[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 24, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37996-38000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-12621]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2026-N-4699]


Expedited Investigational New Drug Pilot Program; Request for 
Information

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice; request for information; establishment of a public 
docket.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is 
opening a public docket to solicit input and comments on a proposal to 
establish a pilot program, the Expedited Investigational New Drug (IND) 
pilot program, to shorten the time it takes from drug identification to 
first-in-human (FIH) study, while protecting clinical trial 
participants. FDA is

[[Page 37997]]

requesting information on the potential pilot program which would 
establish a network of qualified research institutions, such as 
academic medical centers (AMCs), healthcare networks (HNs), contract 
research organizations (CROs), regulatory advisors, and/or other 
research or third-party review organizations (collectively called 
Qualified Research Institutions, or ``QRIs''), who would partner with 
sponsors to develop and review protocols for FIH clinical trials 
intended for a IND submission to FDA. Information provided through this 
public docket will help the Agency refine our approach and consider 
other opportunities to accelerate time to FIH clinical trials.

DATES: Either electronic or written comments, data, or information must 
be received by July 22, 2026.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, data, and information as follows. 
Please note that late, untimely filed comments will not be considered. 
The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept 
comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of July 22, 2026. 
Comments received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper 
submissions) will be considered timely if they are received on or 
before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted 
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov 
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be 
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment 
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party 
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone 
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information, 
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your 
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in 
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential 
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public, 
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner 
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper 
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug 
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets 
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any 
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified, 
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include Docket No. FDA-
2026-N-4699 for ``Expedited Investigational New Drug Pilot Program; 
Request for Information.'' Received comments, those filed in a timely 
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except for 
those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at 
https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 
9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, 240-402-7500.
    Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with confidential 
information that you do not wish to be made publicly available, submit 
your comments only as a written/paper submission. You should submit two 
copies total. One copy will include the information you claim to be 
confidential with a heading or cover note that states ``THIS DOCUMENT 
CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will review this copy, 
including the claimed confidential information, in its consideration of 
comments. The second copy, which will have the claimed confidential 
information redacted/blacked out, will be available for public viewing 
and posted on https://www.regulations.gov. Submit both copies to the 
Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish your name and contact 
information to be made publicly available, you can provide this 
information on the cover sheet and not in the body of your comments and 
you must identify this information as ``confidential.'' Any information 
marked as ``confidential'' will not be disclosed except in accordance 
with 21 CFR 10.20 and other applicable disclosure law. For more 
information about FDA's posting of comments to public dockets, see 80 
FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access the information at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in 
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the 
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, 
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852, 240-402-7500.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Benjamin Cook, Office of the 
Commissioner, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., 
Bldg. 2, Rm. 2114, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-338-4685, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is committed to accelerating development of therapies and cures 
for the American people. In 2025, 70 percent of novel drugs were 
approved in the U.S. before any other country, meaning American 
patients and health care providers had access first.\1\ However, other 
countries are focusing on increasing early-stage biomedical research 
and rapidly advancing in technical ability. For example, in 2021 China 
surpassed the U.S. in global share of phase 1 clinical trials, and from 
2020 to 2025, 11 of the largest pharmaceutical companies spent over 
$150 billion to access early drug assets developed in China.\2\ Given 
the public health importance of access to novel therapies, FDA is 
committed to streamlining requirements and innovating processes to 
advance our global regulatory leadership and facilitate early-stage 
research to continue in the U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.fda.gov/media/190705/download?attachment.
    \2\ https://www.nature.com/articles/d43747-025-00065-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Biopharmaceutical companies able to accelerate FIH milestones have 
a material advantage in creating a successful novel therapy that 
reaches patients, which may be because the FIH milestone assists in 
securing partnerships, investment, and ultimately approved therapies. 
Early human clinical data represents the first value inflection point, 
and unlocks the additional investment required for late-stage 
development critical to the marketing of safe and effective drugs. It 
is imperative for the U.S. to foster early clinical development that 
ultimately provides patients with access to novel therapies, and 
partnering with the innovation ecosystems and streamlining regulatory 
requirements may help achieve that goal.
    FDA reviewers manage substantial portfolios of INDs, New Drug 
Applications (NDAs)/Biologics License Application (BLAs), and 
postmarket

