This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective To assess perceptions and opinions about the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process for disease-modifying therapies (DMT) in people living with multiple sclerosis (MS).
Methods People living with MS were invited to complete a web-based survey of their perceptions of the FDA role and process for approval of MS medications. The survey asked about the role of the FDA, factors involved in the approval process, which voices should represent those with MS in deliberations about drug approval, and the level of comfort with uncertain safety of newly approved therapies.
Results Three thousand thirty-three respondents met inclusion criteria for data analysis. Most respondents seemed to understand the role of the FDA, although only half understood a fundamental FDA role: balancing the risks and benefits when considering drug approval. Significant differences were observed in many areas between those who have and have not tried DMTs. Comfort with uncertainty was associated with several factors relating to side effects and benefits believed important for the FDA to consider. Most respondents reported that people who participated in the medication's clinical trial were particularly able to represent people living with MS.
Conclusion Perceptions regarding the FDA and views of who should represent people living with MS varied between those who have and have not tried DMT. There is variability in personal values that should be recognized and taken into account when considering regulatory responsibilities. Interventions are needed to address educational gaps regarding the mission and trustworthiness of the FDA as an oversight body.
Footnotes
Funding information and disclosures are provided at the end of the article. Full disclosure form information provided by the authors is available with the full text of this article at Neurology.org/cp.
- Received June 2, 2020.
- Accepted October 30, 2020.
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
The Nerve!: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
