Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher (CNPV) Pilot Program; Public Hearing; Request for Comments

The Yale Collaboration for Regulatory Rigor, Integrity, and Transparency (CRRIT) argues that the FDA should sunset the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher (CNPV) pilot program. They contend that the program is redundant with existing expedited pathways, lacks transparency in its selection process, and may compromise patient safety by prioritizing speed over rigorous scientific review.

The Yale Collaboration for Regulatory Rigor, Integrity, and Transparency (CRRIT) urges the FDA to sunset the CNPV pilot program. They argue that the program is redundant with existing expedited pathways, lacks transparency in its selection process, and may compromise patient safety by prioritizing speed over rigorous scientific review.

Arnold Ventures, a philanthropy focused on evidence-based policy, supports the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher (CNPV) Pilot Program but urges the FDA to implement strict transparency, accountability, and safety measures. They specifically call for clear evaluation criteria, robust post-market evidence collection, and adequate staffing resources to ensure the program does not compromise the agency's safety and efficacy standards.

Grace Ukoha, a patient and consumer, opposes the CNPV Pilot Program due to concerns that it prioritizes political goals over scientific rigor and safety. She argues that the expedited review timeline lacks transparency and risks compromising the FDA's ability to independently evaluate drug efficacy.

An individual is expressing strong opposition to the CNPV Pilot Program, arguing that it prioritizes political interests over rigorous scientific review. The commenter expresses concern that expedited timelines and the inclusion of non-FDA priorities like drug pricing will compromise patient safety and transparency.

An individual taxpayer and consumer opposes the CNPV Pilot Program, arguing that it prioritizes political interests over scientific rigor and safety. The commenter expresses concern that the expedited review timeline lacks transparency and could endanger public health by bypassing standard FDA protocols.

Patricia Coffey, a private citizen, opposes the CNPV Pilot Program due to concerns that it prioritizes political goals over scientific rigor and safety. She argues that the expedited review timeline lacks transparency and risks compromising the FDA's ability to independently evaluate drug efficacy.

An individual commenter urges the agency to discontinue the Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher program. They argue that the program threatens the FDA's ability to provide transparent drug reviews and prioritize safety and efficacy over political pressure or profit.

Gary Andrew, a patient and consumer, opposes the CNPV Pilot Program due to concerns that it prioritizes political goals over scientific rigor and safety. He argues that the expedited review timeline lacks transparency and risks compromising the FDA's ability to independently evaluate drug efficacy.