According to the result of the study, 75% of all respondents said they agree or strongly agree that regulators should assess whether any flexibilities enabled during the Covid-19 pandemic should be retained long-term.
Catherine Drew said: "An approach which has been utilised by both the European regulator, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the UK regulator, the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to seek to ensure fast approval of Covid-19 vaccines is rolling reviews, whereby data generated by the applicant is assessed by the regulator as it becomes available, rather than waiting for all the data to be available and reviewing in one consolidated assessment – the benefit of course being a speedier approval from start to finish."
"It is notable that the rolling review is a new assessment route to be implemented by the MHRA as part of the UK’s regulatory processes post Brexit. The route is available for novel medicines and is a clear attempt by the MHRA to speed access to the UK market of particularly innovative medicines. This approach clearly benefits industry, but perhaps more importantly patients will benefit from having access to these new medicines sooner," she said.
"Other regulatory flexibilities have been introduced, for example in relation to more efficient minor variations of marketing authorisations, and the desire is to retain these flexibilities, rather than return to the more time- and labour-intensive approaches pre-pandemic. Given that there has been no lessening of the regulatory standards to be met in relation to marketing authorisations for medicinal products, it seems reasonable to hope that the more efficient processes can remain when the pandemic has gone," Drew said.
Together with regulatory change or reform, increased collaboration was the most popular response from interviewees asked to identify the single most important change in the life sciences industry that could accelerate longer term innovation.