<code id='9222AF9653'></code><style id='9222AF9653'></style>
    • <acronym id='9222AF9653'></acronym>
      <center id='9222AF9653'><center id='9222AF9653'><tfoot id='9222AF9653'></tfoot></center><abbr id='9222AF9653'><dir id='9222AF9653'><tfoot id='9222AF9653'></tfoot><noframes id='9222AF9653'>

    • <optgroup id='9222AF9653'><strike id='9222AF9653'><sup id='9222AF9653'></sup></strike><code id='9222AF9653'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='9222AF9653'><label id='9222AF9653'><select id='9222AF9653'><dt id='9222AF9653'><span id='9222AF9653'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='9222AF9653'></u>
          <i id='9222AF9653'><strike id='9222AF9653'><tt id='9222AF9653'><pre id='9222AF9653'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / comprehensive / focus

          focus


          focus

          author:Wikipedia    Page View:5
          Peter Marks. -- health coverage from STAT
          Peter Marks, Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at the Food and Drug Administration. Susan Walsh-Pool/Getty Images

          Peter Marks wants drug developers to ask more stupid questions.

          It’s part of the top Food and Drug Administration official’s plan to reinvigorate gene therapy, a field that has struggled despite significant technological advances. Some companies are shelving programs or going out of business, even when they have promising data. 

          advertisement

          The problems are numerous: The diseases are often exceptionally rare, limiting the potential market. Manufacturing at commercial quality is complex and expensive. Proving a drug works can be difficult, because there may be too few patients to run a traditional randomized study. 

          Get unlimited access to award-winning journalism and exclusive events.

          Subscribe Log In