This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.
Abstract
Background: The median time to approval of new drugs in Canada decreased considerably in the
mid-1990s, although it continued to be longer than in such countries as Australia,
Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Ongoing concern about approval
times pointed to a need for a further international comparison.
Objective: This study was designed to assess whether there have been continuing improvements
in drug approval times in Canada relative to these other countries.
Methods: Application and approval dates of new chemical or biological substances approved
for marketing from 1999 through 2001 were requested from the Canadian, Australian,
and Swedish regulatory agencies. Information for the United States was derived from
publications of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The regulatory
agency for the United Kingdom does not release application dates, although these were
the same as the Swedish application dates for most drugs approved in both countries
through the centralized European Union (EU) review procedure. Application dates for
drugs licensed under the EU mutual-recognition arrangement or in the United Kingdom
only were requested from the relevant pharmaceutical companies.
Results: One hundred eighty-six new drugs were approved in ≥1 of the countries studied between
January 1999 and December 2001: 17 (9.1%) in all 5 countries, 25 (13.4%) in 4, 27
(14.5%) in 3, 39 (21.0%) in 2, and 78 (41.9%) in 1. Approval times were longer in
Canada than in Australia, although not significantly so (median time, 645 and 551
days, respectively). Canadian and Australian approval times were significantly longer
than those in Sweden (431 days), the United Kingdom (479 days), and the United States
(371 days) (P < 0.001). The annual median approval time in Canada increased in each of the 3 years.
The approval times of priority-reviewed drugs in Canada were significantly longer
than in the United States (median 317 vs 232 days) but significantly shorter than
in Australia (509 days) (both comparisons, P < 0.001).
Conclusions: Overall approval times of new drugs in Canada were longer than those in Australia,
Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States in the period studied. The findings
warrant ongoing monitoring of Canadian drug approval times.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Subscribe to Clinical Therapeutics
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Comparison of the drug approval processes in the US, the EU and Canada.Int J Med Marketing. 2001; 1: 224-235
- Report of the Commission of Inquiry on the Pharmaceutical Industry.Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa1985
- Health and Sports Program: A Study Team Report to the Task Force on Program Review.in: Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa1985: 95-109
- Drug Regulation. Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons, Fiscal Year Ending 31 March 1987. Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa1987
- 5th ed. Memorandum to the Minister (the Stein Report). Department of National Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa1987
- Program Evaluation Study of the Drug Safety, Quality and Efficacy Program.Department of National Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa1989
- Working in Partnerships. Drug Review for the Future.Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa1992
- A comparison of regulatory approval times for new chemical entities in Australia, Canada, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States.J Clin Pharmacol. 1992; 32: 889-896
- Drug review in Canada: A comparison with Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.Drug Inf J. 1998; 32: 1133-1141
- Time required for approval of new drugs in Canada, Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States in 1996–1998.CMAJ. 2000; 162: 501-504
- New drug approval times and ‘therapeutic potential’ in Canada, Australia, Sweden and the United States during the period 1992 to 1998.Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2000; 7: 97-101
- AIDS activists condemn slow drug-approval process.Globe and Mail. 1998; : A6
- First to start, last to finish: Approvals track record is poor.Med Post. 1999; : 12
- Loosening the cap on drug approvals.Globe and Mail. 2000; : R5
- Drug-approval process too slow, activists argue.Globe and Mail. 2001; : A12
- Waiting for approval: Canada's hidden drug problem.Globe and Mail. 2002; : A21
- Can the drug approval process be reformed to save lives?.Fraser Forum. 2002; : 14-16
- Speed up drug-approval process, feds told.CMAJ. 2002; 166: 644
- Issues in the approval of, access to, and post-marketing follow-up of new drugs in Canada: A personal viewpoint.Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2002; 11: 335-340
- 5th ed. Canada's Performance in Drug Approval Times: NOC Survey, 1999. Rx&D, Ottawa2000
- 5th ed. Canada's Performance in Drug Approval Times: NOC Survey, 2000. Rx&D, Ottawa2001
- 5th ed. Canada's Performance in Drug Approval Times: NOC Survey, 2001. Rx&D, Ottawa2002
- 5th ed. New Drug Approvals in 1999. PhRMA, Washington, DC2000
- 5th ed. New Drug Approvals in 2000. PhRMA, Washington, DC2001
- 5th ed. New Drug Approvals in 2001. PhRMA, Washington, DC2002
- The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products' centralized procedure for product approval: Current status.Drug Inf J. 1999; 33: 969-978
- Marketing authorizations of medicinal products in the European Union: Past, present, and future.Drug Inf J. 2000; 34: 793-800
- Practical Nonparametric Statistics.in: John Wiley & Sons, New York1971: 256-263
- 5th ed. Priority Review Policy. Manual of Policies and Procedures, MAPP 6020.3. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Md1996 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- 5th ed. Priority Review of Drug Submissions (Therapeutic Products). Health Canada, Ottawa2002 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- How Long Does It Take to Evaluate a Prescription Medicine?.Therapeutic Goods Administration, Woden, Australia2002 (Available at) (Accessed december 2, 2002)
- Defending drug approval.Globe and Mail. 2002; : A16
- 5th ed. FDA's Drug Review and Approval Times. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Md2001 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- Pharmaceuticals in the European Union.Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg2000 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- 5th ed. Report on PDUFA Goals: Original New Product Applications. Food and Drug Administration, Rockville, Md2002 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- Drug approvals taking too long?.CMAJ. 2002; 166: 790
- Response to commentary.Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2002; 11: 341-342
- Human resources for the approval of new drugs in Canada, Australia, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2002; 2: 73-78
- 5th ed. Annual Report 2001. Läkemedelsverket, Uppsala2002 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- Therapeutic Products Program: Baseline Assessment of Drug Submission Review Process. PricewaterhouseCoopers, Ottawa1999
- Health Canada Progress Update.Health Canada, Ottawa2002 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- New challenges in quality control and licensure. Regulation.Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1994; 10: 55-64
- Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada.Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada, Saskatoon2002 (Available at) (Accessed December 2, 2002)
- Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications.JAMA. 2002; 287: 2215-2220
- Effect of User Fees on Drug Approval Times, Withdrawals, and Other Agency Activities.in: 5th ed. Publication GAO-02-958. US General Accounting Office, Washington, DC2002
- Alosetron: A case study in regulatory capture, or a victory for patients' rights?.BMJ. 2002; 325: 592-595
Article Info
Publication History
Accepted:
January 28,
2003
Identification
Copyright
© 2003 Published by Elsevier Inc.
