76 FR 55928 - Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a...

75 FR 34464 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and Drugs.Com; Correction of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-06-17

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004] FDA 225-09-0012 Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and Drugs.Com... date of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and Drugs.Com that published in the Federal...

Changes in FDA enforcement activities following changes in federal administration: the case of regulatory letters released to pharmaceutical companies.

PubMed

Nguyen, Diane; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Montagne, Michael

2013-01-22

The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for the protection of the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness and security of human drugs and biological products through the enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and related regulations. These enforcement activities include regulatory letters (i.e. warning letters and notice of violation) to pharmaceutical companies. A regulatory letter represents the FDA's first official notification to a pharmaceutical company that the FDA has discovered a product or activity in violation of the FDCA.This study analyzed trends in the pharmaceutical-related regulatory letters released by the FDA during the period 1997-2011 and assessed differences in the average number and type of regulatory letters released during the last four federal administrations. Data derived from the FDA webpage. Information about the FDA office releasing the letter, date, company, and drug-related violation was collected. Regulatory letters were classified by federal administration. Descriptive statistics were performed for the analysis. Between 1997 and 2011 the FDA released 2,467 regulatory letters related to pharmaceuticals. FDA headquarters offices released 50.6% and district offices 49.4% of the regulatory letters. The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion released the largest number of regulatory letters (850; 34.5% of the total), followed by the Office of Scientific Investigations (131; 5.3%), and the Office of Compliance (105; 4.3%). During the 2nd Clinton Administration (1997-2000) the average number of regulatory letters per year was 242.8 ± 45.6, during the Bush Administration (2001-2008) it was 120.4 ± 33.7, and during the first three years of the Obama administration (2009-2011) it was 177.7.0 ± 17.0. The average number of regulatory letters released by the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion also varied by administration: Clinton (122.3 ± 36.4), Bush (29.5�

78 FR 19715 - Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1153] Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish Pilot Projects and...: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is extending the comment period for the notice entitled...

78 FR 14309 - Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-05

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1153] Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish Pilot Projects and... information. SUMMARY: In September 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) asked the...

[U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) strengthens warning that non-aspirin non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can cause myocardial infarctions or strokes: the dentist's perspective].

PubMed

Rosen, E; Tsesis, I; Vered, M

2015-10-01

This short communication is aimed to update dental practitioners regarding the recently published warning of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the risk for severe cardiovascular complications such as myocardial infarction or stroke following the use of non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

A Good Year: FDA Approved Nine New Cancer Drugs in 2014

Cancer.gov

In 2014, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved 41 drugs that had not been approved previously for any indication, the most in nearly 20 years. Of these 41 novel drugs, 9 were approved for the treatment of cancer or cancer-related conditions.

78 FR 6824 - Considerations Regarding Food and Drug Administration Review and Regulation of Drugs for the...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-31

... Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis; Public Hearing AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public hearing; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0035...

75 FR 11893 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Task Force; Request for Comments

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-12

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0247... Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is soliciting comments from interested persons on ways in which FDA can increase transparency between FDA and...

FDA drug labeling: rich resources to facilitate precision medicine, drug safety, and regulatory science.

PubMed

Fang, Hong; Harris, Stephen C; Liu, Zhichao; Zhou, Guangxu; Zhang, Guoping; Xu, Joshua; Rosario, Lilliam; Howard, Paul C; Tong, Weida

2016-10-01

Here, we provide a concise overview of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug labeling, which details drug products, drug-drug interactions, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and more. Labeling data have been collected over several decades by the FDA and are an important resource for regulatory research and decision making. However, navigating through this data is challenging. To aid such navigation, the FDALabel database was developed, which contains a set of approximately 80000 labeling data. The full-text searching capability of FDALabel and querying based on any combination of specific sections, document types, market categories, market date, and other labeling information makes it a powerful and attractive tool for a variety of applications. Here, we illustrate the utility of FDALabel using case scenarios in pharmacogenomics biomarkers and ADR studies. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) postmarket reported side effects and adverse events associated with pulmonary hypertension therapy in pediatric patients.

PubMed

Maxey, Dawn M; Ivy, D Dunbar; Ogawa, Michelle T; Feinstein, Jeffrey A

2013-10-01

Because most medications for pediatric pulmonary hypertension (PH) are used off label and based on adult trials, little information is available on pediatric-specific adverse events (AEs). Although drug manufacturers are required to submit postmarket AE reports to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), this information is rarely transmitted to practitioners. In the setting of a recent FDA warning for sildenafil, the authors sought to give a better description of the AEs associated with current therapies in pediatric PH. In January 2010, a written request was made to the Food and Drug Administration for AE records of commonly used PH medications. Reports were screened for pediatric patients, analyzed in terms of AEs, and compared with the medical literature. Arbitrarily, AEs that could be attributed to concomitant medications were not attributed to the PH medication in question. Adverse events occurring in more than 5 % of events for each drug were assumed to be associated with the targeted PH medication. Between November 1997 and December 2009, 588 pediatric AE reports (death in 257 cases) were reported for the three most commonly used therapies: bosentan, epoprostenol, and sildenafil. Many of the AEs were similar to those reported previously. However, 27 AEs not previously reported in the literature (e.g., pulmonary hemorrhage, hemoptysis, and pneumonia) were found. The FDA postmarket records for PH medications in pediatric patients show a significant number of AEs. The discovery of AEs not previously reported will better inform those caring for these complex and critically ill children, and the large number of deaths suggest they may be underreported in current literature.

FDA Kids' Home Page

MedlinePlus

... and Drug Administration A to Z Index Follow FDA En Español Search FDA Submit search Popular Content Home Food Drugs Medical ... 日本語 | فارسی | English FDA Accessibility Careers FDA Basics FOIA No FEAR Act ...

75 FR 15439 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-29

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

78 FR 15957 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-13

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

77 FR 10537 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-22

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

ClinicalTrials.gov and Drugs@FDA: A Comparison of Results Reporting for New Drug Approval Trials.

