New “21st Century Cures” Legislation: Speed and Ease vs Science

Kesselheim AS, Avorn J - JAMA

  • Innovation Incentives and Competition
  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence

Summary:

While the final 21st Century Cures Act signed in December 2016 included welcome NIH funding increases and provisions for opioid and mental health programs, its FDA-related provisions are problematic because they encourage the agency to rely on less rigorous evidence for drug approval, including insufficiently validated biomarkers, patient experience data, and “real world evidence” from observational data rather than randomized controlled trials. They contend that these changes, combined with an antiregulatory ideology in the new Trump administration, could undermine patient safety and the drug development enterprise by prioritizing speed over science.

VIEW SOURCE

Recent Work from PORTAL

Talk bubble graphics representing commentary and opinion.

How Congress Can Fix Expert Advisory Committees

Daval CJR, Kesselheim AS - STAT

  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence
Simple graphic of magnifying glass examining papers to signify reviewing research publications.

International Regulatory Status and Reimbursement Recommendations of Haematological Malignancy Drugs Withdrawn from the FDA Accelerated Approval Pathway

Mulsant SS, Kesselheim AS, Naci H - Journal of Cancer Policy

  • Price, Value, and Access
  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence
An icon of a bill representing government policy.

Comments on FDA Discussion Paper, “Considerations for the Regulation of Generative AI-Enabled Medical Devices”

Jaiswal N, Gorijavolu R, Thomas S, Hwang TJ, Celi LA, Kesselheim AS - Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

  • Regulation and Clinical Evidence