industry to follow when designing clinical trials for therapies to treat IBS

with constipation and IBS with diarrhoea until such an instrument becomes available. These strategies were established by the IBS scoping group (a working group of the PRO Consortium),

members of which are from the FDA, academia and a patient advocacy group known as The International Foundation for Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders. The PRO Consortium was formed by the

FDA and the Critical Path Institute for the purpose of developing, evaluating and qualifying PRO instruments for use in clinical trials, and has 23 pharmaceutical companies as members. To

date, the consortium has focused on five disease areas: asthma, depression, cognitive disorders, IBS and oncology. The recent FDA guidance for IBS is the first set of disease area-specific

guidelines to have received input from this consortium. At the end of December 2009, the FDA published a general guidance for industry on the use of PRO measures in medical product

development to support labelling claims. FDA PREPARES FOR PDUFA REAUTHORIZATION The US FDA hosted its first public meeting on 12 April to obtain comments on the Prescription Drug User Fee

Act (PDUFA) before PDUFA IV expires in September 2012. THE LOWDOWN: Discussions have begun between the FDA and stakeholders to consider how the PDUFA should be updated when it is scheduled

for reauthorization in 2012. Highlights reported from this first meeting include a request to improve the safety and promotion of prescription drugs and to have clearer drug labels that list

risks and benefits of therapies. There is also a fresh emphasis on meeting review timelines, which has been a problem in recent years partly owing to workload and new requirements from the

FDA Amendments Act (FDAAA) 2007, such as the requirement for Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies. It has also been reported that the FDA and industry will negotiate new fees from June

to January 2010, and a public review of the proposal is planned for September to November 2011. The PDUFA was first passed in 1992 to allow the FDA to obtain fees from drug makers to help

expedite the review of new drug applications (NDAs) and biologic licence applications (BLAs). The Act was introduced to address the problem of understaffing at the FDA, which had caused drug

reviews to be a slow (typically taking up to 2 years) and unpredictable process. By allowing the FDA to obtain fees from companies submitting regulatory applications, timelines were

improved, the review process became more predictable and the FDA agreed to meet specific performance goals. With the reauthorization of PDUFA every 5 years, the legislation is amended, often

leading to an increase in FDA responsibilities. For example, in PDUFA II, the FDA agreed to review 90% of NDAs and BLAs within 10 months for standard reviews and within 6 months for

priority reviews, a goal that it is still aiming to achieve today. Currently, PDUFA is within its fourth enactment (authorized through the FDAAA 2007), which substantially increased the user

fees to allow the FDA to increase staff and make considerable changes to modernize post-market drug safety monitoring. A recent performance review by the FDA — with regard to meeting PDUFA

IV goals — highlighted that the recent staff increases in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research have resulted in a decline in the average level of on-board review expertise and that

certain PDUFA procedural goals were given lower priority in the first 12–18 months of PDUFA IV while new FDAAA 2007 provisions were implemented. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS Reprints and

permissions ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE News in brief. _Nat Rev Drug Discov_ 9, 348–349 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd3176 Download citation * Issue Date: May 2010 * DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd3176 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently

available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative