Spectrum

November 2009

Regulatory and Legislative Activities: Shaping Biomarker and Diagnostic Use and Driving Personalized Medicine

Report Authors
Prachi Vora, M.P.H.

Introduction:

Successful navigation of the regulatory maze is a prerequisite for companies using biomarkers and diagnostics to advance personalized medicine. U.S., European, and Japanese regulators recognize the critical role they play and are reaching out to the industry by publishing guidance and requesting commentary. Additionally, recent legislation, such as GINA, is giving companies new opportunities to further their efforts in personalized medicine. However, plenty of barriers still exist: some are intrinsic to regulatory processes, while others relate to the interpretation of regulations. Industry players are exploring a variety of approaches to overcome these challenges.

Questions Answered in This Report:

  *   A host of regulatory decisions and deadlines are occurring right now. How will GINA (signed into law in May 2008) influence clinical trial enrollment and purchasing of personal genetics products once it fully takes effect in November 2009? What impact will the imminent final report on gene patents by the SACGHS have on licensing practices and patient access to genetic tests? What will the results of the Navigenics/Mayo Clinic study on predictive genetic risk assessments reveal when the study completes in December 2009? What will be the outcome of the August 2009 announcement by the EMEA to clarify criteria used to evaluate in vivo diagnostic tests, taking effect on February 1, 2010? How will Japan’s PMDA adhere to the action plan it set forth in April 2009 to enable shorter review times of diagnostics?

  *   The ACLU has filed a suit against Myriad Genetics regarding Myriad’s BRCA gene patents. How is Myriad responding to the lawsuit? What are the implications of this litigation? Why is there so much controversy surrounding gene patenting?

  *   In July 2009, the FDA amended the drug labels for Amgen’s Vectibix (panitumumab) and ImClone/Bristol-Myers Squibb/Merck KGaA’s Erbitux (cetuximab) to incorporate KRAS testing prior to determining treatment for colorectal cancer. What value do regulators place on genetic data? What other moves has the FDA made recently related to biomarker requirements and recommendations? What regulations has the EMEA instituted on this front?

  *   Debate surrounding the use, regulation, and marketability of personal genetic tests is heating up. Who is benefiting from personal genetic tests? How should these tests be regulated? Which agency currently has oversight of these tests? What are the different ways in which these tests marketed?

  *   Europe has identified more pharmacogenomic markers than the United States or Japan. For how many drugs does the EMEA support pharmacogenomic testing? What is Japan’s position on pharmacogenomic testing and on reviewing these data?

Scope:

Regulatory processes: PMA, 510(k), CE marking, CLIA certification.

Agencies: FDA, EMEA, PDMA, AdvaMed, CDER, CBER, CDRH, PMC, CDC, USPTO, and ACLU.

Markets: United States, Europe, and Japan.

Relevant issues and key legislations to watch: gene patenting, comparative effectiveness research, DTC genetic profiling services, CLIA, GINA, Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act.

Search Reports

Mentioned in this report:

  • - 23andMe
  • - Allergan
  • - Amgen
  • - AstraZeneca
  • - Boehringer Ingelheim
  • - Bristol-Myers Squibb
  • - Celgene
  • - Cephalon
  • - Chugai
  • - deCode
  • - Eli Lilly
  • - Genentech
  • - GlaxoSmithKline
  • - ImClone
  • - Knome
  • - Medicis Pharmaceutical
  • - Merck KGaA
  • - Myriad Genetics
  • - Navigenics
  • - Novartis
  • - Otsuka Pharmaceutical
  • - Pathway Genomics
  • - Pfizer
  • - PricewaterhouseCoopers
  • - Roche
  • - Sanofi-Aventis
  • - Takeda
  • - Teva