Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Sep 23:351:h4679.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.h4679.

Characteristics of efficacy evidence supporting approval of supplemental indications for prescription drugs in United States, 2005-14: systematic review

Affiliations

Characteristics of efficacy evidence supporting approval of supplemental indications for prescription drugs in United States, 2005-14: systematic review

Bo Wang et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To characterize the types of comparators and endpoints used in efficacy trials for approvals of supplemental indications, compared with the data supporting these drugs' originally approved indications.

Design: Systematic review.

Setting: Publicly accessible data on supplemental indications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration from 2005 to 2014.

Main outcome measures: Types of comparators (active, placebo, historical, none) and endpoints (clinical outcomes, clinical scales, surrogate) in the efficacy trials for these drugs' supplemental and original indication approvals.

Results: The cohort included 295 supplemental indications. Thirty per cent (41/136) of supplemental approvals for new indications were supported by efficacy trials with active comparators, compared with 51% (47/93) of modified use approvals and 11% (7/65) of approvals expanding the patient population (P<0.001), almost all of which related to pediatric patients (61/65; 94%). Trials using clinical outcome endpoints led to approval for 32% (44/137) of supplemental approvals for new indications, 30% (28/93) of modified indication approvals, and 22% (14/65) of expanded population approvals (P=0.29). Orphan drugs had supplemental approvals for 40 non-orphan indications, which were supported by similar proportions of trials using active comparators (28% (11/40) for non-orphan supplemental indications versus 24% (10/42) for original orphan indications; P=0.70) and clinical outcome endpoints (25% (10/40) versus 31% (13/42); P=0.55).

Conclusions: Wide variations were seen in the evidence supporting approval of supplemental indications, with the fewest active comparators and clinical outcome endpoints used in trials leading to supplemental approvals that expanded the patient population.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Both authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any organization for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous three years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
Fig 1 Construction of study sample
None
Fig 2 Supplemental indications approved by the FDA for novel therapeutic agents, 2005-14. Types of supplemental indications: new indication denotes no similar use was ever previously approved for agent (for example, drug initially approved for schizophrenia, now approved for bipolar mania); modified indication denotes agent previously approved for different aspect of same indication (for example, drug initially approved for adjunctive therapy in treatment of partial onset seizures, now indicated for use as monotherapy in this condition); expanded patient population denotes agent previously approved for same indication in different group of patients (for example, drug previously indicated for treatment of Crohn’s disease in adults, now approved for use in all patients aged 6 years and older).

Comment in

  • The FDA's new clothes.
    Light DW, Lexchin J. Light DW, et al. BMJ. 2015 Sep 23;351:h4897. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h4897. BMJ. 2015. PMID: 26399468 No abstract available.

References

    1. Goldberg NH, Schneeweiss S, Kowal MK, et al. Availability of comparative efficacy data at the time of drug approval in the United States. JAMA 2011;305:1786-9. - PubMed
    1. Downing NS, Aminawung JA, Shah ND, et al. Clinical trial evidence supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutic agents, 2005-2012. JAMA 2014;311:368-77. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kesselheim AS, Myers JA, Avorn J. Characteristics of clinical trials to support approval of orphan vs nonorphan drugs for cancer. JAMA 2011;305:2320-6. - PubMed
    1. Hirsch BR, Califf RM, Cheng SK, et al. Characteristics of oncology clinical trials: insights from a systematic analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173:972-9. - PubMed
    1. US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. NDA 21-335/S-001. 2002. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/appletter/2002/21335s001ltr.pdf.

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances