<code id='CD143C96AC'></code><style id='CD143C96AC'></style>
    • <acronym id='CD143C96AC'></acronym>
      <center id='CD143C96AC'><center id='CD143C96AC'><tfoot id='CD143C96AC'></tfoot></center><abbr id='CD143C96AC'><dir id='CD143C96AC'><tfoot id='CD143C96AC'></tfoot><noframes id='CD143C96AC'>

    • <optgroup id='CD143C96AC'><strike id='CD143C96AC'><sup id='CD143C96AC'></sup></strike><code id='CD143C96AC'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='CD143C96AC'><label id='CD143C96AC'><select id='CD143C96AC'><dt id='CD143C96AC'><span id='CD143C96AC'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='CD143C96AC'></u>
          <i id='CD143C96AC'><strike id='CD143C96AC'><tt id='CD143C96AC'><pre id='CD143C96AC'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          Home / entertainment / knowledge

          knowledge


          knowledge

          author:hotspot    Page View:271
          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