Biotech Leaders Support Access to Mifepristone

Share

More than 50 biotechnology industry executives and investors have sent a letter to FDA commissioner Marty Makary, urging the agency to reject efforts to restrict access to the abortion medication mifepristone. The letter supports a recent citizen petition by three major medical organizations — the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Society for Family Planning, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine — that calls on the agency to maintain current access to mifepristone.

The biotech leaders emphasized the importance of regulatory stability and scientific integrity, citing FDA’s decades-long track record of safeguarding public health through rigorous, data-driven evaluation. They noted that FDA’s past decisions regarding mifepristone — including initial approval and updated conditions of use in 2016 and 2023 — were based on “numerous high-quality, peer-reviewed studies” involving tens of thousands of patients… Mifepristone has been safely used for decades by millions of women,” the letter reads, adding that risks associated with the drug are comparable to common medications like antibiotics and over-the-counter NSAIDs, as affirmed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

Additionally, the letter criticized a recent report from the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC) that argued for tighter restrictions on the drug. It describes the EPPC publication as “methodologically flawed,” “self-published,” and lacking peer review — noting that it conflates routine emergency room visits with serious adverse events, ignores FDA definitions, and fails to meet basic standards for scientific transparency.

“FDA has never relied on publications with such unreliable methodologies,” the signatories contended. “Doing so would pave the way for any political or interest group to undermine well-grounded FDA decisions with baseless claims.” They warned that embracing flawed data would destabilize the drug approval process, deter investment in medical innovation, and ultimately harm patients. “Our industries’ investment in the lengthy process of scientific discovery relies on this regulatory predictability,” they wrote.

Read more