PubMed

Schwartz, Lisa M; Woloshin, Steven; Zheng, Eugene; Tse, Tony; Zarin, Deborah A

2016-09-20

Pharmaceutical companies and other trial sponsors must submit certain trial results to ClinicalTrials.gov. The validity of these results is unclear. To validate results posted on ClinicalTrials.gov against publicly available U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews on Drugs@FDA. ClinicalTrials.gov (registry and results database) and Drugs@FDA (medical and statistical reviews). 100 parallel-group, randomized trials for new drug approvals (January 2013 to July 2014) with results posted on ClinicalTrials.gov (15 March 2015). 2 assessors extracted, and another verified, the trial design, primary and secondary outcomes, adverse events, and deaths. Most trials were phase 3 (90%), double-blind (92%), and placebo-controlled (73%) and involved 32 drugs from 24 companies. Of 137 primary outcomes identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, 134 (98%) had corresponding data at Drugs@FDA, 130 (95%) had concordant definitions, and 107 (78%) had concordant results. Most differences were nominal (that is, relative difference <10%). Primary outcome results in 14 trials could not be validated. Of 1927 secondary outcomes from ClinicalTrials.gov, Drugs@FDA mentioned 1061 (55%) and included results data for 367 (19%). Of 96 trials with 1 or more serious adverse events in either source, 14 could be compared and 7 had discordant numbers of persons experiencing the adverse events. Of 62 trials with 1 or more deaths in either source, 25 could be compared and 17 were discordant. Unknown generalizability to uncontrolled or crossover trial results. Primary outcome definitions and results were largely concordant between ClinicalTrials.gov and Drugs@FDA. Half the secondary outcomes, as well as serious events and deaths, could not be validated because Drugs@FDA includes only "key outcomes" for regulatory decision making and frequently includes only adverse event results aggregated across multiple trials. National Library of Medicine.

78 FR 36711 - Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act Title VII-Drug Supply Chain; Standards for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-19

...: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notification of public meeting; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing a public meeting regarding FDA's... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Chapter I [Docket Nos...

77 FR 20826 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Food and Drug Administration and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-06

...] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Food and Drug Administration and Industry... Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry and Food and... written requests for single copies of the guidance document entitled ``Guidance for Industry and Food and...

77 FR 55845 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration: Request for Nominations

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-09-11

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001... Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting nominations to serve on the Science Board to FDA (Science Board). FDA seeks to include the views of women and men...

FDA Accelerates Testing and Review of Experimental Brain Cancer Drug | FNLCR Staging

Cancer.gov

An investigational brain cancer drug made with disabled polio virus and manufactured at the Frederick National Lab has won breakthrough status from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to fast-track its further refinement and clinical testing.  Br

78 FR 76842 - Food and Drug Administration/American Academy of Ophthalmology Workshop on Developing Novel...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-12-19

... for Premium Intraocular Lenses; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the following public workshop entitled ``FDA... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001...

Adverse drug event monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Ahmad, Syed Rizwanuddin

2003-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible not only for approving drugs but also for monitoring their safety after they reach the market. The complete adverse event profile of a drug is not known at the time of approval because of the small sample size, short duration, and limited generalizability of pre-approval clinical trials. This report describes the FDA's postmarketing surveillance system, to which many clinicians submit reports of adverse drug events encountered while treating their patients. Despite its limitations, the spontaneous reporting system is an extremely valuable mechanism by which hazards with drugs that were not observed or recognized at the time of approval are identified. Physicians are strongly encouraged to submit reports of adverse outcomes with suspect drugs to the FDA, and their reports make a difference. The FDA is strengthening its postmarketing surveillance with access to new data sources that have the potential to further improve the identification, quantification, and subsequent management of drug risk.

Adverse Drug Event Monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration

PubMed Central

Ahmad, Syed Rizwanuddin

2003-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible not only for approving drugs but also for monitoring their safety after they reach the market. The complete adverse event profile of a drug is not known at the time of approval because of the small sample size, short duration, and limited generalizability of pre-approval clinical trials. This report describes the FDA's postmarketing surveillance system, to which many clinicians submit reports of adverse drug events encountered while treating their patients. Despite its limitations, the spontaneous reporting system is an extremely valuable mechanism by which hazards with drugs that were not observed or recognized at the time of approval are identified. Physicians are strongly encouraged to submit reports of adverse outcomes with suspect drugs to the FDA, and their reports make a difference. The FDA is strengthening its postmarketing surveillance with access to new data sources that have the potential to further improve the identification, quantification, and subsequent management of drug risk. PMID:12534765

A comparison of new drugs approved by the FDA, the EMA, and Swissmedic: an assessment of the international harmonization of drugs.

PubMed

Zeukeng, Minette-Joëlle; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Bonnabry, Pascal

2018-06-01

This study compared the characteristics of new human drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicine Agency (EMA), and Swissmedic (SMC) in the period 2007 to 2016. The list of new drugs and therapeutic biologics approved by the FDA, the EMA, and SMC in the period 2007 to 2016 was collected from websites of those agencies. The study included regulatory information, approval date, and indication for each drug. Descriptive statistical t tests and x 2 -tests were performed for the analysis. From 2007 to 2016, 134 new drugs were approved by all three regulatory agencies. Overall, 66.4% of the drugs were first approved by the FDA, 30.6% by the EMA, and 3.0% by SMC. The difference in approval dates between SMC and the EMA, SMC and the FDA, and the FDA and the EMA were statistically significant. The indications approved by the FDA, the EMA, and SMC for the same drugs were similar in content for 23.1% drugs and different in 76.9% of the drugs. Significant differences in indications existed between the FDA and SMC and the FDA and the EMA, but not between the EMA and SMC. There were differences in the characteristics of new drugs approved by the EMA, the FDA, and SMC in the period 2007-2016. Overall, two thirds of the new drugs were first approved by the FDA. Differences in indications were found in three out of four new drugs approved by the three regulatory agencies. Despite international drug regulation harmonization efforts, significant differences in the characteristics of new drugs approved by different agencies persist.

78 FR 55728 - Society of Clinical Research Associates-Food and Drug Administration: Food and Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-11

...: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The Food and Drug Administration... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001] Society of Clinical Research Associates-Food and Drug Administration: Food and Drug Administration...

