Health

Biopharma’s evolution: learnings from the pandemic for a revived regulatory landscape

October 02, 2022

Global

Biopharma’s evolution: learnings from the pandemic for a revived regulatory

October 02, 2022

Global
Elizabeth Sukkar

Senior research manager

Elizabeth is a senior research manager in global health in the policy and insights team at Economist Impact. Prior to this, she was the managing editor and global healthcare editorial lead at Economist Intelligence Unit’s Thought Leadership division. She is the lead on global health projects that help build effective action to develop a sustainable health economy, with patients at the centre. She has led major research projects on universal healthcare, climate change and its impact on lung health, health literacy, digital health, cancer care, self-care, sin taxes, health financing and patient-centred care.  She is also the lead on The Economist Group’s World Cancer Initiative which has led to the development of new thinking in cancer care and is a key moderator at the Economist Impact Events’ such as the World Cancer Series, Future of Healthcare and Sustainability Summit. She is a member of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, a fellow of the Royal Society for Public Health, and has two degrees: a bachelor of pharmacy degree from Monash University (Australia) and a Master of Science in International Health Policy from the London School of Economics (LSE). She has been a journalist and editor for more than 15 years, covering healthcare policy, R&D and science for medical journals and UK newspapers, including the British Medical Journal and the Guardian. Before joining The Economist Group, she was the deputy news editor at the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, where she ran the news and analysis desk and was often called to comment about healthcare issues on BBC radio. She also managed an international team of journalists when she was the world editor of Informa’s Scrip Intelligence, a global publication on pharmaceutical and healthcare policy, where she won the Informa Journalist of Year award. Before moving into journalism, Elizabeth worked as a pharmacist in community, hospital and health authority settings, and she maintains her pharmacist registration.

Contact

The pandemic revealed what can be possible for future health emergencies, which might be even more severe than covid-19. The speed of product approval was down to several factors but mostly driven by the collaborative effort of key stakeholders. This research explores how we can build regulatory and industry efficiencies in bringing biotherapeutics to market, and embed readiness into the system for future emergencies.

By December 2020, several potential covid-19 vaccines were showing promise in clinical trials. And by the middle of 2021, a vaccine was available to the public. Very few people had been optimistic that such a feat could be achieved. In many ways, it was a perfect storm. The fast development of covid-19 vaccines benefited from years of previous research on related viruses and vaccine trials that used mRNA. It’s said the research matured at just the right time, and that mRNA technology would not have been ready even five years ago.

But the time-consuming part of bringing a vaccine to market is not necessarily the initial research, but everything that follows, including rigorous clinical trial testing, regulatory application approval, manufacturing and communication. On average, this takes just shy of a decade. But advanced digital tools and regulatory levers for faster approvals were at the ready, giving stakeholders the means to move at—relatively—lightspeed. The process was a whirlwind that is likely to affect regulatory practices for years to come, prompting new mindsets and applications of tools to the wider biotherapeutic landscape.

We asked experts in regions with advanced regulatory systems—the UK, the US, the EU and Japan—what happened and what changes are likely to stick. The most significant takeaways are highlighted in this report.

Notable findings include:

• Co-operation and collaboration between the industry, regulators, governments, clinical investigators, academic scientists and non-government organisations (NGOs) has been unprecedented. For many, this was seen as the most effective tool in bringing the covid-19 vaccine to market so quickly. This could set the stage for further alignment in decision-making, de-risking for research and development (R&D), and establishing plans for programmes and standards across the biotherapeutic regulatory landscape. But for this to carry forward successfully, elements of nationalism and competition need to be revisited.

Rolling reviews and Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) were essential tools for speed. Coupled with an all-hands-on-deck mindset from industry and regulators, processes that typically took years instead took months, and those that took months accelerated into weeks. Post-pandemic, our experts think a middle ground can be found. Where the balance lies, of course, may be conditional for years to come. Some believe that such measures may be best for crisis situations, but others feel that these efficiencies can trickle down to the wider pool of biotherapeutic therapies.

 • Digital tools—onwards and upwards. Digital tools adopted in the pharmaceutical sector have soared. Decentralised and remote clinical trials, remote inspections, digital submissions to regulators, and more data-driven discovery were always likely to be part of the future, but the pandemic sped up that eventuality. Many of these tools were already there for the taking but underutilised due to concerns about introducing risk to process and regulatory approval. There’s little turning back now. Many regulators have been quick to offer guidance in these areas and show willingness to engage with industry to expand on them as needed.

 • Too often, manufacturing is an afterthought. The high demand for drug manufacturing, and general shortfall of manufacturers available to produce new or additional drugs, means that, even if the rest of the pharmaceutical ecosystem sped up drug development and approvals, a bottleneck could slow time to market. Covid-19 put a spotlight on the issue, as well as supply chain challenges, and the need for flexible manufacturing procedures to allow for more parallel planning with drug development. These needs may help speed the adoption of continuous manufacturing processes, which offer more flexibility than batch manufacturing and faster delivery times.

Global standards are in the pipeline. Operating in multiple jurisdictions often introduces all manner of complications from a compliance and regulatory perspective, as well as data standards. Consortiums of global regulators and industry bodies have long tried to harmonise standards to ease the increasing number of global R&D initiatives and streamline applications for marketing approval. Progress was slow, but it helped lay the groundwork for the global collaborations that came to light during the pandemic. This momentum, stakeholders say, has continued, helping them carry on developing for the future benefit of global efficiencies.   

Enjoy in-depth insights and expert analysis - subscribe to our Perspectives newsletter, delivered every week