One of EMA's big battles of 2014 will be to regain public trust in an era when the credibility of all authority has been called
Hence major efforts will continue this year to boost agency transparency, and counter concerns over possible conflicts of
interest. The work plan envisages publication of the agendas and minutes of EMA's committees, further increases in communication
outreach, and yet more new rules about disclosure of interests to bolster the independence of dossier approved experts. The
agenda of the agency's leading scientific body, the Committee on Human Medicinal Products, was published for the first time
during the December 2013 meeting; minutes of the meeting will be published in January. It will then become standard practice
to publish the agenda at the start of each meeting; and the minutes after their adoption the following month.
In December, the agency's management board endorsed a number of principles for revising the policy on conflicts of interests
for scientific-committee members and experts. This latest rule-change aims at getting the balance right between maintaining
a pool of high-quality scientific experts and ensuring that experts are free from undue financial or other interests. The
principles, which are still to be turned into detailed rules, include concepts such as timing (how long before a past interest
ceases to be a bar) and differentiation (experts involved in decision-making versus experts involved only in advice). There's
the need, too, to recruit experts: to make involvement with EMA more attractive to scientists and physcians.
But many NGOs believe the rules are not being made sufficiently strict. Pierre Chirac of Prescrire and the Medicines in Europe
Forum says EMA should strengthen its policy to protect decision-making from undue influence. He warns against what he calls
the "unconscious link" between people who have worked together or have common interests.
Similarly, on the hot topic of access to clinical trial information, he insists that raw data should be made available to
independent researchers. But he is not optimistic that EMA "will resist huge pressure from the industry". It has, he says,
stopped providing Prescrire even with documents that contain no raw data.
By contrast, Richard Bergström, director general of the European industry association, EFPIA, is more optimistic about the
data access debate. He believes that industry's concerns over protecting commercially confidential material are being taken
into account as EMA finalizes its policy. He is more worried about how EMA plans to link drug authorization more closely to
Bergström is also concerned about ensuring that EMA opinions and decisions are led by top-quality science, and over the best
allocation of regulatory resources in the face of tighter healthcare budgets and ever-greater workloads. The issue is complex,
he suggests, since it cannot be solved merely by concentrating available talent centrally: national authorities will also
have to remain adequate and credible if they are to ensure national buy-in to decisions taken at the centre.
As if all this were not enough, the agency is determined to boost international cooperation, particularly on inspection of
clinical trial sites outside the EU, and to contribute to the combat to the search for new anti-infective treatments.
The implementation of the pharmacovigilance legislation that came into effect in July 2012 will continue to impose new workloads
in 2014, as will implementation of the falsified medicines legislation. At the same time, the agency is also introducing modifications
to its fee structure, and undergoing a major internal reorganisation this year, with redesigned processes and rearranged departments.
And its work will be further disrupted by a physical move, relocating its 1000 staff members to new premises just down the
road in London docklands, along with 500 items of loose furniture, 3000 personal crates, 5000 linear meters of filing, and
If the agency plays its cards well, it could dispel the memories of those unfortunate blemishes that marred its adolescence,
and look forward to resuming its evolution as a world-leading centre of regulatory excellence. If it doesn't, the agency could
find itself, rather like the European Union of which it is a part, losing its way in a world changing faster than it can keep
Reflector is Pharmaceutical Executive's correspondent in Brussels.