77 FR 21784 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-11

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No FDA-2012-N-0001] Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Science...

Ensuring that consumers receive appropriate information from drug ads: what is the FDA's role?

PubMed

Waxman, Henry A

2004-01-01

The promise of direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertisements lies in their potential to educate consumers about medical conditions and the possibility of treatment. But this promise can only be fulfilled if consumers are given clear and accurate information. The responsibility for ensuring that this occurs falls on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Recent congressional investigations have indicated that the agency is failing at this task, as FDA enforcement actions against false and misleading ads have declined precipitously in recent years. Other FDA efforts, such as its recently released guidelines on prescription drugs, do not appear to be helpful, potentially confusing consumers more than helping them.

Medicare covers the majority of FDA-approved devices and Part B drugs, but restrictions and discrepancies remain.

PubMed

Chambers, James D; May, Katherine E; Neumann, Peter J

2013-06-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Medicare use different standards to determine, first, whether a new drug or medical device can be marketed to the public and, second, if the federal health insurance program will pay for use of the drug or device. This discrepancy creates hurdles and uncertainty for drug and device manufacturers. We analyzed discrepancies between FDA approval and Medicare national coverage determinations for sixty-nine devices and Part B drugs approved during 1999-2011. We found that Medicare covered FDA-approved drugs or devices 80 percent of the time. However, Medicare often added conditions beyond FDA approval, particularly for devices and most often restricting coverage to patients with the most severe disease. In some instances, Medicare was less restrictive than the FDA. Our findings highlight the importance for drug and device makers of anticipating Medicare's needs when conducting clinical studies to support their products. Our findings also provide important insights for the FDA's and Medicare's pilot parallel review program.

75 FR 18219 - Drug and Medical Device Forum on Food and Drug Administration Drug and Device Requirements and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0142] Drug and Medical Device Forum on Food and Drug Administration Drug and Device Requirements and Supplier Controls; Public Educational Forum AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public...

Access to Investigational Drugs: FDA Expanded Access Programs or "Right-to-Try" Legislation?

PubMed

Holbein, M E Blair; Berglund, Jelena P; Weatherwax, Kevin; Gerber, David E; Adamo, Joan E

2015-10-01

The Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access (EA) program and "Right-to-Try" legislation aim to provide seriously ill patients who have no other comparable treatment options to gain access to investigational drugs and biological agents. Physicians and institutions need to understand these programs to respond to questions and requests for access. FDA EA programs and state and federal legislative efforts to provide investigational products to patients by circumventing FDA regulations were summarized and compared. The FDA EA program includes Single Patient-Investigational New Drug (SP-IND), Emergency SP-IND, Intermediate Sized Population IND, and Treatment IND. Approval rates for all categories exceed 99%. Approval requires FDA and Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, and cooperation of the pharmaceutical partner is essential. "Right-to-Try" legislation bypasses some of these steps, but provides no regulatory or safety oversight. The FDA EA program is a reasonable option for patients for whom all other therapeutic interventions have failed. The SP-IND not only provides patient access to new drugs, but also maintains a balance between immediacy and necessary patient protection. Rather than circumventing existing FDA regulations through proposed legislation, it seems more judicious to provide the knowledge and means to meet the EA requirements. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Examination of the relationship between oncology drug labeling revision frequency and FDA product categorization.

PubMed

Berlin, Robert J

2009-09-01

I examined the relationship between the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) use of special regulatory designations and the frequency with which labels of oncology drugs are revised to explore how the FDA's designation of products relates to product development and refinement. One hundred oncology drugs, designated by the FDA as accelerated approval, priority review, orphan drug, or traditional review, were identified from publicly available information. Drug information for each product was evaluated to assess the rate at which manufacturers revised product labeling. Rates were compared between specially categorized products and traditional review products (e.g., orphan vs nonorphan drugs) to produce revision rate ratios for each special category. Labeling for accelerated approval and priority review products are revised significantly more frequently than are labels for traditional products. Accelerated approval products are approved based on surrogate endpoints; this approval process anticipates subsequent labeling refinement. Priority review products, however, are approved through a process that is ostensibly as rigorous as traditional review. Their higher than expected label revision rate may suggest deficiencies in the FDA's current priority review evaluation processes.

76 FR 25358 - 2011 Parenteral Drug Association/Food and Drug Administration Glass Quality Conference; Public...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] 2011 Parenteral Drug Association/Food and Drug Administration Glass Quality Conference; Public Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. SUMMARY: The Food...

75 FR 76992 - Guidance for the Public, FDA Advisory Committee Members, and FDA Staff: The Open Public Hearing...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-10

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2005-D-0072] (formerly Docket No. 2005D-0042) Guidance for the Public, FDA Advisory Committee Members, and FDA Staff: The Open Public Hearing at FDA Advisory Committee Meetings; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug...

77 FR 41413 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Medical Devices: The Pre...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-13

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0530... Program and Meetings With FDA Staff; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the draft...

OpenVigil FDA - Inspection of U.S. American Adverse Drug Events Pharmacovigilance Data and Novel Clinical Applications.

PubMed

Böhm, Ruwen; von Hehn, Leocadie; Herdegen, Thomas; Klein, Hans-Joachim; Bruhn, Oliver; Petri, Holger; Höcker, Jan

2016-01-01

Pharmacovigilance contributes to health care. However, direct access to the underlying data for academic institutions and individual physicians or pharmacists is intricate, and easily employable analysis modes for everyday clinical situations are missing. This underlines the need for a tool to bring pharmacovigilance to the clinics. To address these issues, we have developed OpenVigil FDA, a novel web-based pharmacovigilance analysis tool which uses the openFDA online interface of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to access U.S. American and international pharmacovigilance data from the Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS). OpenVigil FDA provides disproportionality analyses to (i) identify the drug most likely evoking a new adverse event, (ii) compare two drugs concerning their safety profile, (iii) check arbitrary combinations of two drugs for unknown drug-drug interactions and (iv) enhance the relevance of results by identifying confounding factors and eliminating them using background correction. We present examples for these applications and discuss the promises and limits of pharmacovigilance, openFDA and OpenVigil FDA. OpenVigil FDA is the first public available tool to apply pharmacovigilance findings directly to real-life clinical problems. OpenVigil FDA does not require special licenses or statistical programs.

