2013年4月24日 星期三

31 Drugs Facing FDA Approval in 2012-2013

BOSTON (TheStreet) -- Here's an updated list of biotech and pharmaceutical companies with pending FDA drug approval decisions for the rest of 2012 and into early 2013. This refresh includes changes and additions to the FDA calendar last published at the end of July.
The calendar on the following pages captures the most important U.S. regulatory events -- FDA drug approvals and advisory panels -- expected between August and March 2013. As every savvy biotech investor and trader knows, the volatility in biotech and drug stocks ramps significantly as U.S. regulators weigh whether to approve or reject new drugs.
Biotech and drug stocks below are listed in chronological order based on the closest regulatory catalyst.
Gilead Sciences (GILD)
Drug/indication: Quad for HIV
Approval decision date: Aug. 27
Quad combines four Gilead drugs into a single, once-daily pill for HIV. The new (and still experimental) components in the Quad are the integrase inhibitor elvitegravir and cobicistat, which is used to boost blood levels of elvitegravir.
Pfizer (PFE)
Drug/indication: Tofacitinib for rheumatoid arthritis
Approval decision date: August (exact date not specified)
Tofacitinib would be the first pill approved for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, competing with established injectable drugs like Abbbot's Humira.
Ironwood Pharmaceuticals (IRWD)
Drug/indication: Linaclotide for chronic idiopathic constipation and irritable bowel syndrome
Approval decision date: Sept. 7
Navidea Biopharmaceuticals (NAVB)
Drug/indication: Lymphoseek, a radioactive tracing agent for lymph node mapping
Approval decision date: Sept. 10
Sanofi (SNY)
Drug/indication: Aubagio for multiple sclerosis
Approval decision date: Sept. 12
Cornerstone Therapeutics (CRTX)
Drug/indication: Lixivaptan for hyponatremia
FDA advisory panel: Sept. 13
Approval decision date: Oct. 29
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (REGN)
Drug/indication: Eylea for Retinal Vein Occlusion (RVO)
Approval decision date: Sept. 21
This is an additional indication for currently approved Eylea.
Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMY)
Drug/indication: Metreleptin for lipodystrophy
Approval decision date: Oct. 3
Celgene
Drug/indication: Abraxane for non-small cell lung cancer
Approval decision date: Oct. 12
Abraxane is already approved for the treatment of breast cancer.
Bayer and Onyx Pharmaceuticals (ONXX)
Drug/indication: Regorafenib for metastatic colon cancer
Approval decision date: Oct. 15-30 (No specific date disclosed)
Santarus (SNTS)
Drug/indication: Uceris for ulcerative colitis
Approval decision date: Oct. 16
Aegerion Pharmaceuticals (AEGR)
Drug/indication: Lomitapide for dyslipidemia/hypercholesterolemia
FDA advisory panel: Oct. 17
Approval decision date: Dec. 28
Sanofi and Isis Pharmaceuticals (ISIS)
Drug/indication: Kynamro for dyslipidemia/hypercholesterolemia
FDA advisory panel: Oct. 18
Approval decision date: Jan. 29, 2013
Impax Labs (IPXL)
Drug/indication: IPX066 for Parkinson's disease
Approval decision date: Oct. 19
Hyperion Therapeutics (HPTX)
Drug/indication: Ravicti for urea cell disorders
Approval decision date: Oct. 23
United Therapeutics (UTHR)
Drug/indication: Oral Remodulin for pulmonary arterial hypertension
Approval decision date: Oct. 26

Exelixis (EXEL)
Drug/indication: Cabozantinib for medullary thyroid cancer
FDA advisory panel: Nov. 9
Approval decision date: Nov. 29
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11668461/1/31-drugs-facing-fda-approval-in-2012-2013.html
Medivation (MDVN) and Astellas
Drug/indication: Enzalutamide (MDV3100) for prostate cancer
Approval decision date: Nov. 22
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and Ligand Pharmaceuticals (LGND)
Drug/indication: Promacta for thrombocytopenia in hepatitis C patients
Approval decision date: Nov. 30
Alexza Pharmaceuticals (ALXA)
Drug/indication: Adasuve for agitation due to schizophrenia
Approval decision date: Dec. 21
This is Alexza's third attempt at Adasuve approval.
Biogen Idec (BIIB)
Drug/indication: BG-12 for multiple sclerosis
Approval decision date: Dec. 28
BG-12 would be Biogen's first pill for multiple sclerosis.
NPS Pharmaceuticals (NPSP)
Drug/indication: Gattex for short bowel syndrome
Approval decision date: Dec. 30
Santarus
Drug/indication: Uceris for ulcerative colitis
Approval decision date: Jan. 16, 2013
NuPathe (PATH)
Drug/indication: Zelrix for migraine
Approval decision date: Jan. 17, 2013
This is NuPathe's second attempt at Zelrix approval.
Raptor Pharmaceutical (RPTP)
Drug/indication: RP103 for cystinosis
Approval decision date: Jan. 30, 2013
Hemispherx Biopharma (HEB)
Drug/indication: Ampligen for chronic fatigue syndrome
Approval decision date: Feb. 1, 2013
Celgene (CELG)
Drug/indication: Pomalidomide for multiple myeloma
Approval decision date: Feb. 10, 2013
Dynavax (DVAX)
Drug/indication: Heplisav for hepatitis B prevention
Approval decision date: Feb. 24, 2013
Zogenix (ZGNX)
Drug/indication: Zohydro for chronic pain
Approval decision date: March 1, 2013
Sanofi (SNY)
Drug/indication: Lemtrada for multiple sclerosis
Approval decision date: April 12, 2013
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)
Drug/indication: Zytiga for prostate cancer
Approval decision date: April 15, 2013
J&J is seeking an expanded label for Zytiga to treat "pre-chemo" prostate cancer patients.
Sources: Company reports, TheStreet research, BioMedTracker
--Written by Adam Feuerstein in Boston.

Pharmaceutical fraud

Pharmaceutical fraud

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Pharmaceutical fraud involves activities that result in false claims to insurers or programs such as Medicare in the United States or equivalent state programs for financial gain to a pharmaceutical company. There are several different schemes[1] used to defraud the health care system which are particular to the pharmaceutical industry. These include: Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Violations, Off Label Marketing, Best Price Fraud, CME Fraud, Medicaid Price Reporting, and Manufactured Compound Drugs. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) estimates that health care fraud costs American taxpayers $60 billion a year.[2] Of this amount $2.5 billion was recovered through False Claims Act cases in FY 2010. Examples of fraud cases include the GlaxoSmithKline $3 billion settlement, Pfizer $2.3 billion settlement, and Merck $650 million settlement. Damages from fraud can be recovered by use of the False Claims Act, most commonly under the qui tam provisions which rewards an individual for being a "whistleblower", or relator (law).[3]

Contents

Estimates

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) estimates that health care fraud costs American taxpayers $60 billion a year.[2] Of this amount $2.5 billion was recovered through False Claims Act cases in FY 2010. Most of these cases were filed under qui tam provisions.
Some examples of False Claims Act settlements in the pharmaceutical industry include:

Types of fraud

There are several different schemes[1] used to defraud the health care system which are particular to the pharmaceutical industry.
  • Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Violations
  • Off Label Marketing
  • Best Price Fraud
  • CME Fraud
  • Medicaid Price Reporting
  • Manufactured Compound Drugs

GMP violations

Involve fraud with the Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Regulations which require manufacturers to have adequately equipped manufacturing facilities, adequately trained personnel, stringent control over the manufacturing process, appropriate laboratory controls, complete and accurate records, reports, appropriate finished product examination, and so on. Certain violations of the Good Manufacturing Practice Regulations may be the basis for a False Claims Act lawsuit.[4][5]

Off-label marketing

Though physicians may prescribe drugs for off-label usage known as off-label marketing, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prohibits drug manufacturers from marketing or promoting a drug for a use that the FDA has not approved. A manufacturer illegally “misbrands” a drug if the drug’s labeling includes information about its unapproved uses. A drug is deemed misbranded unless its labeling bears adequate directions for use. The courts have agreed with the FDA that the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) requires information not only on how a product is to be used (e.g., dosage and administration), but also on all the intended uses of the product. In 2004, whistleblower David Franklin prevailed in a suit under the False Claims Act against Warner-Lambert, resulting in a $430 million settlement in the Franklin v. Parke-Davis case. It was the first off-label promotion case successfully brought under the False Claims Act in U.S. history. Oral statements and materials presented at industry-support scientific and educational activities may provide evidence of a product’s intended use. If these statements or materials promote a use that is inconsistent with the product’s approved labeling, the product is misbranded under the FDCA for failure to bear labeling with adequate directions for all intended uses.[5][6]

Best price fraud

A figure reported by the manufacturer to CMS in quarterly reports under the Medicaid Rebate Program, it is used to calculate the Medicaid reimbursement rate. It is defined as the lowest price available to any wholesaler, retailer, provider, health maintenance organization (HMO), nonprofit entity, or the government. BP excludes prices to the Indian Health Service (IHS), Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), Department of Defense (DOD), the Public Health Service (PHS), 340B covered entities, Federal Supply Schedule (FSS), state pharmaceutical assistance programs, depot prices, and nominal pricing. BP includes cash discounts and free goods that are contingent upon purchase, volume discounts, and rebates. The fraud occurs as the manufacturer falsely self-reports its Best Price.[5][7]

CME fraud

The dissemination of “scientific and educational” literature. In the past a legitimate expense, they can be a tool for improper off-label marketing if they are designed and carried out under the control of a manufacturer’s influence and bias. Neither the presentations nor the literature are truly independent or non-promotional industry-supported educational activities.[5]

Medicaid price reporting

In order to decrease the amounts owed to the states, some companies misrepresented material facts regarding the regulatory origin/status of their brand name drugs, the AMP, and/or the best price. Despite the Government’s good faith reliance to charge manufacturers a unit rebate amount based upon the manufacturer’s own representation of drug status, and price, some manufacturers have deceptively and fraudulently, breached their duty to deal honestly with the Government.[5][8]

