Characteristics and conflicts of interest at Food and Drug Administration Gastrointestinal Drug Advisory Committee meetings

Introduction The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Gastrointestinal Drug Advisory Committee (GIDAC) is involved in gastrointestinal drug application reviews. Characteristics and conflicts of interest (COI) in GIDAC meetings are not well described. This study analyzed FDA GIDAC meetings and characteristics that predict recommendations. Methods In this cross-sectional study, all publicly available GIDAC meetings where proposed medications were voted on were included. Data were collected regarding indications, medication sponsor, primary efficacy studies, and voting member characteristics (e.g. committee membership, COI). Univariate analyses were conducted at per-meeting and per-vote levels to assess for predictors of committee recommendation and individual votes respectively. Results Thirty-four meetings with 476 individual votes from 1998–2018 were included. Twenty-three (68%) proposals were recommended for approval and 25 (74%) received FDA approval. Most proposals involved >1 primary study (n = 27, 79%). At least one voting member had a COI in 24 (71%) of 34 meetings. Twelve (35%) meetings had at least one sponsor COI. Among 476 individual votes, 74 (15.5%) involved a COI, with 33 (6.9%) sponsor COI. COI decreased significantly over time, with fewer COI in 2006–2010, 2011–2015, and 2016–2020 compared to 1996–2000 and 2001–2005 (p<0.01). There were no significant associations between pre-defined predictors, including COI, and committee level recommendations or individual votes (p>0.05 for all univariate analyses). Conclusions The GIDAC reviewed 34 proposals from 1998–2018. The majority were recommended for approval and later approved by the FDA, highlighting the GIDAC’s prominence in the regulatory process. COI are present among GIDAC panelists but decreasing over time and not associated with recommendations.

A89 CHARACTERISTICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION GASTROINTESTINAL DRUG ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS

Background The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Gastrointestinal Drug Advisory Committee (GIDAC) is involved in gastrointestinal drug application reviews. Characteristics and conflicts of interest (COI) in GIDAC meetings are not well described. Aims To analyze FDA GIDAC meetings and characteristics that predict recommendations. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of all publicly available GIDAC meetings where proposed medications were voted on from 1998–2018. Data were collected on individual meetings and individual voting members at meetings. Predefined predictor variables included type of medication, medication sponsor, primary efficacy studies, and voting member characteristics (e.g. committee membership, COI). Univariate analyses were conducted at per-meeting and per-vote levels to assess for predictors of committee recommendation and individual votes respectively. Results Thirty-four meetings with 476 individual votes from 1998–2018 were included. Twenty-three (68%) proposals were recommended for approval and 25 (74%) received FDA approval. Most proposals involved &gt;1 primary study (n=27, 79%). At least one voting member had a COI in 24 (71%) of 34 meetings. Twelve (35%) meetings had at least one sponsor COI. Among 476 individual votes, 74 (15.5%) involved a COI, with 33 (6.9%) sponsor COI. COI decreased significantly over time, with more COI in 1996–2000 and 2001–2005 compared to 2006–2010, 2011–2015, and 2016–2020 (p&lt;0.01). There were no significant associations between pre-defined predictors, including COI, and committee level recommendations or individual votes (p&gt;0.05 for all univariate analyses). Conclusions The GIDAC reviewed 34 proposals from 1998–2018. The majority were recommended for approval and later approved by the FDA, highlighting the GIDAC’s prominence in the regulatory process. COI are present among GIDAC panelists but decreasing over time and not associated with recommendations. Funding Agencies None

Characteristics and conflicts of interests of public speakers at the Psychopharmacologic Drug and Advisory Committee meetings regarding psychiatric drugs

The Psychopharmacologic Drug Advisory Committee (PDAC) is one of 33 advisory committees of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). During committee meetings, an open public hearing takes place where speakers provide testimonies about the drug in question and are asked, not required, to disclose any conflicts of interests (COIs) before speaking. These speakers may present with COIs which include, but are not limited to, reimbursement for travel and lodging by the pharmaceutical company to attend the meeting; previous or current payments for consulting from the pharmaceutical company and compensation as a paid investigator in previously conducted clinical trials for the drug under review. Our study aimed to investigate the characteristics and COIs of public speakers at PDAC meetings of the FDA. We evaluated 145 public speakers at FDA committee meetings over a 10-year period. We found a total of 52 public speakers disclosed a COI with travel and lodging being the most prominent. Among these speakers, 82.4% provided a positive testimony regarding the psychiatric drug in question. Speakers who had the condition in question were not more likely to provide a positive statement than those who did not. Our results showed that disclosing a COI was associated with increased odds of public speakers providing a favourable testimony for the recommendation of psychiatric drugs. The implications of these findings are concerning since COIs have the potential to skew public speaker’s testimonies and persuade committee members to recommend a drug through emotionally charged tactics.

Biosimilars: Implications for Clinical Practice

In 2015, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first biosimilar, filgrastim-sndz, a biosimilar of the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor filgrastim. Since that time, the FDA has approved four additional biosimilar tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors, and, in May 2017, the Oncology Drug Advisory Committee voted in favor of approval of an epoetin alfa biosimilar. The patents of several widely used biologic cancer therapies (including trastuzumab, rituximab, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and pegfilgrastim) are recently expired or due to expire in the near future, so the introduction of biosimilars into the oncology treatment armamentarium is imminent. However, their arrival also will introduce challenges, including pharmacy and supply chain management and the need for education of clinicians and patients about the efficacy and safety of these agents. These considerations, along with an overview of biosimilars in the oncology pipeline, will be discussed in this review.