77 FR 40069 - Single-Ingredient, Immediate-Release Drug Products Containing Oxycodone for Oral Administration...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0563... Labeled for Human Use; Enforcement Action Dates AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing its intention to take enforcement...

75 FR 73107 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Blood Lancet Labeling; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-29

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0590] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Blood Lancet Labeling; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

The impact of Wyeth v. Levine on FDA regulation of prescription drugs.

PubMed

Ausness, Richard C

2010-01-01

In Wyeth v. Levine, decided in March, 2009, the United States Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff's failure to warn claim against the makers of the drug Phenergan was not impliedly preempted by the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. In doing so, the Court rejected the argument of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that tort claims of this nature stand as an obstacle to federal regulatory objectives. This Article evaluates the Court's opinion in Wyeth and examines that decision's impact on subsequent litigation in the area of prescription drug labeling. The Article first discusses the preemption doctrine and its application to state law tort claims against product manufacturers. It then reviews the history of implied preemption of tort claims against manufacturers of FDA-approved prescription drugs prior to Wyeth and then discusses the Wyeth decisions in the Vermont Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court. Finally, the Article evaluates some of the prescription drug preemption cases that have been decided in the lower federal courts since Wyeth and suggests that these courts are now reluctant to preempt failure to warn claims unless a manufacturer affirmatively seeks permission from FDA to change a drug's labeling.

Did FDA Decisionmaking Affect Anti-Psychotic Drug Prescribing in Children?: A Time-Trend Analysis.

PubMed

Wang, Bo; Franklin, Jessica M; Eddings, Wesley; Landon, Joan; Kesselheim, Aaron S

2016-01-01

Following Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, many drugs are prescribed for non-FDA-approved ("off-label") uses. If substantial evidence supports the efficacy and safety of off-label indications, manufacturers can pursue formal FDA approval through supplemental new drug applications (sNDAs). We evaluated the effect of FDA determinations on pediatric sNDAs for antipsychotic drugs on prescribing of these products in children. Retrospective, segmented time-series analysis using new prescription claims during 2003-2012 for three atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone). FDA approved the sNDAs for pediatric use of olanzapine and quetiapine in December 2009, but did not approve the sNDA for pediatric use of ziprasidone. During the months before FDA approval of its pediatric sNDA, new prescriptions of olanzapine decreased for both children and adults. After FDA approval, the increase in prescribing trends was similar for both age groups (P = 0.47 for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; P = 0.37 for other indications). Comparable decreases in use of quetiapine were observed between pediatrics and adults following FDA approval of its pediatric sNDA (P = 0.88; P = 0.63). Prescribing of ziprasidone decreased similarly for pediatric and adult patients after FDA non-approval of its pediatric sNDA (P = 0.61; P = 0.79). The FDA's sNDA determinations relating to use of antipsychotics in children did not result in changes in use that favored the approved sNDAs and disfavored the unapproved sNDA. Improved communication may help translate the agency's expert judgments to clinical practice.

Access to Investigational Drugs: FDA Expanded Access Programs or “Right‐to‐Try” Legislation?

PubMed Central

Berglund, Jelena P.; Weatherwax, Kevin; Gerber, David E.; Adamo, Joan E.

2015-01-01

Abstract Purpose The Food and Drug Administration Expanded Access (EA) program and “Right‐to‐Try” legislation aim to provide seriously ill patients who have no other comparable treatment options to gain access to investigational drugs and biological agents. Physicians and institutions need to understand these programs to respond to questions and requests for access. Methods FDA EA programs and state and federal legislative efforts to provide investigational products to patients by circumventing FDA regulations were summarized and compared. Results The FDA EA program includes Single Patient‐Investigational New Drug (SP‐IND), Emergency SP‐IND, Intermediate Sized Population IND, and Treatment IND. Approval rates for all categories exceed 99%. Approval requires FDA and Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, and cooperation of the pharmaceutical partner is essential. “Right‐to‐Try” legislation bypasses some of these steps, but provides no regulatory or safety oversight. Conclusion The FDA EA program is a reasonable option for patients for whom all other therapeutic interventions have failed. The SP‐IND not only provides patient access to new drugs, but also maintains a balance between immediacy and necessary patient protection. Rather than circumventing existing FDA regulations through proposed legislation, it seems more judicious to provide the knowledge and means to meet the EA requirements. PMID:25588691

78 FR 54901 - Food and Drug Administration/American Academy of Ophthalmology Workshop on Developing Novel...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-06

... for Premium Intraocular Lenses; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the following public... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001...

77 FR 52744 - Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency Orphan Product Designation and Grant Workshop

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency Orphan Product Designation and Grant Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of meeting. The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Office of Orphan Products Development...

76 FR 6477 - Industry Exchange Workshop on Food and Drug Administration Drug and Device Requirements; Public...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-02-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Industry Exchange Workshop on Food and Drug Administration Drug and Device Requirements; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug...

75 FR 13766 - Food and Drug Administration and Process Analytical Technology for Pharma Manufacturing: Food and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-23

... Administration--Partnering With Industry; Public Conference AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public conference. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a joint conference with... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001...

A Guide to the FDA.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Miller, Annetta K.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) collects information in seven areas: foods, cosmetics, human drugs, animal drugs and feeds, medical devices, biologics, and electronic radiological products. By using procedures outlined in the Freedom of Information Act, the public may get specific information from such FDA files as inspection…

Priority review drugs approved by the FDA and the EMA: time for international regulatory harmonization of pharmaceuticals?

