Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA Kathryn M. Carbone, M.D. Associate Director for Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project Quality Plans Gillian Sandilands Director of Quality
Advertisements

David M. Pollock Medical College of Georgia Discovery-Academia.
CDCs 21 Goals. CDC Strategic Imperatives 1. Health impact focus: Align CDCs people, strategies, goals, investments & performance to maximize our impact.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration Notice: Archived Document The content in this document is provided on the FDAs website for reference purposes only. It.
BME-IDEA Workshop, September 28, 2005
National Cancer Survivorship Initiative Developing the NCSI 2012 document: taking action to improve outcomes.
Introduction to Drug Information Services Ch.#1. An introductory course to teach the students basic principles of DI retrieval. Designed to help students.
December 14, FDA Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science Nonclinical Studies Subcommittee Efficient advancement to clinical trials Jack A.
Scholarship As defined in the Gold Book Primary basis for academic advancement Encompassing generation of new knowledge and/or the dissemination of knowledge.
Integrating CMC Review & Inspection Industry Recommendations Joe Anisko April 24, 2003.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH Working with FDA: Biological Products and Clinical Development Critical Path.
An Overview of Mission-related Research Office of Blood Research and Review C.D. Atreya, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research OBRR, CBER BPAC, Dec
IT Governance and Management
CBER Regulatory Laboratory Planning & Preparedness for SARS-related Biologics Products Kathryn M. Carbone MD Associate Director for Research, Acting, Center.
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Applying Regulatory Science to Advance Development of Innovative, Safe and Effective Biologic Products Carolyn.
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research FDA Overview Site Visit Carolyn A. Wilson, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research.
+ Drug Development and Review Process. + Objectives Learn the processes involved in drug discovery and development Define the phases involved in FDA drug.
Career Opportunities for PharmDs in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Research & Development.
Biomedical research methods. What are biomedical research methods? An integrated approach using chemical, mathematical and computer simulations, in vitro.
Research & Innovation Horizon societal challenge 1 Open Info Day Funding Opportunities for SMEs Horizon 2020 "Health, demographic change and wellbeing"
The NIH Roadmap for Medical Research
ONDQA Perspective on Post Approval Changes Eric P. Duffy, PhD Director, Division of Post-Market Evaluation, ONDQA, CDER, FDA Public Meeting: Supplements.
FDA’s Perspective Continued - Where We Are ?. GMP Task Groups.
Executive summary prepared by some members of the ICH Q9 EWG for example only; not an official policy/guidance July 2006, slide 1 ICH Q9 QUALITY RISK MANAGEMENT.
Critical Path Opportunities for Biologics Products Jesse L. Goodman, M.D. M.P.H. Director Kathryn M. Carbone, M.D. Associate Director for Research Center.
Science at the FDA: Update for the Science Board Jesse L. Goodman, MD, MPH Chief Scientist and Deputy Commissioner for Science and Public Health November.
Access to Clinical Expertise Steve Bain David Powell Jemma Hughes Paula Jeffries.
NCI Review of the Clinical Trials Process 6 th Annual National Forum on Biomedical Imaging in Oncology James H. Doroshow M.D. April 7, 2005 Bethesda, Maryland.
1 Supplements and Other Changes to an Approved Application By: Richard J. Stec Jr., Ph.D. February 7, 2007.
Associate Director for Research, OCTGT
Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical Science, CDER, FDA ACPS Subcommittee on Manufacturing Science: Identification and Prioritization.
Drug Submissions: Review Process Agnes V. Klein, MD Biologics and Genetic Therapies Directorate February, 2003 www/hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb-dgps/therapeut.
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Carolyn A. Wilson, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research Applying Regulatory Science to Advance Development.
Division of Hematology Basil Golding M.D. Division Director Site Visits 2010 Laboratories of Hemostasis, and Plasma Derivatives.