[[Page 37998]]

responsibilities. FDA aims to provide a regulatory environment for 
sponsors to accelerate early clinical development while maintaining 
rigorous oversight and safety protections for clinical trial 
participants. This requires reimagining the IND process to address 
regulatory considerations that account for pressures facing U.S. 
innovators who seek to develop safe and effective drugs and 
longstanding resource constraints facing FDA reviewers. The proposed 
pilot program is being designed to test the feasibility of helping to 
address overall time to the first in human trials. Specifically, the 
pilot aims to test whether it is possible to improve the quality of IND 
submissions such that there are fewer instances where it is necessary 
to impose phase 1 clinical holds; reduce FDA review time through a 
rolling submission process; and test whether clinical trial initiation 
activities, such as Institutional Review Board (IRB) review and site 
contracting, can be conducted in parallel with IND development and 
review, thereby accelerating the time from when FDA permits a clinical 
investigation to begin to FIH study initiation.
    The role of third parties during the initial pilot program will be 
restricted to providing advice and preliminary review, not engaging in 
regulatory decision-making. FDA will remain solely responsible for 
making decisions about whether a clinical investigation can begin or 
whether a clinical hold may be imposed. Participation in the pilot is 
voluntary. Sponsors may continue to submit INDs to FDA without 
participating in the pilot.

A. Proposed Expedited IND Pilot Program Structure

    FDA proposes leveraging America's world-class research institutions 
as collaborative partners in early clinical development for drugs 
intended for commercial distribution. The proposed expedited IND pilot 
program will serve to identify a network of qualified research 
institutions, such as AMCs, HNs, CROs, regulatory advisors, and/or 
other research organizations (collectively called QRIs), who will 
partner with sponsors to develop and review protocols for FIH clinical 
trials in the U.S. intended for IND submission to FDA. These QRIs would 
specifically assess and make recommendations for the pharmacology and 
toxicology, clinical, and chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) 
components of the Phase 1 FIH IND submission. QRIs are intended to 
serve as expert partners to sponsors in developing higher-quality 
submissions that will expedite the timeframe to FIH trials and QRI 
recommendations are, by nature, advisory. Sponsors will maintain 
ownership over the IND submission. Throughout the proposed pilot, FDA 
will maintain full oversight of IND submissions, retaining full 
authority to make regulatory determinations, including the ability to 
issue a clinical hold, disqualify investigators, and conduct 
inspections.
    As part of the proposed pilot, FDA is exploring the use of a 
rolling submission platform that would allow FDA to review QRI 
recommendations regarding completed components of the IND submission on 
a rolling basis. Similar to the rolling review of an NDA or BLA under 
FDA's expedited review programs, this approach would facilitate FDA 
review of completed individual IND components prior to formal IND 
submission. Once the last component of the Phase 1 IND is submitted, 
the IND would be considered submitted such that the 30-day IND review 
clock starts. Since all the IND submission components would have been 
reviewed by FDA on a rolling basis, the sponsor may receive a safe to 
proceed notification before the 30-day IND review period ends. The 
rolling review could minimize the need for FDA to impose a clinical 
hold because it would provide an earlier opportunity for FDA to 
identify deficiencies, prior to the 30-day review period starting. 
Similarly, the rolling review could minimize the need for FDA to issue 
a clinical hold or information request. The pilot aims to test whether 
these processes may accelerate Phase 1 FIH study initiation.
    Additionally, FDA intends to work with sponsors and QRIs to review 
and refine QRI performance objectives and key deliverables as part of 
the pilot, with the goal of gathering information that could inform a 
potential process for establishing a process for QRI certification by 
FDA. FDA will monitor and evaluate QRI performance through clearly 
defined metrics. FDA will implement a new technology platform to 
perform a rolling IND submission by submitting individual IND 
components and receiving FDA feedback in real time. Using this 
platform, FDA will maintain oversight of recommendations regarding the 
program's clinical protocol, pharmacology and toxicology package, or 
CMC package, and ultimately provide FDA with the necessary information 
to expedite IND submission review. FDA would retain full regulatory 
authority including:
     Authority to disqualify an investigator from conducting 
clinical research;
     Authority to disqualify or impose other administrative 
restrictions on an IRB or its parent institution;
     Current Good Clinical Practice clinical trial inspection 
program;
     Requirements for safety reporting;
     Ability to issue a clinical hold.
    The goal of this new pilot program is to accelerate the time from 
nonclinical research to FIH studies while maintaining full FDA 
oversight and regulatory authority. FDA seeks stakeholder input on the 
processes, operational requirements, structural factors, and other 
considerations that may impact pilot implementation. At the conclusion 
of the pilot, FDA intends to use learnings from the pilot to further 
provide regulatory oversight that facilitates early-stage, first in 
human research in the U.S., and potentially refine its IND review 
process broadly going forward. Following the pilot, FDA expects that 
sponsors will pay fees directly to QRIs. FDA will not be involved in 
the setting or collection of any fees.

