As the Food and Drug Administration grapples with rising pressure to approve new medicines more quickly, a new analysis finds the agency disagreed with its expert advisory panels about one-fifth of the time. And the disagreements were more likely to occur over safety issues than over approving new products or additional uses for existing products.

Of those disagreements, 75% resulted in the FDA making more restrictive decisions after an advisory panel made a favorable recommendation, while 25% resulted in the agency making less restrictive decisions after unfavorable panel recommendations, according to the analysis, which was published in The Milbank Quarterly and reviewed 376 panel meetings that took place between 2008 and 2015.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • Online intelligence briefings
  • Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy