Ophthalmic Drug Discovery and Development: Regulatory Aspects of Patient Focused Drug Development in Ophthalmology

Eyes on the Prize: Decoding the Ophthalmic Product Regulations and Intricacies of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval

The dynamic and continuously evolving field of ophthalmology necessitates rigorous regulatory oversight in the United States. This review outlines the multifaceted Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) approval process for ophthalmic products, detailing the classifications, pathways, and regulatory compliance for devices, drugs, biologics, and combination products. Particular emphasis is placed on distinct frameworks for Class I, II, and III devices, as well as regulations for drugs, biologics, and combination products. The organizational structure of the FDA is detailed, with highlights on specific Ophthalmology oversight divisions, historical regulatory evolution, and initiatives such as Patient-Focused Drug Development. An in-depth examination of the regulatory journey, ranging from initial research to post-marketing surveillance, includes practical guidance through stages such as Pre-Investigational New Drug/Pre-Submission consultations, clinical trials, new drug application/biologics license application/premarket approval submissions, and FDA advisory committee interactions. The article underscores the importance of early interactions with the health authorities, interdisciplinary team collaboration, adherence to current standards, and the anticipation of policy changes to ensure patient safety. It concludes with an analysis of 4 key FDA-approved ophthalmic products, including Eylea®, Luxturna®, Alphagan P®, and the Raindrop® Near Vision Inlay, detailing their contributions to ophthalmic care and offering valuable insights into their respective clinical trials, regulatory pathways, and potential implications. These case studies are included to illustrate both successful and failed ophthalmic product launches, thereby highlighting the importance of alignment with regulatory compliance.

Measures of visual disturbance in patients receiving extended depth-of-focus or trifocal intraocular lenses

The degree of visual disturbance associated with a particular model of intraocular lens (IOL) depends on several factors, including IOL optic, material, and mechanics. Characterization of visual disturbance profiles is paramount for informing clinical IOL selection. Although many studies evaluating presbyopia-correcting IOLs include subjective assessment of visual symptoms, the types of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to capture these outcomes are inconsistent across studies, complicating data contextualization. Furthermore, some tools produce more meaningful results than others. This review presents a discussion on the scientific literature published on the subjective and semiobjective (halo and glare simulator, light-distortion analyzer, vision monitor, and halometers) methods used to assess visual disturbances in patients implanted with trifocal or extended depth-of-focus IOLs, highlighting their advantages and limitations. It underscores the importance of between-study comparisons and the need for standardized PROMs in clinical IOL research to provide more accurate information for IOL selection.