Manufactured compound drugs

FDA guidelines authorize pharmacists to “compound” or mix medications only in response to a physician’s valid prescription. This assumes, of course, that the physician intends that the medication be compounded. The regulations further require that the mixed or compounded medications are medically necessary and not commercially available. Illegal compounding includes compounding of ingredients such that the compounded drug is tantamount to commercially available medications, involving mass manufacturing of drugs under the guise of compounding.
Federal law, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines and the regulations of other Government Healthcare Programs, prohibit coverage of claims for “compounded” medications when the claims are submitted by a company that is mass manufacturing large amounts of unapproved drugs in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), under the guise of “compounding.”[5][9]

Kickbacks

Kickbacks are rewards such as cash, jewelry, free vacations, corporate sponsored retreats, or other lavish gifts used to entice medical professionals into using specific medical services. This could be a small cash kickback for the use of an MRI when not required, or a lavish doctor/patient retreat that is funded by a pharmaceutical company to entice the prescription and use of a particular drug.[1]
People engaging in this type of fraud are also subject to the federal Anti-Kickback statute.

Examples of fraud cases

  • $3 billion GSK settlement. On 2 July 2012, GlaxoSmithKline pleaded guilty to criminal charges and agreed to a $3 billion settlement of the largest health-care fraud case in the U.S. and the largest payment by a drug company.[10] The settlement is related to the company's illegal promotion of prescription drugs, its failure to report safety data,[11] bribing doctors, and promoting medicines for uses for which they were not licensed. The drugs involved were Paxil, Wellbutrin, Advair, Lamictal, and Zofran for off-label, non-covered uses. Those and the drugs Imitrex, Lotronex, Flovent, and Valtrex were involved in the kickback scheme.[12][13][14] The government investigation of GSK was launched largely on the basis of information provided by four whistleblowers who filed two qui tam (whistleblower) lawsuits against the company under the False Claims Act. GSK settled the whistleblowers’ lawsuits for a total of $1.017 billion out of the $3 billion settlement, the largest civil False Claims Act settlement to date.[15]
  • Pfizer $2.3 billion settlement: Pfizer settled multiple civil and criminal allegations for $2.3 billion in the largest case of pharmaceutical and health care fraud in US history. The drugs involved were Bextra (an anti-inflammatory drug), Geodon (an anti-psychotic drug), Lipitor (a cholesterol drug), Norvasc (anti-hypertensive drug), Viagra (erectile dysfunction), Zithromax (antibiotic), Zyrtec (antihistamine), Zyvox (an antibiotic), Lyrica (an anti-epileptic drug), Relpax (anti-migraine drug), Celebrex (anti-inflammatory drug), and Depo-provera (birth control).[16]
  • Merck $650 million settlement: Merck settled a nominal pricing fraud case in which the company was accused of taking kickbacks and violating Medicaid best price regulations for various drugs."Huge Percentage of Financial Fraud Against U.S. Government Comes From Healthcare Industry". Deep Harm. 2009-09-02.</ref>"Top 20 Cases". Taxpayers Against Fraud. 2011-06-01.</ref>
  • United States et al., ex rel. Jim Conrad and Constance Conrad v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc, et al. involved a drug manufacturer selling a drug, Levothroid, that had never been approved by the FDA. These allegations settled for $42.5 million due to multiple whistleblowers stepping forward to provide detailed information on the alleged fraud. The collective reward to the relators in this case was over $14.6 million.[17][18]

Reporting fraud

There are many ways to report cases of fraud. If a patient or health care provider believes they have witnessed Health Care Fraud, they are encouraged to contact the FBI via either their local office, telephone, or the online tips form.
If, however, they want to ensure the government actively investigates the alleged fraud, they are encouraged to contact legal counsel from an experienced firm that specializes in qui tam litigation under the False Claims Act. A good legal team can advise potential whistleblowers of their rights, protections, and what evidence is necessary to solidify a case against the group leading the fraud.

See also

References

  1. ^ a b c "Financial Crimes to the Public Report 2006". FBI. 2006.
  2. ^ a b "FBI-Health Care Fraud". FBI.
  3. ^ "Department of Justice". Department of Justice.
  4. ^ "The Top 12 GMP Violations". Fierce Pharma Manufacturing.
  5. ^ a b c d e f "Pharmaceutical Fraud". Nolan & Auerbach P.A.
  6. ^ "Strategies and Practices in Off-Label Marketing of Pharmaceuticals: A Retrospective Analysis of Whistleblower Complaints". PLoS Medicine.
  7. ^ "State Medicaid Policies and Oversight Activities Related to 340B Purchased Drugs". HHS-OIG.
  8. ^ "Average Manufacturer Price and Average Sales Price Reporting Requirements". HHS-OIG.
  9. ^ "PRESCRIPTION DRUGS: State and Federal Oversight of Drug Compounding by Pharmacies". United States General Accounting Office.
  10. ^ "GlaxoSmithKline". 4 July 2012.
  11. ^ "GlaxoSmithKline Agrees to Pay $3 Billion in U.S. Drug Settlement". 2 July 2012.
  12. ^ Fred Mogul (2 July 2012). "NY to Get Millions in GlaxoSmithKlein Settlement". WNYC. Retrieved 2 July 2012.
  13. ^ "BBC News -GlaxoSmithKline to pay $3bn in US drug fraud scandal". BBC Online. Retrieved 2 July 2012.
  14. ^ Thomas, Katie and Schmidt, Michael S. (July 2, 2012). "Glaxo Agrees to Pay $3 Billion in Fraud Settlement". The New York Times. Retrieved July 3, 2012.
  15. ^ "P&C's Glaxo whistleblower case accounts for $1.5 billion out of Glaxo's record $3 billion settlement." Phillips & Cohen LLP Press Release. July 2, 2012.
  16. ^ "JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES LARGEST HEALTH CARE FRAUD SETTLEMENT IN ITS HISTORY". DOJ. 2009-09-02.
  17. ^ "Forest Whistleblower Cases Settle for Over $300 million". PRWeb. 2010-09-15.
  18. ^ "Drug Maker Forest Pleads Guilty". Department of Justice. 2010-09-15.