B. QRI Responsibilities

    FDA is considering the following responsibilities for QRIs 
participating in the proposed pilot. FDA is seeking input on the 
appropriate scope and structure of these responsibilities through 
questions outlined in Section II. For the purpose of the pilot, QRI 
responsibilities would include:
     Conducting conflict of interest screening and establishing 
a formal engagement agreement with the sponsor;
     Conducting regular meetings with the sponsor and 
appropriate subject matter experts to discuss IND development progress, 
and maintaining comprehensive documentation of discussions and 
recommendations;
     Providing expert consultation and written recommendations 
to sponsors on nonclinical, clinical, and CMC components of the IND 
submission on a rolling basis;
     Maintaining documentation of recommendations and sponsor 
interactions and sharing with FDA through the rolling submission 
platform;
     Supporting parallel activities such as IRB review and 
clinical trial site activation to facilitate timely trial initiation 
upon FDA IND review; and
     Participating in pilot evaluation activities, including 
providing metrics and lessons learned to FDA.

C. QRI Qualification Criteria

    The following reflects FDA's current thinking on eligibility 
criteria for consideration for participating in the proposed pilot 
program as a QRI. For

[[Page 37999]]

the purposes of the proposed pilot, QRIs would be expected to 
demonstrate:
     Comprehensive expertise across nonclinical (pharmacology/
toxicology), clinical, and CMC disciplines relevant to first-in-human 
IND submissions;
     Clinical trial infrastructure supporting Phase 1 studies, 
including IRB and clinical trial site capabilities, either through 
direct ownership and operation or through established partnerships;
     Leadership and personnel with suitable drug development 
and first-in-human IND execution expertise across relevant disciplines, 
including pharmacology-toxicology, clinical, CMC, and regulatory 
affairs; and
     A track record of success in regulatory affairs, including 
supporting IND submissions across relevant therapeutic areas and 
product modalities.
    FDA will encourage pilot applicants to describe their capabilities 
based on the qualifications outlined above. Additional capabilities may 
be described if they advance applicants' ability to support IND 
development.

II. Considerations for Pilot Development

    FDA seeks input on these topics from sponsors, contract research 
organizations, academic institutions, health networks/systems, 
institutional review boards, patient advocacy organizations, investors, 
and other interested parties. To help FDA review comments efficiently, 
please identify the question to which you are responding by its 
associated category and number. If you are responding to more than one 
question, please identify each question to which you are responding, 
and categorize each response by question. After reviewing input 
provided on these topics, FDA intends to provide additional information 
about how QRIs can request to participate in the pilot.