PubMed

Alqahtani, Saad; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Eguale, Tewodros

2015-07-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) priority review process applies to a drug that is considered a significant improvement over the available alternatives. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) accelerated approval applies to a product that is of major public health interest. This study assessed differences in the characteristics of priority review new molecular entities and new therapeutic biologic products approved by the FDA and the EMA. This study includes regulatory information on drug applications, approvals, indications, and orphan designations of all priority review drugs approved by the FDA and the EMA in the period 1999-2011. Descriptive statistics, t-tests, and chi-squared and Wilcoxon tests were performed. Overall, 100 FDA priority review new molecular entities and new therapeutic biologics were approved by both agencies; 87.0% of the products were first approved by the FDA. The average FDA review time (9.2 ± 8.4 months) was significantly lower than the EMA average review time (14.6 ± 4.0 months) (p < 0.0001). The FDA and the EMA granted orphan designation to 43.0% and 33.0%, respectively, of the applications. There were differences in the administration route (1.0% of all products), dosage (8.0%), strength (23%), posology (51.0%), indications (30.0%), restrictions of use (52.0%), limitations of use (19.0%), and outcomes limitations (28.0%) approved by both regulatory agencies. Significant differences exist in the characteristics of the priority review drugs approved by the FDA and the EMA. Harmonization of the US and European regulatory frameworks may facilitate timely approval of pharmaceutical products. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

77 FR 70166 - Provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act Related to Medical Gases...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-11-23

...; Establishment of a Public Docket AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is establishing a public docket for information pertaining to FDA's... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1090...

Deficiencies in the reporting of VD and t1/2 in the FDA approved chemotherapy drug inserts

PubMed Central

D’Souza, Malcolm J.; Alabed, Ghada J.

2011-01-01

Since its release in 2006, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) final improved format for prescription drug labeling has revamped the comprehensiveness of drug inserts, including chemotherapy drugs. The chemotherapy drug “packets”, retrieved via the FDA website and other accredited drug information reporting agencies such as the Physician Drug Reference (PDR), are practically the only available unbiased summary of information. One objective is to impartially evaluate the reporting of useful pharmacokinetic parameters, in particular, Volume of Distribution (VD) and elimination half-life (t1/2), in randomly selected FDA approved chemotherapy drug inserts. The web-accessible portable document format (PDF) files for 30 randomly selected chemotherapy drugs are subjected to detailed search and the two parameters of interest are tabulated. The knowledge of the two parameters is essential in directing patient care as well as for clinical research and since the completeness of the core FDA recommendations has been found deficient, a detailed explanation of the impact of such deficiencies is provided. PMID:21643531

76 FR 9027 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Best Practices for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-02-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0057] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Best Practices for Conducting and...: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

The ABCs of the FDA: A Primer on the Role of the United States Food and Drug Administration in Medical Device Approvals and IR Research.

PubMed

Adamovich, Ashley; Park, Susie; Siskin, Gary P; Englander, Meridith J; Mandato, Kenneth D; Herr, Allen; Keating, Lawrence J

2015-09-01

The role of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in medical device regulation is important to device-driven specialties such as interventional radiology. Whether it is through industry-sponsored trials during the approval process for new devices or investigator-initiated research prospectively evaluating the role of existing devices for new or established procedures, interaction with the FDA is an integral part of performing significant research in interventional radiology. This article reviews the potential areas of interface between the FDA and interventional radiology, as understanding these areas is necessary to continue the innovation that is the hallmark of this specialty. Copyright © 2015 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Physicians' Trust in the FDA's Use of Product-Specific Pathways for Generic Drug Approval.

PubMed

Kesselheim, Aaron S; Eddings, Wesley; Raj, Tara; Campbell, Eric G; Franklin, Jessica M; Ross, Kathryn M; Fulchino, Lisa A; Avorn, Jerry; Gagne, Joshua J

2016-01-01

Generic drugs are cost-effective versions of brand-name drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) following proof of pharmaceutical equivalence and bioequivalence. Generic drugs are widely prescribed by physicians, although there is disagreement over the clinical comparability of generic drugs to brand-name drugs within the physician community. The objective of this survey was to assess physicians' perceptions of generic drugs and the generic drug approval process. A survey was administered to a national sample of primary care internists and specialists between August 2014 and January 2015. In total, 1,152 physicians comprising of internists with no reported specialty certification and those with specialty certification in hematology, infectious diseases, and endocrinology were surveyed. The survey assessed physicians' perceptions of the FDA's generic drug approval process, as well as their experiences prescribing six generic drugs approved between 2008 and 2012 using product-specific approval pathways and selected comparator drugs. Among 718 respondents (62% response rate), a majority were comfortable with the FDA's process in ensuring the safety and effectiveness of generic drugs overall (91%) and with letting the FDA determine which tests were necessary to determine bioequivalence in a particular drug (92%). A minority (13-26%) still reported being uncomfortable prescribing generic drugs approved using product-specific pathways. Overall, few physicians heard reports of concerns about generic versions of the study drugs or their comparators, with no differences between the two groups. Physicians tended to hear about concerns about the safety or effectiveness of generic drugs from patients, pharmacists, and physician colleagues. Physicians hold largely positive views of the FDA's generic drug approval process even when some questioned the performance of certain generic drugs in comparison to brand-name drugs. Better education about the generic drug

75 FR 48699 - Memorandum of Understanding Between United States Food and Drug Administration and the Centers...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-11

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004] [FDA 225-10-0010] Memorandum of Understanding Between United States Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION...

76 FR 38184 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; FDA Recall...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-29

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0439] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; FDA Recall Regulations AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

77 FR 47652 - Second Annual Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-09

... of Special Health Issues, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD... between health professional organizations and FDA staff. The Office of Special Health Issues serves as a... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001...

Sanofi Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al.; withdrawal of approval of 21 new drug applications and 62 abbreviated new drug applications--FDA. Notice.

PubMed

1998-05-12

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval of 21 new drug applications (NDA's) and 62 abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA's). The holders of the applications notified the agency in writing that the drug products were no longer marketed and requested that the approval of the applications be withdrawn.

Food and drug administration regulation of drugs that raise blood pressure.

