Abstract
Through expanded access protocols, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows patients with serious or immediately life-threatening diseases access to experimental drugs outside the clinical trial setting when no satisfactory alternative treatment is available. While the FDA has established a mechanism for providing patients with unapproved drug access, the regulations do not require the pharmaceutical company to provide the drug. The drug company’s permission to use its experimental drug is a necessary prerequisite to using the FDA’s expanded access mechanism. Increasingly, drug companies are coming under scrutiny regarding the programs governing that decision-making power. Historically, disclosing whether a company has an expanded access program, and whether or how it would respond to an expanded access request, has been left to discretion of the drug companies themselves. Few manufacturers publish adequate expanded access protocols. As a result, patients were provided with little insight into how companies evaluate expanded access requests and are naturally skeptical as to the ethical integrity of the process. The recently passed 21st Century Cures Act changes that practice by requiring drug companies to have, and make publically available, their expanded access procedures including criteria for evaluating and responding to patient requests. In this article, we contend that complying with the new transparency provisions will require drug companies to respond to several unresolved expanded access issues. Namely, how to reconcile a patient’s desire to access lifesaving experimental therapies alongside the company and society’s interest in the efficient development of new drugs. Even more challenging, how can companies devise practices for evaluating and processing expanded access requests that also fairly and equitably acknowledge those concerns? In addressing these questions, this article explores the legal, regulatory, business, and societal influences that have shaped expanded access policies and practices. From there, we provide companies a framework that balances appropriately the desires of individuals and gaining the requisite approvals ensure access not just for one person but for society.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
21 C.F.R. §312.310; 21 C.F.R. §312. 315, 21 C.F.R. §312.320.
21 CFR §312.310.
Pub. L. No. 114-255 (2016).
Nichols (1991).
Young et al. (1988).
Young et al. (1988).
Eichler et al. (2013). The Risks of Risk Aversion in Drug Regulation, 12 Nature.
Buhles (2011).
Buhles (2011).
Kolata (1989).
Buhles (2011).
Sanghavi (2013).
Sanghavi (2013).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
21 C.F.R. §312.305 (2105).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
U.S. Department Health and Human Services (2013).
US Food and Drug Administration (2013). IND Activity Reports. Expanded Access INDs and Protocols.http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/HowDrugsareDevelopedandApproved/DrugandBiologicApprovalReports/INDActivityReports/ucm373560.htm.
Kim et al. (2015).
United States v. Rutherford (1979).
Id. at 556.
United States v. Rutherford (1979).
Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenhach (2007).
Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenhach (2007).
Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenhach (2007).
Brower (2014).
Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenhach (2007).
Walker et al. (2014).
Qiu et al. (2014).
Rid and Emanuel (2014).
Adebamowo et al. (2014).
Kaye (2014).
Kaye (2014).
Cohen (2014).
Flatten (2016).
Mackey and Schoenfeld (2016).
Mackey and Schoenfeld (2016).
Flatten (2016).
Caplan and Moch (2014).
Caplan and Moch (2014).
Gaffney (2015).
H.R. 1281 (2014).
Zettler and Greely (2014).
H.R. 1281 (2014).
Tenth Amendment Center (2013). Right to Try. Retrieved from http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter.com/issues/right-to-try/.
Bateman-House (2016).
Edney (2017).
S.2912 Trickett Wendler Right to Try Act (2016).
Zettler and Greely (2014).
Zettler and Greely (2014).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Zettler and Greely (2014).
Mutual Pharmaceutical v. Bartlett (2013).
Food and Drug Admin. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000).
Zettler and Greely (2014).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Cameron (2014).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Walker et al. (2014).
Proposed new drug (1983).
Docker Marcus (2014).
McDiarmid (2014).
Jarow et al. (2016).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
In Glaser v. Enzo Biochem Inc., 303 F. Supp. 2d 724 (E.D. Va. 2003),.
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Darrow et al. (2015).
Ochs (2009).
Huneycutt et al. (2016).
Huneycutt et al. (2016).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
"Shire Policies: Expanded access." Shire Policies: Expanded access. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016..
"Shire Policies: Expanded access." Shire Policies: Expanded access. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016..
