Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7008

Bill Overview

Title: Pre-approval Information Exchange Act of 2022

Description: This bill specifies that economic, scientific, or other product support information that is exchanged between drug manufacturers and health care entities (e.g., pharmacy benefit managers) about drug products before regulatory approval is not considered to be misbranding or prohibited premarket promotion if it relates to the product's investigational use and meets other specified criteria. The Government Accountability Office must study the use and effects of such information.

Sponsors: Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-KY-2]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals impacted by regulation of pre-approval drug information exchange

Estimated Size: 110000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Pharmaceutical Research Scientist (Boston, MA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe the policy will be beneficial as it allows for a smoother exchange of vital drug information with healthcare entities.
  • It may accelerate the speed at which we can move new drugs from trials into wider acceptance, which ultimately benefits patients.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 7 7

Pharmacy Benefit Manager (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy provides us with a better framework for understanding new drugs before they hit the market.
  • This policy could reduce the lag time between approval and optimal formulary inclusion.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 7 6
Year 20 6 6

Primary Care Physician (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 35 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might provide more clarity on potential treatments and new drug therapies.
  • I am concerned about the potential pressure to prescribe investigational drugs prematurely.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 5
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 5 5
Year 20 5 5

Clinical Pharmacist (Chicago, IL)

Age: 28 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This could help us provide better advice for patients who have limited options.
  • I am concerned about the quality and reliability of pre-approved drug information.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Regulatory Affairs Specialist (New York, NY)

Age: 39 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It streamlines how drug entities can communicate investigational uses with us.
  • I worry about the potential for increased pressure to approve hastily.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 5 5

Patient on experimental treatment (Miami, FL)

Age: 50 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any policy that speeds up access to information on new treatments is a positive.
  • I worry that the increased information might not always be in a format I can understand.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 5
Year 20 5 5

Biomedical Scientist (Denver, CO)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm thrilled that this policy might enhance collaborations and partnerships.
  • I am curious about the impact this will have on regulatory processes long-term.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 6

Bioethicist (Dallas, TX)

Age: 54 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy may challenge ethical considerations. Pre-market information sharing needs strong ethical guidelines.
  • I support the intent but caution against potential misuse.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 6 7
Year 20 6 6

Nurse Practitioner (Seattle, WA)

Age: 41 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased early information might help us better prepare patients for potential new treatments.
  • We must ensure this information doesn't confuse or mislead patients.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 6
Year 2 6 6
Year 3 6 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Regulatory Analyst (Atlanta, GA)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The transparency it brings is necessary for progression, albeit with a risk of increased errors and pressure.
  • It is a step forward for pre-approval processes although careful monitoring will be essential.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 6 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $500000 (Low: $300000, High: $800000)

Year 2: $250000 (Low: $150000, High: $500000)

Year 3: $250000 (Low: $150000, High: $500000)

Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)

Key Considerations