External links and resources

  1. Masterminds Behind Pharmaceutical Fraud Deserve Prison Time
  2. The Future of the False Claims Act
  3. CGMP Violations may be the Basis for Qui Tam
  4. Blowing the Whistle on Health Care Fraud
  5. Health Care Fraud Prevention
  6. FBI Tips Online

2013年4月23日 星期二

[封面故事] 生技領域中的服務業-CRO (生物科技 No.6, 2002/11)
文:陳復霞 
生物科技運用的範圍廣泛,其中製藥約占了70﹪,藥廠必須委託其他的專業機構來進行部分流程,藉以降低營運成本、獲得競爭優勢,甚至快速開發供應產品,以求讓產品能夠提早問市,足見生技服務業有相當大的拓展空間。
在 全球的生技產業當中,與生活息息相關的農業及環保為不容忽視之要角,而攸關生命存續的醫藥相關領域更是受人重視,根據2001年全球生技公司各領域比例分 佈資料顯示,全球的上市生技公司當中屬於藥品業的高居50﹪之多,而生物技術服務業約占5﹪,CRO占2﹪,顯見全球的生技產業正持續成長,生技服務業也 居中扮演著相當重要的角色。(圖一)
圖一:2001年全球生技公司各領域之比例分佈

新藥研發階段性流程
生 技產業的發展有三大要素:資金、技術、人才。雖然生技產品成功後常會帶來高額的利潤,但是,在藥物研究開發與上市的流程中,可以發現研發耗費時日頗多,必 須先投入大量的資金、人力及物力,而在得到研發成果後如何證明安全性及有效性,加上審核階段性費用、專利權的競爭等等相關事宜,都充滿難以預料的風險。 (圖二)
原本擔任生物技術開發中心執行長十餘年(1984~1999年),在任內即已經積極推動國內生物科技產業發展,並拓展國際間生物 技術之交流,引進技術;目前擔任明生生物科技公司董事長的田蔚城認為生物科技運用的範圍廣及醫藥、食品、環保、農林漁牧、能源等產業,其中製藥約占了 70﹪,他表示藥廠不可能包辦全部的流程,必須委託其他的專業機構來進行部分流程,藉以降低營運成本、獲得競爭優勢,甚至快速開發供應產品,以求讓產品能 夠提早問市,足見生技服務業有相當大的拓展空間。
圖二:新藥研究開發及上市的流程圖(資料來源:明生生技)

生技服務業類型

田蔚城表示製藥產業不斷改變,在1980年開始興起委外產業,在製藥產業分工解體之下,常見的委外產業以研發、生產及行銷服務居多,CRO起源於美、歐等先進國家,而後CRO開始向東歐、中南美洲及亞洲發展。目前全球約有千餘家CRO,2001年總產值為98億美元。

生 技服務業提供新藥研發過程中必要的支援,為生技產業不可或缺的基石。其服務內容包括專業知識、資金、技術、設備、耗材、實驗室、操作步驟或代工生產服務。 大致可以區分為:研發及技術服務(Contract Research Organizations;CRO)、生產代工服務(Contract Manufacturing Organizations;CMO)、實驗室用產品-儀器/試劑及耗材、行銷服務及其他支援性服務(如智慧財產權及技術鑑定、人才培訓、創業投資及生物 資訊服務等),一旦產品縮短時程上市,不但節省許多成本,更能夠提升產能以因應市場需求,使得與研發生產相關的前兩項在製藥及生技產業中的地位亦日趨重 要,合作範圍也逐漸擴大至其他服務項目。



CRO審核要件

新藥開發時,除了實驗室研究,尚需經過一連串動 物試驗及人體臨床試驗的過程,CRO為接受委託進行研發的機構,提供新藥臨床試驗的相關業務。CRO提供服務內容為藥物研究、臨床前試驗、臨床試驗及國家 機構的審核申請(如:衛生署)等項目。亦即從藥物研發到上市的一切服務,可避免藥廠因投入過多人力、設備及經費在某些階段性研發工作上,而能掌控資源加以 充分運用。