"Shire Policies: Expanded access." Shire Policies: Expanded access. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016..
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Shire Policies: no access (2016).
Genentech: Investigational Medicines (2016).
"Shire Policies: Expanded access." Shire Policies: Expanded access. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016..
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
.
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
Caplan and Ray (2016).
"Expanded Access Programs: Points to Consider - BIO." (2016).
"Expanded Access Programs: Points to Consider - BIO." (2016).
Raus (2016).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
Food and Drug Administration, HHS (2009).
References
Abigail Alliance v. von Eschenhach, 495 F. 3d. 695 (D.C. Cir. 2007)
Adebamowo, C., Bah-Sow, O., Binka, F., Bruzzone, R., Caplan, A., Delfraissy, J. F., et al. (2014). Randomised controlled trials for Ebola: practical and ethical issues. Lancet, 384(9952), 1423.
Bateman-House, A. (2016). Right-to-try laws could curtail the development of innovative new therapies. Retrieved from https://www.statnews.com/2016/11/09/right-try-laws/.
Brower, V. (2014). Food and Drug Administration responds to pressure for expanded drug access. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 106(6), 171.
Buhles, W. C. (2011). Compassionate use: a story of ethics and science in the development of a new drug. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 54(3), 304–315.
Cameron, S. (2014). Trials for new Cancer Treatments Reach Only a Tiny Fraction of Patients. Healthline. http://www.healthline.com/health/cancer/trials-for-new-teatments-reach-few-patients.
Caplan, A., & Moch, K. (2014). Rescue me: The challenge of compassionate use in the social media era. Health Affairs Blog. http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2014/08/27/rescue-me-the-challenge-of-compassionate-use-in-the-socialmedia-era/.
Caplan, A. L., & Ray, A. (2016). The ethical challenges of expanded access. JAMA, 315(10), 979–980. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0416.
Cohen, E. (2014). Company denies drug to dying child. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/10/health/cohen-josh.
Darrow, J. J., et al. (2015). Practical, legal, and ethical issues in expanded access to investigational drugs. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(3), 279–286.
Docker Marcus, A. (2014). Researchers fret as social media lift veil on drug trials. Wall Street Journal. July 29, 2014 http://www.wsj.com/articles/researchers-fret-as-social-media-lift-veil-on-drug-trials-1406687404.
Edney, A. (2017). Dying Patients Have Pence’s Backing on ‘Right to Try’ Policy. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-08/pence-piles-on-drugmakers-with-push-for-right-to-try-regulation.
Eichler, H. G., et al. (2013). The risks of risk aversion in drug regulation. Nature reviews Drug discovery, 12(12), 907–916.
Expanded Access Programs: Points to Consider - BIO. (2016). N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016.
Flatten, M. (2016). Dead on Arrival: Federal “Compassionate Use” Leaves Little Hope for Dying Patients (Rep.). Goldwater Institute.
Food and Drug Admin. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120, 133-34 (2000)
Food and Drug Administration, HHS. (2009). Expanded access to investigational drugs for treatment use. Final rule. Federal Register, 74(155), 40900.
Gaffney, A. (2015). Right to Try Legislative Tracker. http://www.raps.org/Regulatory-Foexpandedaccess/News/Databases/2015/06/24/21133/Right-to-Try-Legislation-Tracker/.
Genentech: Investigational Medicines. (2016). Genentech: Investigational Medicines. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016.
H.R. 1281, Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Colo. 2014); H.R. 1685, Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Mo. 2014); 46. H.R. 891, Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (La. 2014).
Huneycutt, B., Mermelstein, N., & Woollett, G. (2016). Current state of transparency of manufacturer’s compassionate use policies (rep.). Washington, DC: Avalere Health.
Jarow, J. P., Lemery, S., Bugin, K., Khozin, S., & Moscicki, R. (2016). Expanded access of investigational drugs: the experience of the center of drug evaluation and research over a 10-year period. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 50(6), 705–709.
Kaye, R. (2014). How the Ebola drug ZMapp is made. Retrieved from http://khon2.com/2014/10/06/how-the-ebola-drug-zmapp-is-made/.
