More FDA drama: Top drug regulator calls it quits after 3 weeks
Briefly

More FDA drama: Top drug regulator calls it quits after 3 weeks
"The top drug regulator at the Food and Drug Administration, Richard Pazdur, has decided to retire from the agency just three weeks after taking the leading position, according to multiple media outlets. Pazdur, an oncologist who has worked at the FDA since 1999, was seen as a stabilizing force for an agency that has been mired in turmoil during the second Trump administration."
"He took over the role of leading the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research on November 11, after the previous leader, George Tidmarsh, left the agency amid an investigation and a lawsuit regarding allegations that he used his position to exact petty revenge on a former business partner. In light of the scandal, one venture capital investor called the agency a " clown show." Drug industry groups, meanwhile, called the FDA erratic and unpredictable."
"Just days on the job, Pazdur expressed deep concerns about the legality and public health risks of FDA Commissioner Marty Makary's plans to overhaul and expedite agency operations. On November 21, the Post reported that Pazdur disagreed with Makary's plans to reduce the number of studies needed to make drug-related decisions, such as label changes. Pazdur was further concerned that Makary's plan to shorten drug review times was not sufficiently transparent and could be illegal."
Richard Pazdur, an oncologist who joined the FDA in 1999, retired three weeks after becoming director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. He was viewed as a stabilizing force amid agency turmoil after George Tidmarsh left amid an investigation and lawsuit alleging petty revenge against a former business partner. A venture investor called the agency a " clown show," and industry groups labeled it erratic and unpredictable. Pazdur raised deep concerns about Commissioner Marty Makary's plans to shorten and expedite drug reviews, citing legality, public‑health risks, lack of transparency, and exclusion of career scientists from political-priority reviews.
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
[
|
]