CRO送審案件依照性質不同,審核時間也不同,根據衛生署藥政處副處長余萬能表示,申請新藥臨床試驗 (Investigational New Drug ;IND),送審單位需備妥臨床試驗計畫書、藥理作用、安全性資料與CMC化學資料後,經衛生署及倫理委員會通過核准後,才可以開始進行臨床試驗部分。通 常辦理臨床試驗計畫書及報告書案件的審核費用最高為五萬元;中藥部分由中醫藥委員會負責審理,而西藥或其他植物抽取藥物則為衛生署藥政處的審理範圍。
余 萬能表示目前衛生署委託財團法人醫藥品查驗中心進行初審,最長不得超過42天,接近於美國食品與藥品管理局(FDA)的標準。複審則由衛生署藥物審議委員 會審查,總計最長不得超過200個工作天,如果藥物審核過程中資料不齊全,可以補件一次,期限最高為三個月,如逾期未補件則逕予結案。(圖三) 至於申請新藥上市(New Drug Application;NDA)時,須檢附具有統計學意義的臨床試驗結果和其他相關資料,向衛生主管機關提出申請。

圖三:IND審查流程(資料來源:查驗中心)
CRO未來動向
至 於健保局的健保給付方式對生物科技產業的發展有何影響?田蔚城認為藥價是影響台灣生技及製藥產業發展的重要原因之一,健保給付方式會影響製藥業投入研發的 意願,採行低價競爭甚至會扼殺製藥產業的發展,而CRO與生技產業的研發部分關係密切,當藥價的問題不解決,藥廠投資研發的意圖勢必趨於保守,環環相扣, 生技及製藥產業的前景堪慮,生技服務業也勢必受到相當的衝擊。
隨著生技藥品研發與生產需求的不斷提高,開拓全球市場是藥廠極其重要的策 略,CRO選擇設立適當的據點或標準實驗室以便進行臨床試驗,亦是開發市場潛力的利基點。未來衛生署將積極健全於臨床試驗體系及修訂藥品審查法規,以發展 台灣成為亞太華人臨床試驗中心,奠定新藥研發基礎,吸引早期研發之新藥到台灣執行臨床試驗。
此外,衛生署也將健全新藥查驗登記審核體系、藥品不良反應通報系統,在北中南區設置藥品不良反應通報中心,以及持續並簡化查驗登記作業流程及法規鬆綁列為推動重點,相信對日後推動生技製藥產業有實質的正面意義。

藥學雜誌106Vol. 27 No. 1  Mar. 31 2011
中華民國一○○年三月三十一日出版
林口長庚紀念醫院藥劑部藥師 張維漢、陳偉立、林佳慧、王秀尹
摘要
醫學研究種類繁多,其中屬藥品臨床試驗,如新藥開發、上市藥 品拓展新適應症、新劑型開發以至學名藥欲證明與原開發廠療效相同,都需運用科學方式提供足以信賴之證據,方可運用於臨床上。臨床試驗除計劃主持人、研究護 士、臨床研究專員外,尚須藥師參與擔任管理臨床試驗藥品的角色。
臨床試驗藥品與一般臨床藥品的管理有許多不同,本文提供某醫學中心藥師實際參與臨床試驗藥品管理之經驗,期望拋磚引玉對此類藥品管理有所迴響。
關鍵字: 臨床試驗藥品管理、藥品優良臨床試驗準則、藥師、management of investigational product、good clinical practice、pharmacist
壹、前言
臨床試驗是醫學研究發展過程中不可或缺的過程。新藥、 新技術及新醫療器材,或是擴展新適應症、新劑型均需運用科學方式提供可信之證據,以應用於維護人類健康及促進社會福祉。近年來實證醫學成為顯學,設計良好 的隨機分派控制試驗 (RCTs, Randomized controlled Trials) 證據等級較高,成為醫療決策的重要參考依據。
人類歷史中發生過許多不道德醫學研究案例,如二次大戰期間,納粹醫師與科學家對被俘虜的猶太人進行低氧、低溫、化學戰劑等人體試驗,最終這些醫師與科學家在紐倫堡受到審判1;1932至1945日本731部隊在中國大量進行鼠疫、天花、傷寒、霍亂等病毒之活人實驗2。1947年發表的「紐倫堡宣言」為全球醫界首次對人體試驗提出的倫理規範,直至1964年世界醫學會 (WMA, World Medical Association) 發表之「赫爾辛基宣言」成為國際間臨床試驗道德規範之依歸2。 因各國新藥上市審核條件不同,藥廠為符合各國規定須重複多次試驗,不僅增加研發成本,亦延誤病患治療之時機。有鑑於各國醫藥品管理法規協合化之需求,美 國、歐盟和日本藥政主管機關及製藥業於1990年成立國際醫藥法規協合會 (ICH, International Conference on Harmonization) 以共同制定國際規範,一致的新藥審核標準加速研發及上市,並可減少重複試驗的昂貴成本,使患者及早獲得新的治療1。我國於2005年1月6日參考ICH-E63制定並發佈藥品優良臨床試驗準則 (GCP, Good Clinical Practice)4,使國內臨床試驗與國際接軌。
貳、臨床試驗藥局與專責藥師必要性
藥品管理是藥師的天職,尤對尚無法確知療效與安全的藥品,在調劑、保存與紀錄更須審慎管理。另因臨床試驗藥品發放方式受制於各試驗之設計,與一般治療用藥極為不同,為避免工作流程造成調劑困難,建議將臨床試驗與臨床應用兩種藥品分開,成立專屬臨床試驗藥局管理。
個案醫院依據相關法規制定「人體試驗管理作業準則」5, 對試驗藥品管理明確規定:「試驗用藥應存放於『臨床試驗藥品中心』或藥局,由專責藥師管理;如有特殊狀況須以個案簽呈呈報,委員會核准後得由試驗主持人自 行管理。」;前述準則公佈前曾進行試驗藥品管理查核,計畫主持人大多將藥品管理工作委由研究護士或助理處理,管理缺失包含未依計畫分別管理、溫溼度監控未 落實、可用藥品與回收藥品混雜、冷藏櫃未使用緊急電源、藥品存放未適當管控,未授權者亦可取得等。為改善前述缺失藥師除加強各計畫人員藥品管理能力,並積 極規劃建置臨床試驗藥局,使臨床試驗藥品回歸專業藥師管理,目前已無試驗主持人自行管理之案件。衛生署衛署藥字第0980343086號函公佈後,個案醫 院陸續接獲其他醫院詢問與觀摩,足見個案醫院在試驗藥品管理方面之經驗。
參、臨床試驗藥局管理實績
個案醫院於2005年6月21日成立臨床試驗藥局,當時配置兩名藥師,負責管理所屬院區臨床試驗藥品。後因業務量日增,由三名藥師負責所屬院區臨床試驗藥品及全體系試驗藥品編碼與進度控管。
該藥局以「追求卓越,要做就做最好的」為目標,有感於每試驗案均由研究團隊縝密計劃、高額研發成本及寶貴受試者共同完成,因而認真面對每一試驗案,不讓試驗案因藥品管理缺失而導致失敗。
一、業務範圍
依臨床試驗藥品管理規範,專責藥師管理之試驗藥品涵 蓋:經人體試驗倫理委員會審議通過之臨床試驗案藥品非本院採購供一般臨床使用者,一律納入臨床試驗藥局管理。除具化療特性之試驗藥品由化療藥局管理外,其 餘試驗藥品均由臨床試驗藥局管理,此外,尚須定期查核化療藥局及主持人自行管理之試驗藥品並協助全院區試驗藥品編碼建檔。
二、 試驗藥品編碼收件及電腦上線審查流程 (圖一)
試驗藥品管理由藥劑部負責編碼及行政審查,研擬藥品品 名、規格、含量、包裝形式等資訊後呈相關主管建置藥品檔,編碼後得以電腦醫令開方,並連結批價、庫存及資訊管理,經計劃核准之醫師開立處方後,由研究助理 持處方至臨床試驗藥局領藥。試驗藥品編碼建檔前,需與主持人或委託廠商討論計劃內容、執行細節,並審核相關文件 (包含核准函、計劃書、藥品管理繳款證明、主持人手冊等)。