A. Pilot Program Design and Implementation

1. QRI Qualification and Capabilities
    i. What specific changes, if any, would you recommend regarding 
FDA's thinking on the capabilities, infrastructure, and/or leadership 
expertise research institutions must demonstrate to qualify for the 
pilot program?
    ii. Are there additional required capabilities FDA should assess 
across clinical and translational science expertise, CMC capabilities, 
or therapy/domain area knowledge?
    iii. Are any of the listed QRI qualification considerations 
unfeasible or unattainable by potential QRIs?
    iv. Should different specializations exist based on QRI therapeutic 
area focus or therapeutic modality expertise?
    v. To ensure faster FIH initiation, should QRIs be required to have 
a self-owned and operated IRB and/or clinical trial site? If not, would 
a partnership with an IRB and/or trial site network be sufficient?
    vi. If the QRI serves in a dual capacity as both an IRB and 
regulatory advisor, are there additional considerations or reporting 
that would be helpful to prevent potential conflicts of interest and 
ensure QRIs are objective and reliable?
2. Pre-IND and IND Review Process
    i. What changes, if any, would you recommend regarding QRI 
responsibilities and expected tasks during the pilot? Are any tasks 
unfeasible or should be undertaken by the sponsor rather than the QRI?
    ii. What should be the output of QRI advice and review? What 
information from this review should be submitted to FDA?
    iii. How can the pilot ensure QRIs provide independent, objective 
review while partnering with sponsors?
    iv. How should expedited INDs during the pilot differ in 
requirement from standard IND submission, if at all?
3. Drug Eligibility and Participation
    i. Should all drug products be considered in the pilot or are there 
specific types of drug products and/or specific disease or conditions 
that are better suited for the pilot (e.g., small molecules, large 
molecules, cellular & gene therapies, nucleic acid-based therapies, 
combination products, etc.)?
    ii. How should drug products be prioritized for participation in 
the pilot and why?
4. Pilot Scope and Scale
    i. How many QRIs and therapeutic areas/modalities be included in 
the pilot to represent industry research and different public health 
needs?
    ii. What duration or volume of participation is appropriate for the 
pilot phase before evaluation?
5. Implementation and Feasibility
    i. What resources would QRIs need to develop and maintain IND 
review and recommendation capabilities (staff, quality systems, 
technology infrastructure, estimated costs)?
    ii. Are there existing models, research networks, pilot programs, 
or international examples that could inform implementation? Please 
describe relevant examples and lessons learned.

B. Risks, Oversight, and Evaluation

1. Risks and Safeguards
    i. Are there any risks worth noting associated with the proposed 
pilot program?
    ii. Could the pilot inadvertently compromise clinical trial 
participants' safety, scientific rigor, or ethical standards, and if 
so, what suggestions does the commenter have for mitigating such an 
outcome?
    iii. Could this pilot create inequitable access favoring well-
resourced sponsors over smaller companies?
    iv. Please include how identified risks can be mitigated.
2. Oversight and Accountability
    i. In the case of disagreement between FDA and QRIs/sponsors on 
recommendations, what processes, timeline, discussion forums, or 
mitigation should be used to quickly reach a resolution?
    ii. What oversight and compliance mechanisms should apply if QRIs 
fail to meet performance standards? What performance thresholds or 
other events should trigger FDA intervention or removal of QRIs?
    iii. How can the pilot ensure transparency while safeguarding the 
sponsor's confidential commercial, trade secrets, and other sensitive 
information?
3. Success Metrics and Evaluation
    i. What data should be collected throughout the pilot to enable 
evaluation? Who should collect this data (FDA, QRIs, sponsors, third 
party evaluators)?
    ii. What metrics should define pilot success? Please address time, 
quality, safety, and specify any others.
    iii. At what point is the pilot deemed successful (i.e., after the 
first successful IND submission, after the entire pilot cohort is 
finished with IND submission, etc.)?
    iv. If successful, how should the pilot expand? How can innovation 
from the pilot be scaled to maximize impact for the FIH clinical trial 
ecosystem?

C. Additional Considerations

    1. What additional/alternative approaches could achieve similar 
goals of accelerating Phase 1 FIH IND study initiation in the U.S.?
    2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed pilot 
compared to these alternatives?
    3. How should FDA take into account the information submitted, and 
should

[[Page 38000]]

that be different depending on the risk of the product under 
investigation?
    4. Are there important considerations or concerns not addressed in 
the questions above?

Grace R. Graham,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Legislation, and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2026-12621 Filed 6-22-26; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P