PubMed

Blankfield, Robert P; Iftikhar, Imran H

2015-01-01

Although it is recognized that a systolic blood pressure (SBP) increase ≥ 2 mm Hg or a diastolic blood pressure (DBP) increase ≥ 1 mm Hg increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes in middle-aged adults, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lacks an adequate policy for regulating medications that increase blood pressure (BP). Some FDA reviewers consider a clinically significant increase in BP to occur only if a drug raises SBP ≥ 20 mm Hg or if a drug raises DBP ≥ 10 to 15 mm Hg. In recent years, numerous drugs have been regulated or taken off the market due to cardiovascular safety concerns. The list includes rofecoxib (Vioxx), valdecoxib (Bextra), nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, sibutramine (Meridia), and phenylpropanolamine. It is probable that the hypertensive effect of these drugs explains why they increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Other drugs, notably serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and drugs used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, were approved without cardiovascular safety data despite the fact that they raise BP comparable to valdecoxib and sibutramine. It is the responsibility of the FDA to ensure that drugs are properly labeled regarding risk. Even if a drug raises BP only modestly, FDA guidelines for new drug approvals should include a requirement for cardiovascular safety data. However, such guidelines will not address the problem of how to obtain cardiovascular safety data for the many already approved drugs that increase BP. The FDA should play a role in obtaining cardiovascular safety data for such drugs. © The Author(s) 2014.

78 FR 9928 - Food and Drug Administration Drug Shortages Task Force and Strategic Plan; Request for Comments

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-12

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0124] Food and Drug Administration Drug Shortages Task Force and Strategic Plan; Request for Comments AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: To assist the Food...

75 FR 17423 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004] [FDA 225-10-0007] Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration, United States...) is providing notice of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the FDA, U.S. Department of Health...

Patterns of pregnancy exposure to prescription FDA C, D and X drugs in a Canadian population.

PubMed

Wen, S W; Yang, T; Krewski, D; Yang, Q; Nimrod, C; Garner, P; Fraser, W; Olatunbosun, O; Walker, M C

2008-05-01

To examine prescription Food and Drug Administration (FDA) C, D and X drugs in general obstetric population. Historical cohort study. A total of 18 575 women who gave a birth in Saskatchewan between January 1997 and December 2000 were included. Among them, 3604 (19.4%) received FDA C, D or X drugs at least once during pregnancy. The pregnancy exposure rates were 15.8, 5.2 and 3.9%, respectively, for category C, D and X drugs, and were 11.2, 7.3 and 8.2%, respectively, in the first, second and third trimesters. Salbutamol (albuterol), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (co-trimoxazole), ibuprofen, naproxen and oral contraceptives were the most common C, D, X drugs used during pregnancy. About one in every five women uses FDA C, D and X drugs at least once during pregnancy, and the most common prescription drugs in pregnancy are antiasthmatic, antibiotics, nonsteroid anti-inflammation drugs, antianxiety or antidepressants and oral contraceptives.

Clinical benefit, price and approval characteristics of FDA-approved new drugs for treating advanced solid cancer, 2000-2015.

PubMed

Vivot, A; Jacot, J; Zeitoun, J-D; Ravaud, P; Crequit, P; Porcher, R

2017-05-01

Prices of anti-cancer drugs are skyrocking. We aimed to assess the clinical benefit of new drugs for treating advanced solid tumors at the time of their approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and to search for a relation between price and clinical benefit of drugs. We included all new molecular entities and new biologics for treating advanced solid cancer that were approved by the FDA between 2000 and 2015. The clinical benefit of drugs was graded based on FDA medical review of pivotal clinical trials using the 2016-updated of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Value Framework (ASCO-VF) and the European Society for Medical Oncology Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS). Characteristics of drugs and approvals were obtained from publicly available FDA documents and price was evaluated according to US Medicare, US Veterans Health Administration and United Kingdom market systems. The FDA approved 51 new drugs for advanced solid cancer from 2000 to 2015; we could evaluate the value of 37 drugs (73%). By the ESMO-MCBS, five drugs (14%) were grade one (the lowest), nine (24%) grade two, 10 (27%) grade three, 11 (30%) grade four and two (5%) grade five (the highest). Thus, 13 drugs (35%) showed a meaningful clinical benefit (scale levels 4 and 5). By the ASCO-VF which had a range of 3.4-67, the median drug value was 37 (interquartile range 20-52). We found no relationship between clinical benefit and drug price (P = 0.9). No characteristic of drugs and of approval was significantly associated with clinical benefit. Many recently FDA-approved new cancer drugs did not have high clinical benefit as measured by current scales. We found no relation between the price of drugs and benefit to society and patients. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Use of surrogate outcomes in US FDA drug approvals, 2003-2012: a survey.

PubMed

Yu, Tsung; Hsu, Yea-Jen; Fain, Kevin M; Boyd, Cynthia M; Holbrook, Janet T; Puhan, Milo A

2015-11-27

To evaluate, across a spectrum of diseases, how often surrogate outcomes are used as a basis for drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and whether and how the rationale for using treatment effects on surrogates as predictors of treatment effects on patient-centred outcomes is discussed. We used the Drugs@FDA website to identify drug approvals produced from 2003 to 2012 by the FDA. We focused on four diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), type 1 or 2 diabetes, glaucoma and osteoporosis) for which surrogates are commonly used in trials. We reviewed the drug labels and medical reviews to provide empirical evidence on how surrogate outcomes are handled by the FDA. Of 1043 approvals screened, 58 (6%) were for the four diseases of interest. Most drugs for COPD (7/9, 78%), diabetes (26/26, 100%) and glaucoma (9/9, 100%) were approved based on surrogates while for osteoporosis, most drugs (10/14, 71%) were also approved for patient-centred outcomes (fractures). The rationale for using surrogates was discussed in 11 of the 43 (26%) drug approvals based on surrogates. In these drug approvals, we found drug approvals for diabetes are more likely than the other examined conditions to contain a discussion of trial evidence demonstrating that treatment effects on surrogate outcomes predict treatment effects on patient-centred outcomes. Our results suggest that the FDA did not use a consistent approach to address surrogates in assessing the benefits and harms of drugs for COPD, type 1 or 2 diabetes, glaucoma and osteoporosis. For evaluating new drugs, patient-centred outcomes should be chosen whenever possible. If the use of surrogate outcomes is necessary, then a consistent approach is important to review the evidence for surrogacy and consider surrogate's usage in the treatment and population under study. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/

78 FR 15019 - Food and Drug Administration Prescription Drug User Fee Act V Benefit-Risk Plan; Request for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-08

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0196] Food and Drug Administration Prescription Drug User Fee Act V Benefit-Risk Plan; Request for Comments AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice, request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and...