Developing a National Critical Care Clinical Research Network: what’s in it for trainees? Paul Dark Associate Professor, Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences,
FDA’s Perspective on the “Pharmaceutical cGMPs for the 21st Century” Initiative David J. Horowitz, Esq. Director, CDER/FDA, Office of Compliance Advisory.
CPTR Overview CPTR 2012 Workshop October 2-4, 2012.
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Carolyn A. Wilson, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research Applying Regulatory Science to Advance Development.
SARC: Participation and Protocol / Concept Review Robert Maki, MD PhD Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.
Proposal for End-of-Phase 2A (EOP2A) Meetings Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee November 17-18, 2003 Lawrence.
The FDA: Basic Facts It takes 12 to 15 years to develop a single drug Only 1 in 10,000 potential medications makes it completely through the process Only.
Transition of Biomarkers to Surrogate Endpoints: A Critical Path Initiative….. …..Introduction Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee of ACPS November 4, 2004.
FDA’s Critical Path Research Initiative & Intro to the CBER Research Program Kathryn M. Carbone, M.D. Associate Director for Research CBER/FDA.
The Importance of a Strategic Plan to Eliminate Health Disparities 2008 eHealth Conference June 9, 2008 Yvonne T. Maddox, PhD Deputy Director Eunice Kennedy.
OBRR Response to BPAC Recommendations on the Office Research Program Office Site Visit: July 22, 2005 BPAC Recommendations: February 10, 2006 C.D. Atreya,
OFFICE OF VACCINES RESEARCH AND REVIEW Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Michael J. Brennan, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research OVRR Site.
NIH and the Clinical Research Enterprise Third Annual Medical Research Summit March 6, 2003 Mary S. McCabe National Institute of Health.
Research in the Office of Vaccines Research and Review: Vision and Overview Jesse Goodman, M.D., M.P.H. Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.
1 Drug Safety Oversight Board: Recent Activities FDA Science Board Advisory Committee Meeting March 31 st, 2006 Douglas C. Throckmorton, MD Deputy Director.
Introduction to FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review Norman W. Baylor, Ph.D. Director, Office of Vaccines Research and Review.
CBER Research: OBRR Office Site Visit Kathryn M. Carbone, MD Associate Director of Research CBER/FDA.
Research in the Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies: Vision and Overview Jesse Goodman, M.D., M.P.H. Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation.
CTEP Visiting Physician Externship Coordinator: Igor Espinoza-Delgado, M.D. NCI CTEP Investigational Drug Branch
Critical Path Initiative Sousan S. Altaie, Ph.D. Scientific Policy Advisor OIVD/CDRH.
Ethical issues with the regulatory use of gene expression data Benjamin S Wilfond MD Medical Genetics Branch National Human Genome Research Institute Department.
Creating the Path for Innovative New Therapies Raymond L. Woosley, MD, PhD President, The Critical Path Institute.
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA Site Visit Introduction Kathryn M. Carbone, M.D. Associate Director for Research.
Peer Review of OBP Research Division of Monoclonal Antibodies
Examining Drug Quality Regulation Douglas C. Throckmorton, MD Deputy Director Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Public Meeting on 21 CFR February,
FDA Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology July 22-23, 2008 Introduction and Update Helen N. Winkle Director, Office of.
1 BETTER APPROACHES TO MONITORING MEDICAL PRODUCT SAFETY ARE NEEDED.
OFFICE OF VACCINES RESEARCH AND REVIEW Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Michael J. Brennan, Ph.D. Associate Director for Research OVRR Site.
CBER Research: OCTGT Office Site Visit Carolyn A. Wilson, Ph.D. Associate Director of Research (Acting) CBER/FDA.
GCP (GOOD CLINICAL PRACTISE)
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CENTER FOR BIOLOGICS AND HUMAN SERVICESEVALUATION and RESEARCH AND HUMAN SERVICES EVALUATION and RESEARCH Update on the Somatic Cell.
Patient Engagement in Drug Development: Experiences, Good Practices and Lessons Learned Lana Skirboll VP Science Policy Sanofi October 28, 2016, National.
FDA Perspective on Cardiovascular Device Development
CDRH 2010 Strategic Priorities
Quality System.
Introduction to TransCelerate
Presentation transcript:

Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA Kathryn M. Carbone, M.D. Associate Director for Research

Sponsor Perspective* Drug discovery and development can run as high as $1.9 billion. “Lowering that number is the current Holy Grail of the industry.” How can the CBER help make biological product development more efficient and support more safe and effective products reaching the public? *J. Mervis, Science, Vol 309, July 29, 2005 I

Sponsor Perspective* “…’it’s not the number of targets validated, or the number of chemicals selected. It’s proof of concept in patients [Yamada, GSK]…[a drug] is not a success until we’ve treated a patient with it.’ [Fishman, Novartis]” “…’it’s still a crapshoot…after 30 years in this business, I haven’t met anybody who could [pick winners]’ [Ruffolo, Wyeth] But investigational products aren’t true winners until documentation of safety, efficacy and manufacturing adequate…too many drugs fail too late in the development process….costly and inefficient

Sponsor Perspective* “…’you can’t manage [product development] science. But it needs to be. [Ruffolo, Wyeth]” “…Knowing how to maintain a healthy [product development] pipeline…’is more or less a matter of intuition.’ [Scheller, Genentech]” Consider the value to human health of research carefully managed to target the development of the scientific tools and knowledge needed for assessment of biological product safety, efficacy and quality manufacture = Critical Path Science…

FDA Critical Path Research Initiative Identify, focus upon and manage research to resolve regulatory & scientific challenges to improve product development process and product availability Needed to inform policy and guidance

Why CBER? Unique Role vis-à-vis the Science of Biologics Product Evaluation Innovators create scientific tools that are typically applicable to their specific products and not shared with others in industry CBER research-regulators are expert in biological product development AND standard scientific disciplines..expertise not often seen in standard biomedical discovery research arenas CBER research-regulators see the successes, failures, and missed opportunities across whole classes of exciting and innovative products and want to help CBER Guidance documents that are based on science can provide a clearer, more predictable regulatory path CBER plays a convening and coordinating role for scientific needs across sponsors

Multitasking at the FDA: Research Supports Regulatory Mission CBER researchers fully integrated into the regulatory process (~50% average time) “Researcher-Regulator” model (unique to CBER) Review INDs and BLAs Development of Policy and Guidance Documents Meeting with Sponsors and Advisory Committees Participation in Pre-license and Biennial Inspections Evaluation of Adverse Drug Reactions and Risk Assessment Performing research relevant to product evaluation of safety, efficacy, manufacturing: Developing/evaluating scientific tools & knowledge

FDA Critical Path Research Initiative: CBER Leadership CBER scientists can help get better products to patients, faster through: CBER intramural research programs Working collaboratively with government, academic and industry scientists Critical Path Extramural grant programs Guidances, standards, publications, stakeholder outreach, and other creative approaches to support product development, safety/efficacy assessment and review, consistent manufacturing

Applicability of Research Programs to Biologics Development It’s not “basic vs. applied science”, it’s how CBER research activity is applicable to supporting biologics product approvals Hundreds of Biologics Licensing Applications and Investigational New Drug Applications directly supported by research programs (OCTGT will provide examples) Research Programs have special relevance to evaluation of Biodefense Biological and Pandemic Influenza medical products

Major Goals for CBER Research Program Creating efficient, high quality regulatory pathways where there are none (particularly important for OCTGT products) Applying 21 st Century science to improve efficiency and accuracy of established regulatory pathways Focus on Outcomes: Identifying and resolving specific, high priority scientific challenges in product evaluation CBER Research Program Product Safety: ~40 % Product Quality ~25 % Product Efficacy ~ 25% Other ~ 10%

CBER Research: Managing Regulatory Challenges Into Biological Product Successes Formal process for Internal and External Expert evaluation of proposed research plans: Priority Scientific quality Internal & External evaluation of past research achievements Internal Management reviews: Yearly cycle using Annual Research Program Reporting External Site Visits: Laboratory/Res-Reg/Office Site Visits Outcomes include: Publications, Regulatory Policy/Guidances, Invited talks, Research QA/QC

Managing to CBER Research Goals Guiding Research Principles for Offices and the Centers CBER Research Leadership Council to coordinate development and implementation of the Principles Priorities for accomplishments in the next 12 months identified

Guiding Principles The CBER research program will be highly collaborative and include laboratory, epidemiological, statistical, and clinical sciences. Its scope will encompass the scientific basis of pre-clinical and clinical studies, manufacturing, regulatory submissions, inspections, postmarketing surveillance and Guidances. The research will be of high quality, efficient, and directed and managed to provide outcomes that address scientific and regulatory challenges in product development, safety, efficacy and quality.

Research Leadership Council Composed of Center Scientific Leadership Tasked to innovate processes for: Ensuring stakeholder input into the research program Prioritization and goal setting Developing tools for regulatory workload assessment and evaluation of research applicability Develop Cross-cutting Research Priorities and Communication strategies, and Center-wide scientific matrix programs where appropriate

Examples of CBER Critical Path Investment Opportunities in Cell-Tissue-Gene Therapy Better characterization of cell therapies & links to standardized clinical/lab outcomes Appropriate toxicology approaches for complex biological products New assays, standards, biomarkers, surrogates for complex biologics safety, efficacy and quality Multipathogen and rapid detection methodologies Methods & validation of pathogen inactivation for cells, tissues and other products Improving longevity/storage of cells and tissues Enhanced clinical trial design/analysis

Thank you To the Advisory Committee for their time, expertise and suggestions for continuing improvement of CBER research programs