WallachJDRossJSNaciH. The US Food and Drug Administration’s expedited approval programs: Evidentiary standards, regulatory trade-offs, and potential improvements. Clin Trials2018; 3: 219–229.
2.
CaliffR. Expedited and facilitated drug evaluations and evidence of benefit and risk: the cup is half-full. Clin Trials12018; 3: 235–239.
3.
DowningNSAminawungJAShahNDet al. Clinical trial evidence supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutic agents, 2005–2012. JAMA2014; 311: 368–377.
4.
PsatyBMMeslinEMBreckenridgeA. A lifecycle approach to the evaluation of FDA approval methods and regulatory actions: opportunities provided by a new IOM report. JAMA2012; 307: 2491–2492.
5.
NaciHSmalleyKRKesselheimAS. Characteristics of preapproval and postapproval studies for drugs granted accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration. JAMA2017; 318: 626–636.
6.
NaciHWoutersOJGuptaRet al. Timing and characteristics of cumulative evidence available on novel therapeutic agents receiving Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval. Milbank Q2017; 95: 261–290.
7.
PeaseAMKrumholzHMDowningNSet al. Postapproval studies of drugs initially approved by the FDA on the basis of limited evidence: systematic review. BMJ2017; 357: j1680.
8.
WoodcockJ. Expediting drug development for serious illness: trade-offs between patient access and certainty. Clin Trials2018; 3: 230–234.
9.
BeaverJAHowieLJPelosofLet al. A 25-year experience of US Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval of malignant hematology and oncology drugs and biologics: a review. JAMA Oncol. Epub ahead of print 1March2018. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5618.
10.
WoloshinSSchwartzLMWhiteBet al. The fate of FDA postapproval studies. N Engl J Med2017; 377: 1114–1117.
11.
FainKDaubresseMAlexanderGC. The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act and postmarketing commitments. JAMA2013; 310: 202–204.
12.
CianiOBuyseMDrummondMet al. Time to review the role of surrogate end points in health policy: state of the art and the way forward. Value Health2017; 20: 487–495.
13.
SchilskyR. Access versus evidence: the regulators’ dilemma. Clin Trials2018; 3: 240–242.
14.
CaliffRMRobbMABindmanABet al. Transforming evidence generation to support health and health care decisions. N Engl J Med2016; 375: 2395–2400.
15.
KesselheimASWangBFranklinJMet al. Trends in utilization of FDA expedited drug development and approval programs, 1987–2014: cohort study. BMJ2015; 351: h4633.
16.
CharyKV. Expedited drug review process: fast, but flawed. J Pharmacol Pharmacother2016; 7: 57–61.
17.
US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Guidance for industry: fast track drug development programs – designation, development, and application review, https://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/98fr/980813gd.pdf, September1998 (accessed 10 March 2018). Note: the document has since been removed, but is available on request
SchickAMillerKLLanthierMet al. Evaluation of pre-marketing factors to predict post-marketing boxed warnings and safety withdrawals. Drug Saf2017; 40: 497–503.
20.
MostaghimSRGagneJJKesselheimAS. Safety related label changes for new drugs after approval in the US through expedited regulatory pathways: retrospective cohort study. BMJ2017; 358: j3837.
21.
DowningNSShahNDAminawungJAet al. Postmarket safety events among novel therapeutics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 2001 and 2010. JAMA2017; 317: 1854–1863.
22.
PinnowEAmrSBentzenSMet al. Postmarket safety outcomes for new molecular entity (NME) drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration between 2002 and 2014. Clin Pharmacol Ther. Epub ahead of print 20December2017. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.944.
23.
WallachJDRossJS. Gabapentin approvals, off-label use, and lessons for postmarketing evaluation efforts. JAMA2018; 319: 776–778.