FDA Accelerates Testing and Review of Experimental Brain Cancer Drug | Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research

Cancer.gov

An investigational brain cancer drug made with disabled polio virus and manufactured at the Frederick National Lab has won breakthrough status from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to fast-track its further refinement and clinical testing.  Br

The history and contemporary challenges of the US Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Borchers, Andrea T; Hagie, Frank; Keen, Carl L; Gershwin, M Eric

2007-01-01

The year 2006 marks the 100th anniversary of the regulatory agency now known as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the first consumer protection agency of the federal government and arguably the most influential regulatory agency in the world. The FDA thus plays an integral role in the use of pharmaceuticals, not only in the United States but worldwide. The goal of this review was to present an overview of the FDA and place its current role in the perspectives of history and contemporary needs. Relevant materials for this review were identified through a search of the English-language literature indexed on MEDLINE (through 2006) using the main search terms United States Food and Drug Administration, FDA, history of the FDA, drug approvals, drug legislation, and FDA legislation. Results from the initial searches were then explored further. The statute that created the bureau which later became the FDA established this agency to prohibit interstate commerce of adulterated foods, drinks, and drugs. The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act that replaced it in 1938, and subsequent food and drug laws and amendments, expanded the FDA's responsibilities to cosmetics, medical devices, biological products, and radiation-emitting products. These amendments have also established the FDA as a mainly preventive regulatory agency that relies chiefly on pre-market control. As such, the FDA has played an important role in shaping the modern pharmaceutical industry by making the scientific approach and the clinical trial process the standard for establishing safety and efficacy and by making rigorous scientific analysis the predominant component of the process for pharmaceutical regulation. As shown in this review, the evolution of the FDA can be described as a series of "crisis-legislation-adaptation" cycles: a public health crisis promoted the passage of congressional legislation, which was then followed by implementation of the law by the FDA. However, the crises the FDA faces

78 FR 35937 - Food and Drug Administration Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption Clinical...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-14

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0790] Food and Drug Administration Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption Clinical Investigations; Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug...

Doctors, drugs, and the FDA.

PubMed

Shanklin, D R

1972-11-01

This communication is directed to obstetricians, to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to those individuals who might want to impose possibly unnecessary external structures on the practice of medicine. It is considered a positive that the patients of today are well informed and are more actively participating in therapeutic design. There is more veto power on the part of the patient and more concern over the trained ability of the physician. In the past physicians frequently made judgements individually, applying isolated and at times random standards for their decisions. Such actions were inevitable in an era when neither pathogenesis nor treatment was well understood. Now there is no excuse for such actions. Communication is easy, journals are widely circulated, and there are numerous refresher seminars. Increased specialization of knowledge has meant more corporate or group decisions for therapy. Current trends will continue to offer both opportunities and responsibilities. The opportunities are for better diffusion of knowledge, and the responsibility is to be informed. There can be a high level national standard for medical practice. As a beginning, the medical practice laws could use some uniform decisions. The FDA needs to show more responsiveness to changing knowledge and increased willingness to reconsider indications and contraindications in the light of newer experience. There is sufficient information available now to support the revocation of the approval of the use of diuretics in the management of human pregnancy. Another role of the FDA is the approval of new substances or new uses of old substances. The prostaglandins appear in this category, and the December 1972 issue will include the recent Brook Lodge Symposium on prostaglandins. The individual physician requires journal articles, individual experience, and designed trials in order to make judgements on patients who may have some factors not accounted for by groupthink or regulations.

Maternal characteristics associated with pregnancy exposure to FDA category C, D, and X drugs in a Canadian population.

PubMed

Yang, Tubao; Walker, Mark C; Krewski, Daniel; Yang, Qiuying; Nimrod, Carl; Garner, Peter; Fraser, William; Olatunbosun, Olufemi; Wen, Shi Wu

2008-03-01

To estimate the frequency of exposure to prescription Food and Drug Administration (FDA) category C, D, and X drugs in pregnant women, and to analyze the maternal characteristics associated with such an exposure. A 50% random sample of women who gave a birth in Saskatchewan between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2000 was chosen for the study. The rate of exposure to FDA category C, D, or X drugs recorded in the pharmacist database was estimated. Associations of exposure to FDA category C, D, and X drugs with maternal characteristics were evaluated using multiple logistical regression, with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the association measures. A total of 18 575 women were included in this study. Among them, 3604 (19.4%) had exposure to one or more FDA category C, D, and X drugs during pregnancy. Category C drugs were the most frequently used drugs (15.8%), followed by D drugs (5.2%), and X drugs (3.9%). Women with chronic health conditions had fourfold at increased risk of exposure than women without. Regardless of health status, women who were <20 years of age, who had a parity > or =3, and who were on social assistance plan were at increased risk of pregnancy exposure to these drugs. About 19.4% pregnant women are exposed to FDA C, D or X drugs during pregnancy. Women with chronic diseases, younger age, increased parity, and under social assistance are at increased risk of exposure to FDA C, D, or X drugs. Copyright 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

76 FR 78931 - Food and Drug Administration Rare Disease Patient Advocacy Day; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-20

... Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Office of Orphan Products... educate the rare disease community on the FDA regulatory processes. This educational meeting will consist...

76 FR 31615 - Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: Commercially Distributed In Vitro Diagnostic Products...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-01

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0305] Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: Commercially Distributed In Vitro Diagnostic Products Labeled...: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

Patient Reported Outcome (PRO) assessment in epilepsy: a review of epilepsy-specific PROs according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory requirements.

