Expedited development and review pathways for novel oncology drugs.

Abstract

e13578 Background: Following approval of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Safety and Innovation Act in 2012, the FDA launched a 3-year plan to promote innovation, increase stakeholder involvement, secure the drug supply chain, and fund these endeavors by collecting user fees. The FDA created its fourth expedited pathway, Breakthrough Therapy Designation (BTD) to focus on the development and approval of therapies to treat serious and life-threatening conditions that lack adequate therapies. Our 2017 study (ASCO abstract #e18270) identified a trend of increased use of these approaches with oncology drugs, particularly the BTD, which was a nascent pathway at the time. We aimed to reexamine FDA pathway and approval trends in oncology interventions. Methods: We analyzed publicly available data on novel drug approvals by the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) from 2012-2020 and the 4 expedited pathways (BTD, Accelerated Approval, Fast Track Designation [FTD], and Priority Review). Results: Between 2012 and 2020, CDER approved 380 new chemical entities, including 101 oncology drugs. Due to data limitations, 3 novel oncology biologics (approved by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) and 4 diagnostics were excluded from the analyses. Oncology drugs comprised a mean 27% (range 14-34%) of all approvals from 2012-2020, including 25% from 2012–2016 and 28% from 2017-2020. Of all approved oncology drugs from 2012-2020, 94% (range 82-100%) utilized at least one expedited pathway. Oncology approvals were more likely than non-oncology approvals to have used one or more expedited pathways. Use of these pathways for oncology approvals increased from 2012-2016 to 2017-2020: ≥2 (65% vs 78%) and ≥3 (35% vs 50%) pathways. BTD usage for oncology drugs increased from 35% in 2012-2016 to 57% in 2017-2020, though for 2012-2016, the time interval between awarding the (new) designation and the remainder of development activities must be considered. Presumably because BTD grants additional benefits over FTD, generally the use of FTD for oncology drugs has declined over time. The use of Priority Review and Accelerated Approval has remained the same. Despite the pandemic, for oncology and non-oncology drugs alike, approvals using pathways remained consistent between 2019 and 2020. Conclusions: Efficient FDA review plays an important role in oncology drug development. Since its inception in 2012, BTD has been adopted and expeditiously used, comprising more than half of all novel oncology drug approvals from 2017-2020. Our data show a gradual increase in approvals of drugs granted BTD, which, given the duration of drug development, likely reflects the time between the acceptance of the BTD request and remainder of the pre-submission development activities. As BTD was expressly developed to increase stakeholder interaction and prioritize innovation, the speed-to-adoption and use of this pathway among oncology interventions is promising.