Biotech Values

[poorgradstudent]

>I believe you - but I don't get it.<

One random tidbit I've picked up over the years is that the FDA's stance towards oncology appears to be substantively different than for other indications.

So your stance is perfectly compatible with the oncology approval pathway, and I identify with it. But the oddity is that for non-lethal conditions (for lack of a better term), the FDA appears to allow multiple challengers in similar classes. These RA drugs are examples, as well as the cholesterol modifying agents... those didn't necessarily go head to head either.

I'm not sure exactly what the line of demarcation is for the apparently different attitudes of the FDA, but they certainly seem more flexible in certain indications than others.