A general overview of the drug review process is presented with emphasis on non-clinical approaches for gaining acceptable exemptions for investigational use of new drugs. Selected non-clinical requirements for approval of marketing or the new drug application are also discussed. Particular attention is given to the trend towards a more rational, scientific approach to the design of studies that are intended to elucidate issues of safety and efficacy. The fundamental purpose of these new approaches is to reduce drug development time and expense and bring newer and better drug therapies to patients. Newer requirements for the conduct and use of kinetics earlier in development are emphasized. The relevance of meetings with the Food and Drug Administration and the effects that meetings are reported to have had on total drug development time are also discussed.
Barton BL. (1990) FDA's inspections of US and non-US clinical studies. Drug Information Journal24:463–8.
2.
Chasseaud LF. (1992) The importance of pharmacokinetic toxicokinetic and metabolic information in carcinogenicity study design. Drug Information Journal26:445–55.
3.
Contrera JF, Aub D, Barbehenn E, et al. (1993) A retrospective comparison of the results of 6 and 12 month non-rodent toxicity studies. Adverse Drug React Toxicol Rev12:63–76.
4.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1977) Title 40 Ŝ 1500 et. seq. Council on environmental quality. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
5.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1985a) Title 21 Ŝ 25-25.50. Environmental assessments. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
6.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1985b) Title 21 Ŝ 314-314.445. Applications for FDA approval to market a new drug or an antibiotic drug. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
7.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1987a) Title 21 Ŝ 312.1-312.145. Investigational new drug application. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
8.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1987b) Title 21 Ŝ 58.1-58.219. Good laboratory practice. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
9.
Code of Federal Regulations. (1990) Title 21 Ŝ 50-50.48. Protection of human subjects. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
10.
Collins J, Grieshaber C, Chabner BA. (1990) Pharmacologically guided phase I clinical trials based upon preclinical drug development. J Natl Cancer Inst82:1321–6.
11.
Federal Register. (1985) 50:7452-519. New drug and antibiotic regulations: final rule. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
12.
Federal Register. (1992) 57:58942-60. New drug, antibiotic, and biological drug product regulations; accelerated approval: final rule. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
13.
Federal Register. (1994a) 59:9752-5. International conference on harmonisation; draft guideline on dose selection for carcinogenicity studies of pharmaceuticals; availability: notice. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
14.
Federal Register. (1994b) 59:9755-69. International conference on harmonisation; draft guideline on the assessment of systemic exposure in toxicity studies; availability: notice. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
15.
Federal Register. (1994c) 59:9748-50. International conference on harmonisation; draft guideline on repeat dose tissue distribution studies; availability: notice. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
16.
Herxheimer A. (1991) How much drug in the tablet. Lancet337.346–8.
17.
Hurley FL. (1984) Planning research and development of new drugs to assure regulatory approval. Food Drug Cosmetic Law Journal39:312–97.
18.
Kaitin KI, Phelan NR, Raiford D, Morris B. (1991) Therapeutic ratings and end-of-phase II conferences: initiatives to accelerate the availability of important new drugs. J Clin Pharmacol31:17–24.
19.
Kelsey FO. (1990) FDA perspective on IRBs and overview of FDA inspection of IRBs. Drug Information Journal24:795–805.
20.
Merrill RA, Hutt PB. (1980) Food and Drug Law. New York: The Foundation Press.
21.
Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. (1981) Guidelines for testing of chemicals. Paris: OECD Publications, (continuing series).
22.
O'Reilly JT. (1979) Food and Drug Administration. Chapters 13-15. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
23.
Peck CC, Barr WH, Benet LZ, et al. (1992) Opportunities for integration of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and toxicokinetics in rational drug development. J Pharmaceutical Sci81:605–10.
24.
Temple RJ. (1991) Access, science, and regulation. Drug Information Journal25:1–11.
25.
Tribe L. (1978) American Constitutional Law. New York: The Founder Press.
26.
United States Code. (1962) Title 21 Ŝ 300-92. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
27.
United Stales Code. (1969) Title 42 Ŝ 4371 et. seq. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
28.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1988) From Test Tube to Patient: New Drug Development in the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
29.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (1990) New Drug Evaluation Statistical Report Annual Report. U.S. Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
30.
Weissinger J. (1992) Carcinogenic testing of therapeutics. Drug Information Journal26:133–40.
