ABSTRACT
Background and Objective The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) relies on advice from scientific and medical experts to make approval decisions about new prescription medications and medical devices. Therefore, it is crucial that FDA Advisory Committees (ACs) include the most knowledgeable scientists and clinicians in the decision-making process. However, to ensure that the advice is free from biases, current FDA policy often excludes those most qualified from participating in ACs due to perceived conflicts of interest (COI). The objective of the present study is to elicit opinion among subject matter experts regarding current FDA COI rules and regulations.
Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study using formal, self-administered online survey consisting of 14 questions, 3 of which addressed perceived implications of current FDA COI policy. We send a formal online survey to study subjects via Qualtrics. Study subjects were 1) individuals who participated in FDA ACs and 2) those who were interested in participating in ACs and had completed FDA COI paperwork but rejected by the FDA due to COI. The outcome measure is response to the 3 questions about the perceived implications of current FDA COI policy. Responses were scored on a 5-point Likert-type scale.
Results Among 403 study subjects (200 AC members and 203 individuals who were rejected due to COI), 145 (36%) responded to the survey including 90 AC members and 55 rejected individuals. Respondents included 41 (28%) females. 97% were holding MD or PhD degrees. 88% were age 46 and over, and 66% had more than 25 years in practice. The primary findings were that 49% of respondents agreed that the current FDA regulations lead to a lower quality of experts on ACs, 72% agreed that current policies exclude qualified experts from serving on ACs, and 48% agreed that FDA policy lowers the overall quality of AC input, to at least a “moderate” extent (19%-37% to a “high” or “very high” extent).
Conclusions The prevailing opinion among respondents to the formal survey is that current FDA COI policy has the potential effects to lowering quality of experts, excluding qualified experts, and lowering overall quality of AC input. The present report elucidates a potential need for the FDA to discuss the benefit and risk of the current AC COI policies.
Competing Interest Statement
Dr. Houchin is a Behavioral Health Medical Director for WellCare Health Plans. Dr. Hart has the following disclosures: Honoraria from Globus and DepuySynthes, Royalties from Seaspine and DupuySynthes, Study Funding for Other Projects from ISSGF, Speaking and/or Teaching Arrangements from DepuySynthes, Board membership from CSRS (Scientific Advisory Board), ISSLS (Scientific Advisory Board), ISSG (Scientific Advisory Board), and AOSpine (Technical Committee), and Grants from Medtronic (past) and ISSG (current). The other authors have no disclosures.
Funding Statement
None.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Columbia University Institutional Review Boards (Columbia University Administrative Review Committee Protocol Number: IRB-AAAS6808) determined that this study qualified as exempt, and no consent form was required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available.