09-1.tif
圖一 臨床試驗藥品管理流程圖

三、專責藥師例行業務
1.試驗藥品之管理、調劑、使用監測、儲藏供應、分裝 及相關協調等事宜。藥品點收與存放時需核對試驗藥品之包裝及標示是否符合法令與試驗案之規定,如標示或說明、製造日期、使用期限、用量記載、運送、供應、 貯藏方式並標明「人體試驗專用」等。尤應注意所有試驗藥品僅供參與試驗之醫師處方,以確保試驗藥品供應予符合該試驗案之受試者。
2.臨床試驗藥局設施之維護:每工作日上、下班分別記錄室溫與冷藏 (凍) 櫃溫 (濕) 度;每月主動寄發溫濕度記錄予委託廠商,以維護試驗藥品存放環境品質。
3.其他:(1)每試驗案獨立存放並上鎖保管。(2) 製作每案受試者名冊 (Subjects List)、試驗藥品調劑、發藥注意事項、試驗藥品調劑記錄表 (Investigational Product Inventory) 等表單。(3)調劑試驗藥品應確保試驗盲性設計,含雙盲試驗案中為非盲性人員藥品調劑、記錄工作。(4)協助建置、維護全體系試驗藥品之檔案以確實掌握各 院區管理情形。
四、執行成果
2009年度臨床試驗藥品管理案件數如表一,該年度監 測、稽核、查核均無缺失。另因業務主要接洽以委託廠商之臨床研究專員 (CRA, Clinical Research Associate) 與研究助理 (CRC, Clinical Research Coordinator) 為主,2008年底對前述對象進行臨床試驗藥局滿意度調查。問卷共計130份,回收96份,回收率76.8%,在藥局作業流程方面滿意度達滿意以上的比例 為93.1%,部分受訪者表示個案醫院的行政流程仍有簡化的空間;藥品儲存空間、監控方式等硬體設備部份滿意度達滿意以上為96.6%,然因個案醫院規模 大,受訪者建議臨床試驗藥局應搬遷至較為中央的地理位置以利研究護士領用試驗藥物,針對此項個案醫院於2009年9月已將臨床試驗藥局搬遷至院區核心地 點,並改善空間與硬體設備;藥師專業知識部份滿意度達滿意以上的比例更高達100%,而藥師服務態度滿意度達滿意以上為97.7%;文件紀錄品質滿意度達 滿意以上則為100%,但仍希望個案醫院能填寫試驗委託廠商的表格,並增加管理回收的試驗藥品業務 (表二)。

