Abstract:The metrics of success for oncology drug development and approval shifted with the shorter time to approval associated with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2018 Real-Time Oncology Review (RTOR) program and the newly mandated FDA Diversity Action Plan (DAP) requirements. 1 -4 The study by Mooghali et al 5 found that premarket evidence for RTOR indications was often drawn from surrogate end points. However, postmarketing requirements to confirm benefit for RTOR indications with traditional approval were infrequent. Mooghali et al 5 conclude that additional postmarketing requirements for trials with surrogate end points may be important to sustain the flexibility of the RTOR program. An active critical test case is how the RTOR program adapts premarketing and postmarketing evidence requirements to meet DAP objectives. The RTOR program and DAP requirements focus on distinct but complementary aspects of drug development and approval: speed to patient access and equity in data supporting access, respectively. The FDA Oncology Center of Excellence also has implemented other mechanisms, such as Project Orbis and the Product Quality Assessment Aid to expedite drug review and Project Equity to advance clinical trial diversity and evidence generation for historically underrepresented patient populations. 2 ,3,6 These initiatives reflect a broader FDA strategy to improve patient outcomes through regulatory efficiency and accurate understanding of outcomes for the intended patient population. The DAP gained legislative backing as a requirement in late 2022, the same year a draft guidance was issued. The final guidance is pending as of March 2024, and there is limited publicly available experience. In particular, it is unknown how the FDA will assess achievement of DAP goals for RTOR eligibility and the extent of postmarketing studies that are highlighted in the draft DAP guidance. 1 Despite prior FDA efforts to improve clinical trial diversity, overall recruitment of racially and ethnically diverse patient populations remains disproportionately low. For example, although Black patients account for approximately 20% of all patients with multiple myeloma, they represent approximately 4% of patients enrolled in myeloma clinical trials. 1 Population-level studies confirm racial and ethnic inequities in clinical trial participation across multiple cancer types. 7 The drivers of inequitable trial participation include trial eligibility criteria that disproportionately exclude Black, Indigenous, and people of color; geographic and transportation barriers; earned mistrust of the medical and clinical research system, bias among trial staff, and lack of partnership with Black, Indigenous, and people of color communities in clinical trial design. 8 Several of the multilevel drivers are addressed in the DAP and prior FDA guidance documents related to advancing clinical trial diversity. 1 Consideration of DAP goals early in the drug development process and early discussion with the FDA is likely the most effective approach to meeting the dual objectives of access and equity. A critical challenge to developing a meaningful DAP is deeply understanding the characteristics of patients who will likely benefit from the therapy. These characteristics extend beyond race and ethnicity to include other historically underrepresented populations based on age, sex, gender identity, socioeconomic status, pregnancy and lactation status, and disability. 1 Unfortunately, current and detailed epidemiologic information is not always available in research publications, existing incidence databases or disease registries. Availability of data is particularly challenging for rare diseases, regional or community differences, and specific indications (eg, second-line treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer after a specific first-line chemotherapy regimen). One approach is to leverage data from electronic health records (EHRs) to extract additional patient demographic and clinical details not usually captured in other databases, such as claims and registry data. To make sense of complex data from disparate EHR sources and to enable efficient drug development and access programs, such as the RTOR, advanced analytic approaches and technology-based solutions are needed. For example, artificial intelligence and machine learning approaches can be applied to EHR data to support DAP enrollment goal-setting for specific indications and settings, optimization of trial eligibility criteria for diversity, and identification of potential trial sites enriched for diverse patient populations. Still, it will be important to assess and mitigate potential algorithmic bias in leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning in these contexts. Additionally, equitable implementat -Abstract Truncated-

Prospects for Rapid Advances in the Development of New Medicines for Special Medical Needs

Current Regulatory Status in China of Drugs Withdrawn from the US FDA Accelerated Pathway: Implications for Regulation Globally

Special FDA designations for drug development: orphan, fast track, accelerated approval, priority review, and breakthrough therapy

A Drug Discovery Perspective on FDA Expedited Development and Incentive Programs

Expediting treatments in the 21st century: orphan drugs and accelerated approvals

FDA's Expedite Development Program for the Therapies for Serious Conditions

Putting meat on the bone: how to fast-track innovative medicines to those who need them and generate data to justify continued use

FDA's proposed regulations to expand access to investigational drugs for treatment use: the status quo in the guise of reform

Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration new drug and biologic approvals, regulatory pathways, and review times, 1980–2022

Clinical evidence and benefit of special FDA designations in anti-cancer drugs.

Clinical development and marketing application review times for novel orphan-designated drugs

A Decade of FDA-Approved Drugs (2010–2019): Trends and Future Directions

Providing Patients with Critical or Life-Threatening Illnesses Access to Experimental Drug Therapy: A Guide to Clinical Trials and the US FDA Expanded Access Program

The US Food and Drug Administration Dual Mandate for Rapid Drug Review and Equity

An accelerated access pathway for innovative high-risk medical devices under the new European Union Medical Devices and health technology assessment regulations? Analysis and recommendations

The next generation of rare disease drug policy: ensuring both innovation and affordability

Paper Promises for Drug Innovation

Assessment of Clinical Trials Supporting US Food and Drug Administration Approval of Novel Therapeutic Agents, 1995-2017

Novel Design and Analysis for Rare Disease Drug Development

Balancing speed, science and regulatory requirements in oncology drug development