Changes in Evidence Used for FDA Novel Drug Approvals Following the Implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0

Abstract

Background: The 21st Century Cures Act (2017) expanded FDA flexibility in applying methodological standards for drug approval. To examine trends before and after implementation, we independently reviewed all novel drugs approved between 2016 and 2024. Methods: We constructed a database of all novel FDA approvals from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2024. Each study linked to an approved drug (N=6,763) was cataloged by study number, sponsorship, and timing of results reporting relative to completion. Results: Since 2016, the number of studies supporting approval has steadily declined. Beginning in 2017, the modal number of studies per approval fell to one. Industry sponsorship increased while NIH-supported studies decreased. Average time to public posting of results exceeded the one-year statutory limit. Conclusions: After implementation of the Cures Act, FDA approvals have relied on fewer, increasingly industry-sponsored studies. Although this may accelerate access to new therapies, it raises concerns about the strength of evidence for safety and effectiveness.
Full text 1,166 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 4 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background The 21st Century Cures Act (2017) expanded FDA flexibility in applying methodological standards for drug approval. To examine trends before and after implementation, we independently reviewed all novel drugs approved between 2016 and 2024.

Methods

We constructed a database of all novel FDA approvals from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2024. Each study linked to an approved drug (N=6,763) was cataloged by study number, sponsorship, and timing of results reporting relative to completion.

Results

Since 2016, the number of studies supporting approval has steadily declined. Beginning in 2017, the modal number of studies per approval fell to one. Industry sponsorship increased while NIH-supported studies decreased. Average time to public posting of results exceeded the one-year statutory limit.

Conclusions

After implementation of the Cures Act, FDA approvals have relied on fewer, increasingly industry-sponsored studies. Although this may accelerate access to new therapies, it raises concerns about the strength of evidence for safety and effectiveness. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-28T02:00:01.590549+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0