表一 體系委託廠商贊助臨床試驗案件數
院區
試驗案件數
需藥品管理者
尚未進行
藥品存放藥局管理案件
查核
林口
225
190
13
170
7 a
高雄
108
89
8
81
0
台北
12
9
0
9
0
基隆
22
16
1
15
0
嘉義
26
22
4
18
0
合計
393
326
26
293
7
註: a均為核醫藥品由核醫藥師負責,臨床試驗藥品管理藥師仍須定期查核
註: 數據資料統計至2010年1月31日

表二 臨床試驗藥局滿意度調查
項目
很滿意
滿意
不滿意
很不滿意
合計
藥局作業流程
40 (46.0%)
41 (47.1%)
5 (5.7%)
1 (1.1%)
87 (100%)
儲藏空間(室溫及冷藏)、溫度監控等硬體設備
44 (50.6%)
40 (46.0%)
3 (3.4%)
0 (0%)
87 (100%)
藥師專業知識
52 (59.8%)
35 (40.2%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
87 (100%)
藥師服務態度
57 (65.5%)
28 (32.2%)
2 (2.3%)
0 (0%)
87 (100%)
文件記錄的品質*
49 (58.3%)
35 (41.7%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
84 (100%)
*本題有3人未回答
         

肆、挑戰與問題
臨床試驗藥局管理較一般藥局有許多不同,如:1.試驗 藥品的發放受制於試驗設計,專責藥師須了解每一計劃設計的發放方式,並非如臨床應用藥品單純由用法用量與天數計算。如雙盲雙虛擬設計每次需配發兩種藥品, 使受試者能依試驗設計方式服用;雙盲試驗中藥師為解盲藥師 (unblinded pharmacist),藥師須依計劃調劑藥品負責維持盲性之要求。2.為完整記載受試者病歷且因應電子病歷趨勢,試驗藥品領用仍須開立醫囑。許多試驗案 因設計不同無法結合現行醫囑系統,在藥品編碼時需異中求同考量其相關變數。3.試驗藥品僅可由計劃核准之醫師處方給藥參與計劃之受試者。目前均由藥師人工 建檔核對,難免有疏漏,如以資訊系統輔助比對將更加完善。但因此資訊系統建置尚未健全且有權限問題,仍無法有效落實受試者管理。4.病人數眾多、研究團隊 品質佳,參考衛生署台灣藥品臨床試驗資訊網之公開資訊6,個案醫院試驗案件數多,較已設立國家級卓越臨床試 驗中心不遑多讓。臨床試驗案件持續成長,藥品存放空間與設備需求日增,然因試驗設計差異,藥品存放空間與設備需求預估不易。5.專責藥師應具臨床藥學訓 練、GCP訓練認證、細心、英語及協調能力佳等多項特質,人才培養不易。再加上藥師須了解每試驗案之發藥標準程序因此不宜頻繁更動,將使專責藥師缺乏其他 業務輪訓機會,此專責職務在人力資源運用上需作更宏觀之整體考量。
伍、結論
臨床試驗藥品管理是近年來藥劑部門新接觸之業務,隨著 試驗案件增加,不論是社會對臨床試驗倫理議題重視、人體試驗委員會加強稽核、醫療機構對研究能力重視、藥廠開發新藥擴展市場殷切均讓執行品質要求 (包含試驗藥品管理) 不斷增加。而目前僅大型機構設立專責藥師管理,其他許多醫院均由一般藥局或主持人自行管理,可能導致試驗藥物因無專責人員管理而造成缺失。
期望藉此文分享試驗藥品管理經驗與挑戰,使其他機構可及早規劃建置相關作業標準與制度,讓藥師在臨床試驗藥品管理之品質提升,使台灣在執行臨床試驗更具國際競爭力。
參考資料:
1. 葉嘉新、林志六:新藥開發與臨床試驗,第一版。台北,秀威資訊科技股份有限公司,2008。
2. 郭英調:臨床研究手冊,2000。
3. 國際醫藥法規協合會Http://www.ich.org/cache/compo/475-272-1.html#E6。擷取日期:2009年6月1日。
4. 藥品優良臨床試驗準則,2005。
5. 聯合人體試驗委員會 http://www.jirb.org.tw/laws.asp。擷取日期:2009年6月1日。
6. 台灣藥品臨床試驗資訊網 http://www.cde.org.tw/ct_taiwan/index.htm。擷取日期:2009年6月6日。

Experiences in Management of Investigation Products
Wei-Han Chang, Wei-Li Chen, Chia-Hui Lin, Hsiu-Yin Wang
Department of Pharmacy, Chang Gung Medical Foundation, Linkou, Taiwan
Abstract
All varieties of medical researches are required to be scientifically validated before clinical applications and clinical trials involved drug intervention also included. Examples of clinical trials involved drug intervention are new drug development, new indication and formulation explorations, and bioequivalence comparison to brand drugs. In addition to principal investigators, clinical research coordinators, and clinical research associates, pharmacists also play a vital role in the management of investigational products.
In the aspect of drugs management, there are lots of difference between investigational drugs and ordinary medications. With the expectation of eliciting more responses to investigational drug management, this article provides practical experiences of pharmacists in a teaching hospital setting.



