Patient Perspectives on Approval Speed vs Evidentiary Certainty in US Cancer Drug Approvals

Importance: Use of the US Food and Drug Administration's Accelerated Approval pathway assumes that patients are willing to accept uncertainty about clinical benefit in exchange for faster access to new cancer drugs. However, little is known about how patients view this trade-off or the circumstances under which they consider it acceptable. Objectives: To explore patients' views on the trade-off between faster approval and evidentiary certainty regarding the clinical benefit of new cancer drugs in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews conducted online between January 27 and April 1, 2025, with patients aged 18 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer. Purposive sampling was used to achieve maximum variation in cancer stage, treatment status, age, and sociodemographic background. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patients' views on the trade-off between faster drug approval and evidentiary certainty. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed to identify key patterns in understanding, experiences of uncertainty, attitudes toward waiting, treatment priorities, and views on regulatory decision-making. Results: A total of 125 individuals registered their interest and met eligibility criteria to participate. After purposive sampling, 30 participated in this study (10 aged 20-39 years [33.3%], 12 aged 40-59 years [40.0%], and 8 aged >60 years [26.7%]; all female), representing 17 US states (9 Northeast, 12 Midwest, 4 South, 5 West). A total of 13 participants (43.3%) had metastatic disease, 21 (70.0%) were receiving active treatment, and 27 (90.0%) had received at least 1 systemic therapy. Faster approval at the expense of certainty about the clinical benefit of new cancer drugs was considered most acceptable when no alternative treatments existed or when the anticipated benefits were transformative. When clinical benefit was uncertain, participants emphasized the importance of survival and quality of life as priority treatment outcomes, the added risks of adverse effects, and the burden of intensive treatment. Many viewed broader access to clinical trials, rather than faster regulatory approval, as an effective way to address unmet needs while facilitating evidence generation for approval. Conclusion and Relevance: In this qualitative study of patients diagnosed with breast cancer, there was a mismatch between when patients considered trading evidentiary certainty for faster approval as acceptable and the conditions under which many new cancer drugs are approved by the Food and Drug Administration. To better align regulatory approvals with patient values, use of accelerated approval may be most appropriate for drugs that are likely to address genuine treatment gaps or offer meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes over existing alternatives.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JAMA Network Open
Published
2026-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.17450
Primary Topic
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Patient Perspectives on Approval Speed vs Evidentiary Certainty in US Cancer Drug Approvals

Holly Fernandez Lynch, Robin Forrest, Huseyin Naci, Ajay Aggarwal et al.
JAMA Network Open
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
article

Patient Perspectives on Approval Speed vs Evidentiary Certainty in US Cancer Drug Approvals

Holly Fernandez Lynch, Robin Forrest, Huseyin Naci, Ajay Aggarwal, Emily Jackson, Melanie Wyne, Michelle Tregear, Anita K. Wagner
article en

Abstract

Importance: Use of the US Food and Drug Administration's Accelerated Approval pathway assumes that patients are willing to accept uncertainty about clinical benefit in exchange for faster access to new cancer drugs. However, little is known about how patients view this trade-off or the circumstances under which they consider it acceptable. Objectives: To explore patients' views on the trade-off between faster approval and evidentiary certainty regarding the clinical benefit of new cancer drugs in the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used semistructured interviews conducted online between January 27 and April 1, 2025, with patients aged 18 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer. Purposive sampling was used to achieve maximum variation in cancer stage, treatment status, age, and sociodemographic background. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patients' views on the trade-off between faster drug approval and evidentiary certainty. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed to identify key patterns in understanding, experiences of uncertainty, attitudes toward waiting, treatment priorities, and views on regulatory decision-making. Results: A total of 125 individuals registered their interest and met eligibility criteria to participate. After purposive sampling, 30 participated in this study (10 aged 20-39 years [33.3%], 12 aged 40-59 years [40.0%], and 8 aged >60 years [26.7%]; all female), representing 17 US states (9 Northeast, 12 Midwest, 4 South, 5 West). A total of 13 participants (43.3%) had metastatic disease, 21 (70.0%) were receiving active treatment, and 27 (90.0%) had received at least 1 systemic therapy. Faster approval at the expense of certainty about the clinical benefit of new cancer drugs was considered most acceptable when no alternative treatments existed or when the anticipated benefits were transformative. When clinical benefit was uncertain, participants emphasized the importance of survival and quality of life as priority treatment outcomes, the added risks of adverse effects, and the burden of intensive treatment. Many viewed broader access to clinical trials, rather than faster regulatory approval, as an effective way to address unmet needs while facilitating evidence generation for approval. Conclusion and Relevance: In this qualitative study of patients diagnosed with breast cancer, there was a mismatch between when patients considered trading evidentiary certainty for faster approval as acceptable and the conditions under which many new cancer drugs are approved by the Food and Drug Administration. To better align regulatory approvals with patient values, use of accelerated approval may be most appropriate for drugs that are likely to address genuine treatment gaps or offer meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes over existing alternatives.

JAMA Network OpenVol. 9(6)
University of London (GB), Harvard University (US), Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Breast Cancer Alliance (US), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB), Harvard Pilgrim Health Care (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.