User login
Photo by Steven Harbour
Results of an analysis published in The BMJ have raised concerns about how often drug regulators go on to work in the biopharmaceutical industry.
A pair of researchers evaluated 55 medical reviewers who worked at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-seven percent of the reviewers left the FDA, and 58% of those who left were subsequently employed by or consulting for the biopharmaceutical industry.
Vinay Prasad, MD, and Jeffrey Bien, MD, both of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, conducted this research.
The pair began by identifying hematology-oncology drugs approved by the FDA from 2006 to 2010. They then used the FDA database ([email protected]) to compile a list of all medical reviewers for these drugs.
The researchers then searched publicly available information from the Department of Health and Human Services, LinkedIn, and PubMed to determine the reviewers’ subsequent jobs.
The pair identified 55 unique hematology-oncology medical reviewers who reviewed drug applications between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-nine percent (n=27) of these reviewers continue to work exclusively at the FDA. Four percent (n=2) still work at the FDA but hold secondary appointments (1 with a non-FDA-related consulting position and 1 with another government position).
Forty-seven percent (n=26) of the reviewers left the FDA. The researchers were unable to determine subsequent jobs for 14% (n=8) of the reviewers.
However, 27% (n=15) went on to biopharmaceutical industry employment or consulting. Four percent (n=2) went on to other government positions, and 2% (n=1) went on to work in academia.
Drs Prasad and Bien said this analysis is the first to document the rate of the “revolving door” between the FDA and the biopharmaceutical industry, and the results suggest a sizable percentage of FDA medical reviewers who leave the agency subsequently work in the industry.
The researchers said they are concerned by these findings, and they noted that this analysis may have underestimated the extent of the “revolving door” because they could not identify subsequent jobs for all of the reviewers studied. 
Photo by Steven Harbour
Results of an analysis published in The BMJ have raised concerns about how often drug regulators go on to work in the biopharmaceutical industry.
A pair of researchers evaluated 55 medical reviewers who worked at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-seven percent of the reviewers left the FDA, and 58% of those who left were subsequently employed by or consulting for the biopharmaceutical industry.
Vinay Prasad, MD, and Jeffrey Bien, MD, both of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, conducted this research.
The pair began by identifying hematology-oncology drugs approved by the FDA from 2006 to 2010. They then used the FDA database ([email protected]) to compile a list of all medical reviewers for these drugs.
The researchers then searched publicly available information from the Department of Health and Human Services, LinkedIn, and PubMed to determine the reviewers’ subsequent jobs.
The pair identified 55 unique hematology-oncology medical reviewers who reviewed drug applications between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-nine percent (n=27) of these reviewers continue to work exclusively at the FDA. Four percent (n=2) still work at the FDA but hold secondary appointments (1 with a non-FDA-related consulting position and 1 with another government position).
Forty-seven percent (n=26) of the reviewers left the FDA. The researchers were unable to determine subsequent jobs for 14% (n=8) of the reviewers.
However, 27% (n=15) went on to biopharmaceutical industry employment or consulting. Four percent (n=2) went on to other government positions, and 2% (n=1) went on to work in academia.
Drs Prasad and Bien said this analysis is the first to document the rate of the “revolving door” between the FDA and the biopharmaceutical industry, and the results suggest a sizable percentage of FDA medical reviewers who leave the agency subsequently work in the industry.
The researchers said they are concerned by these findings, and they noted that this analysis may have underestimated the extent of the “revolving door” because they could not identify subsequent jobs for all of the reviewers studied.
Photo by Steven Harbour
Results of an analysis published in The BMJ have raised concerns about how often drug regulators go on to work in the biopharmaceutical industry.
A pair of researchers evaluated 55 medical reviewers who worked at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-seven percent of the reviewers left the FDA, and 58% of those who left were subsequently employed by or consulting for the biopharmaceutical industry.
Vinay Prasad, MD, and Jeffrey Bien, MD, both of Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, conducted this research.
The pair began by identifying hematology-oncology drugs approved by the FDA from 2006 to 2010. They then used the FDA database ([email protected]) to compile a list of all medical reviewers for these drugs.
The researchers then searched publicly available information from the Department of Health and Human Services, LinkedIn, and PubMed to determine the reviewers’ subsequent jobs.
The pair identified 55 unique hematology-oncology medical reviewers who reviewed drug applications between 2001 and 2010.
Forty-nine percent (n=27) of these reviewers continue to work exclusively at the FDA. Four percent (n=2) still work at the FDA but hold secondary appointments (1 with a non-FDA-related consulting position and 1 with another government position).
Forty-seven percent (n=26) of the reviewers left the FDA. The researchers were unable to determine subsequent jobs for 14% (n=8) of the reviewers.
However, 27% (n=15) went on to biopharmaceutical industry employment or consulting. Four percent (n=2) went on to other government positions, and 2% (n=1) went on to work in academia.
Drs Prasad and Bien said this analysis is the first to document the rate of the “revolving door” between the FDA and the biopharmaceutical industry, and the results suggest a sizable percentage of FDA medical reviewers who leave the agency subsequently work in the industry.
The researchers said they are concerned by these findings, and they noted that this analysis may have underestimated the extent of the “revolving door” because they could not identify subsequent jobs for all of the reviewers studied.