Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 11, 2025

Patient-Derived Tumor Explants As a "Live" Preclinical Platform for Predicting Drug Resistance in Patients
Published on: February 7, 2021
Subsequent Indications in Oncology Drugs: Pathways, Timelines, and the Inflation Reduction Act
Julie A Patterson1, James Motyka2, Rayan Salih2
1National Pharmaceutical Council, 1717 Pennsylvania AVE NW Ste 800, Washington, DC, 20006, USA. jpatterson@npcnow.org.
Introduction:
Recent research has raised questions about potential unintended consequences of the Inflation Reduction Act's Drug Price Negotiation Program (DPNP), suggesting that the timelines introduced by the law may reduce manufacturer incentives to invest in post-approval research towards additional indications. Given the role of multiple indications in expanding treatment options in patients with cancer, IRA-related changes to development incentives are especially relevant in oncology. This study aimed to describe heterogeneous drug-level trajectories and timelines of subsequent indications in a cohort of recently approved, multi-indication oncology drugs, including overall, across subgroups of drugs characterized by the timing and pace of additional indications, and by drug type (i.e., small molecule vs. biologic).
Methods:
This cross-sectional study evaluated oncology drugs first approved by the FDA from 2008 to 2018 and later approved for one or more additional indications. Numbers, types, and approval timelines of subsequent indications were recorded at the drug level, with drugs grouped by quartile based on the pacing of post-approval development (i.e., "rapid pace" to "measured pace").
Results:
Multi-indication oncology drugs (N = 56/86, 65.1%) had one or more subsequent indication approved in a new: cancer type (60.7%), line of treatment (50.0%), combination (41.1%), mutation (32.1%), or stage (28.6%). The median time between FDA approvals for indications increased from 0.6 years (IQR: 0.48, 0.74) in the "rapid pace" group to 1.6 years (IQR: 1.32, 1.66), 2.4 years (IQR: 2.29, 2.61), and 4.9 years (IQR: 3.43, 6.23) in the "moderate," "measured-moderate," and "measured" pace groups, respectively. Drugs in the "rapid pace" group often received their first subsequent indication approval within 9 months of initial approval (median: 0.7 years; IQR: 0.54, 1.59), whereas the "measured pace" group took a median of 5.7 years (IQR: 3.43, 6.98). Across all multi-indication drugs, the median time to the most recent approval for a subsequent indication was 5.5 years (IQR: 3.18, 7.95). One quarter (25%) of drugs were approved for their most recent subsequent indication after the time at which they would be DPNP-eligible.
Conclusion:
Approval histories of new oncology drugs demonstrate the role of post-approval indications in expanding treatment options towards new cancer types, stages, lines, combinations, and mutations. Heterogeneous clinical development pathways provide insights into potential unintended consequences of IRA-related changes surrounding post-approval research and development.
Insights
The Inflation Reduction Act
Area of Science:
- Oncology Drug Development
- Health Economics and Outcomes Research
- Regulatory Science
Background:
- Concerns exist regarding the Inflation Reduction Act's (IRA) Drug Price Negotiation Program (DPNP) potentially decreasing manufacturer incentives for post-approval research.
- Oncology drug development heavily relies on multiple indications to broaden patient treatment options.
- Understanding drug development timelines is crucial for assessing the impact of policy changes on cancer care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To analyze the diverse development pathways and timelines for subsequent indications of oncology drugs approved between 2008 and 2018.
- To characterize drug development pacing (rapid to measured) and its relationship with subsequent indication approvals.
- To explore potential unintended consequences of the IRA's DPNP on oncology R&D.
Main Methods:
- A cross-sectional study of 56 oncology drugs with at least one subsequent FDA approval.
- Data collection on the number, type, and timing of post-approval indications.
- Drugs were categorized into quartiles based on the pace of post-approval development.
Main Results:
- 65.1% of evaluated oncology drugs received subsequent indications for new cancer types, lines of treatment, combinations, mutations, or stages.
- Median time between approvals varied significantly by development pace, from 0.6 years (rapid) to 4.9 years (measured).
- 25% of drugs received their latest subsequent indication approval after the DPNP eligibility timeline.
Conclusions:
- Post-approval indications are vital for expanding treatment options in oncology.
- Heterogeneous drug development timelines highlight potential impacts of the IRA's DPNP on R&D incentives.
- Further research is needed to fully understand the long-term effects of policy changes on cancer drug innovation.
More Related Videos
07:42Assessment of Resistance to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors by an Interrogation of Signal Transduction Pathways by Antibody Arrays
Published on: September 19, 2018
06:51Utilizing 18F-FDG PET/CT Imaging and Quantitative Histology to Measure Dynamic Changes in the Glucose Metabolism in Mouse Models of Lung Cancer
Published on: July 21, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Targeted Cancer Therapies
There are several types of targeted therapies against...
Cancer Therapies
However, cancer treatments can pose several challenges, as therapies used to kill cancer cells are generally also toxic to normal cells. Moreover, cancer cells mutate rapidly and can develop resistance to chemical agents or radiation therapy. Besides, all types of cancer cells may not respond to the same therapy. Some cancer cells respond to one...
Cancer-Critical Genes II: Tumor Suppressor Genes
When the function of certain critical genes, especially those involved in cell cycle regulation and cell growth signaling cascades, gets disrupted, it upsets the cell cycle progression. Such cells with unchecked cell cycles start proliferating uncontrollably and eventually develop into tumors.
Such genes that act...
Interactions Between Signaling Pathways
Convergence and divergence, and cross-talk between signaling pathways
Two distinct signaling pathways can converge on a single functional unit, which may either be a single protein or a complex of proteins. The response is either functionally distinct or synergistic between the two pathways but different from the response...
Inhibition of Cdk Activity
PI3K/mTOR/AKT Signaling Pathway