Kim, T., Lurie, P., & Pazdur, R. (2015). US Food and Drug Administration efforts to facilitate the use of expanded access programs. J Clinical Oncology, 33, 3979–3980.
Kolata, G. (1989). F.D.A. Approves the use of an experimental drug for AIDS patients’ eye infections. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1989/03/03/us/fda-approves-the-use-of-an-experimental-drug-for-aids-patients-eye-infections.html.
Mackey, T. K., & Schoenfeld, V. J. (2016). Going “social” to access experimental and potentially life-saving treatment: an assessment of the policy and online patient advocacy environment for expanded access. BMC Medicine, 14(1), 1.
McDiarmid, J. (2014). Cobourg patient drew the ‘short straw’ in cancer drug trial. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/02/07/cobourg_woman_34_faces_death_from_melanoma_without_access_to_trial_drug.html.
Mutual Pharmaceutical v. Bartlett, 133 S.Ct. 2466 (2013).
Nichols E; Institute of Medicine (US) Roundtable for the Development of Drugs and Vaccines Against AIDS. Expanding Access to Investigational Therapies for HIV Infection and AIDS: March 12–13, 1990 Conference Summary. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 1991. 1, Historical Perspective. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234129/.
Ochs, Ashley. (2009). Study in Futility: Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs Will Not Expand Access to Experimental Drugs for the Terminally Ill, A. Seton Hall Law Review, 39, 559.
Okie, S. (2006). Access before approval—a right to take experimental drugs? New England Journal of Medicine, 355(5), 437–440.
Proposed new drug, antiboticm and biologic drug product regulations, Federal Register 1983; 48:26729
Pub. L. No. 114-255, 130 Stat. 1033 (2016).
Qiu, X., Wong, G., Audet, J., Bello, A., Fernando, L., Alimonti, J. B., et al. (2014). Reversion of advanced Ebola virus disease in nonhuman primates with ZMapp. Nature, 514, 47–53. doi:10.1038/nature13777.
Raus, K. (2016). An analysis of common ethical justifications for compassionate use programs for experimental drugs. BMC Medical Ethics, 17, 60. doi:10.1186/s12910-016-0145-x.
Rid, A., & Emanuel, E. J. (2014). Ethical considerations of experimental interventions in the Ebola outbreak. The Lancet, 384(9957), 1896–1899. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)61315-5.
S.2912 Trickett Wendler Right to Try Act 2016, https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/2912. Sen. Johnson’s prior attempt to move this legislation last year was blocked by then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
Sanghavi, D. M. (2013). The Pills of Last Resort: How Dying Patients Get Access to Experimental Drugs. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/magazine/how-dying-patients-get-access-to-experimental-drugs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
Shire Policies: no access. (2016). Shire Policies: Expanded access. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 June 2016.
Tenth Amendment Center. (2013). Right to Try. Retrieved from http://tracking.tenthamendmentcenter.com/issues/right-to-try/.
United States v. Rutherford, 442 U.S. 544, 551-555 (1979)
U.S. Department Health and Human Services. (2013). Guidance for Industry: Expanded Access to Investigation Drugs for Treatment Use – Qs & As 1.
US Food and Drug Administration. (2013). IND Activity Reports. Expanded Access INDs and Protocols. http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/HowDrugsareDevelopedandApproved/DrugandBiologicApprovalReports/INDActivityReports/ucm373560.htm.
Walker, M. J., Rogers, W. A., & Entwistle, V. (2014). Ethical justifications for access to unapproved medical interventions: An argument for (limited) patient obligations. The American Journal of Bioethics, 14(11), 3–15.
Young, F. E., Norris, J. A., Levitt, J. A., & Nightingale, S. L. (1988). The FDA’s new procedures for the use of investigational drugs in treatment. JAMA, 259(15), 2267–2270. doi:10.1001/jama.1988.03720150043034.
Zettler, P. J., & Greely, H. T. (2014). The strange allure of state “Right-to-Try” laws. JAMA Internal Medicine, 174(12), 1885–1886.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, S.B., Murata, A.Y. The Expanded Access Cure: A Twenty-First Century Framework for Companies. J Bus Ethics 156, 155–171 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3533-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3533-3