台灣醫藥品臨床試驗現況

CDE戴天池醫師於財團法人生物技術開發中心演講

 

2013年4月22日 星期一

歐洲境內臨床試驗申請案件量正逐年下滑? 法規遵循成本

為簡化歐盟境內過於繁瑣之
跨境臨床試驗(Cross-Border Clinical Trial)申請及管理措施
及降低執行成本,歐盟執委會(European Commission)於今(2012)717日時,正式向議會(European Parliament)提出了一項新修法建議案(Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council “on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC”)...
        為簡化歐盟境內過於繁瑣之跨境臨床試驗(Cross-Border Clinical Trial)申請及管理措施及降低執行成本,歐盟執委會(European Commission)於今(2012)717日時,正式向議會(European Parliament)提出了一項新修法建議案(Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council “on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use, and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC); 而根據執委會方面所作之說明可知,於現行臨床試驗管理指令架構下,不論是廠商或研究者,若想於不同會員國內同時進行臨床試驗,就必須分別向各該會員國提出 申請;而由於,在不同會員國間,對於同一藥品臨床試驗申請案之審查,其不論在作成准駁之時間、抑或是通報與監督管理之要求等方面,皆未盡一致;因此,從法 規遵循之角度來看,欲於歐洲境內執行跨境臨床試驗所須付出之高成本,對廠商或研究者來說,除造成了相當程度上之不便與負擔外,亦影響其提出申請之意願(據其估算,近年來於歐洲境內執行之臨床試驗案件量,已較以往大幅降低了約15%左右);對此,執委會健康及消費者事務委員John Dalli表示:「關於此次所提出之新立法建議案,除擬減輕業者不必要之行政管理及成本負擔外,政府亦將建構一套可調和各會員國臨床試驗管理措施、及具一體適用性之新臨床試驗申請系統」;換言之,若一旦順利完成立法,未來就歐盟境內跨不同會員國臨床試驗之申請與執行,將更能兼顧便利及時效性。
        關於研擬此項新立法建議案之主要目的,除要置換現行已不合時宜之歐盟臨床試驗管理指,亦要嘗試讓境內跨境臨床試驗之管理與執行,變得更加簡化且具一致性;因此,在這樣的思維概念下,執委會乃提出了幾項具體修訂方向,其包括:
 () 提出集中化臨床試驗管理程序:此部分主要之重點有二:其一,是將全面納入並考量境內各會員國對臨床試驗之管理要求:而其二,則是要建立更「完整」及「快速」的臨床試驗申請程序 (並將確保單一評估結果之產生)
 () 簡化各項通報監督措施(Simplified Reporting Procedures)亦即,將免除目前擬於歐盟進行跨境床試驗之申請與執行者,須分別對不同會員國及相關單位,提繳龐大資料之情況(現於歐盟境內進行之臨床試驗,約莫有1/4,是同時於3-5個不同會員國中執行)
 () 更加透明化(More Transparency)此主要聚焦於兩部分,一者,係針對正進行中之臨床試驗研究之受試者招募部分,而另一,則是針對臨床試驗研究產出結果透明化之部分;
 () 評估執委會對各會員國之監督管理提供協助與導引之可能性:亦即,要積極確保與監督這些管理措施,能確實於各會員國中被落實,並與歐盟新指令之基本規範原則與管理規定保持一致,而非僅是消極的等待各會員國之通報或提供建議等。
        而針對上述修訂方向,歐盟議會官員Peter Liese表示:「個人比較關注的,是那些於原指令中,造成業者將臨床試驗由境內移轉至印度、中國大陸與其他國家中執行之規定,以及應如何妥善解決的問題;雖然,目前執委會方面業已初步提出日後對印度、中國大陸及其他國家中所執行臨床試驗,應如何適切管理之建議,但個人以為,在這些國家所採之標準實不易被驗證之前提下,原則上,仍不宜將於這些國家中所執行之臨床試驗資料,直接作為境內核准新藥上市之參考依據」;此外,其另建議:「對於『非基於商業性目的(如為學術、慈善等目的)所進行之臨床試驗,日後亦應要有不同之管理方式,以讓其可在受較少限制之情況下,快速啟動並進行後續相關研究工作,為境內病患及大眾創造更多之利益與福祉」。
        最後,執委會John Dalli委員補充:「從新藥開發與改善既有治療方法等角度來看,臨床試驗及其管理,皆扮演著極為關鍵之角色,而這也是如今為何會提出此項新立法建議案,來協助改善與提升境內臨床試驗管理之真正價值與意義!而若此項新指令一旦實施,除預計每年將可減省近8億歐元之法規遵循成本外,亦可同時帶來促進境內醫療研究與新產品開發等利益,並為歐盟之經濟成長,作出一定之貢獻」。不論如何,在歐盟境內臨床試驗申請量大幅銳減之趨勢下(2007年時歐盟境內有超過5,000件臨床試驗案,但至2011年止已下滑至3,800),政府是否能在可確保臨床試驗數據之信賴度」及維持高病患安全標準等前提下,藉由此制訂新指令之方式,順利化危機為轉機?則端視其所提出之解決套案,後續是否能確實獲得業者及大眾之青睞而定(此項立法建議案後續將經歐盟議會及理事會審議,預計將於2016年時正式生效施行)