PubMed

Nixon, Annabel; Kerr, Cicely; Breheny, Katie; Wild, Diane

2013-03-11

Despite collection of patient reported outcome (PRO) data in clinical trials of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), PRO results are not being routinely reported on European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) product labels. This review aimed to evaluate epilepsy-specific PRO instruments against FDA regulatory standards for supporting label claims. Structured literature searches were conducted in Embase and Medline databases to identify epilepsy-specific PRO instruments. Only instruments that could potentially be impacted by pharmacological treatment, were completed by adults and had evidence of some validation work were selected for review. A total of 26 PROs were reviewed based on criteria developed from the FDA regulatory standards. The ability to meet these criteria was classified as either full, partial or no evidence, whereby partial reflected some evidence but not enough to comprehensively address the FDA regulatory standards. Most instruments provided partial evidence of content validity. Input from clinicians and literature was common although few involved patients in both item generation and cognitive debriefing. Construct validity was predominantly compromised by no evidence of a-priori hypotheses of expected relationships. Evidence for test-retest reliability and internal consistency was available for most PROs although few included complete results regarding all subscales and some failed to reach recommended thresholds. The ability to detect change and interpretation of change were not investigated in most instruments and no PROs had published evidence of a conceptual framework. The study concludes that none of the 26 have the full evidence required by the FDA to support a label claim, and all require further research to support their use as an endpoint. The Subjective Handicap of Epilepsy (SHE) and the Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) have the fewest gaps that would need to be addressed through

Comparison of oncology drug approval between Health Canada and the US Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Ezeife, Doreen A; Truong, Tony H; Heng, Daniel Y C; Bourque, Sylvie; Welch, Stephen A; Tang, Patricia A

2015-05-15

The drug approval timeline is a lengthy process that often varies between countries. The objective of this study was to delineate the Canadian drug approval timeline for oncology drugs and to compare the time to drug approval between Health Canada (HC) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In total, 54 antineoplastic drugs that were approved by the FDA between 1989 and 2012 were reviewed. For each drug, the following milestones were determined: the dates of submission and approval for both the FDA and HC and the dates of availability on provincial drug formularies in Canadian provinces and territories. The time intervals between the aforementioned milestones were calculated. Of 54 FDA-approved drugs, 49 drugs were approved by HC at the time of the current study. The median time from submission to approval was 9 months (interquartile range [IQR], 6-14.5 months) for the FDA and 12 months (IQR, 10-21.1 months) for HC (P < .0006). The time from HC approval to the placement of a drug on a provincial drug formulary was a median of 16.7 months (IQR, 5.9-27.2 months), and there was no interprovincial variability among the 5 Canadian provinces that were analyzed (P = .5). The time from HC submission to HC approval takes 3 months longer than the same time interval for the FDA. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first documentation of the time required to bring an oncology drug from HC submission to placement on a provincial drug formulary. © 2015 American Cancer Society.

Internet Database Review: The FDA BBS.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Tomaiuolo, Nicholas G.

1993-01-01

Describes the electronic bulletin board system (BBS) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that is accessible through the Internet. Highlights include how to gain access; the menu-driven software; other electronic sources of FDA information; and adding value. Examples of the FDA BBS menu and the help screen are included. (LRW)

Exposure Matching of Pediatric Anti-infective Drugs: Review of Drugs Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration for Pediatric Approval

PubMed Central

Zimmerman, Kanecia; Putera, Martin; Hornik, Christoph P.; Smith, P. Brian; Benjamin, Daniel K.; Mulugeta, Yeruk; Burckart, Gilbert J.; Cohen-Wolkowiez, Michael; Gonzalez, Daniel

2016-01-01

Purpose Over the last decade, few novel antibiotics have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for pediatric use. For most anti-infective agents, including antibiotics, extrapolation of efficacy from adults to children is possible if the disease and therapeutic exposures are similar between the 2 populations. This approach reduces the number of studies required in children, but relies heavily on exposure matching between children and adults. Failures in exposure matching can lead to delays in pediatric approvals of new anti-infective agents. We sought to determine the extent of exposure matching, defined by a comparison of area under the concentration-time curve, between children and adults, for anti-infective drug products submitted to the FDA for approval. Methods We reviewed anti-infective submissions to the FDA (2002–2014) for pediatric indication. We included drug products administered via oral, intravenous, or intramuscular administration routes, and those with AUC estimates for children in available FDA reports. Our main outcome of interest was the proportion of drugs with median (or mean) pediatric AUC within 20% of the median (or mean) reported adult value. Findings We identified 29 drug products that met inclusion criteria, 14 (48%) of which had mean (or median) AUCs of all submitted age groups within 20% of that in adults. Only route of administration and drug class were associated with pediatric AUC within 20% of adult AUC. Implications Future research is needed to define criteria for and predictors of successful exposure matching of anti-infectives between children and adults. PMID:27364807

Exposure Matching of Pediatric Anti-infective Drugs: Review of Drugs Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration for Pediatric Approval.

PubMed

Zimmerman, Kanecia; Putera, Martin; Hornik, Christoph P; Brian Smith, P; Benjamin, Daniel K; Mulugeta, Yeruk; Burckart, Gilbert J; Cohen-Wolkowiez, Michael; Gonzalez, Daniel

2016-09-01

Over the last decade, few new antibiotics have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for pediatric use. For most anti-infective agents, including antibiotics, extrapolation of efficacy from adults to children is possible if the disease and therapeutic exposures are similar between the 2 populations. This approach reduces the number of studies required in children, but relies heavily on exposure matching between children and adults. Failures in exposure matching can lead to delays in pediatric approvals of new anti-infective agents. We sought to determine the extent of exposure matching, defined by a comparison of area under the concentration-time curve, between children and adults, for anti-infective drug products submitted to the FDA for approval. We reviewed anti-infective submissions to the FDA (2002-2014) for pediatric indication. We included drug products administered via oral, intravenous, or intramuscular administration routes, and those with AUC estimates for children in available FDA reports. Our main outcome of interest was the proportion of drugs with median (or mean) pediatric AUC within 20% of the median (or mean) reported adult value. We identified 29 drug products that met inclusion criteria, 14 (48%) of which had mean (or median) AUCs of all submitted age groups within 20% of that in adults. Only route of administration and drug class were associated with pediatric AUC within 20% of adult AUC. Future research is needed to define criteria for and predictors of successful exposure matching of anti-infectives between children and adults. Published by Elsevier Inc.

The FDA alert on suicidality and antiepileptic drugs: Fire or false alarm?

PubMed

Hesdorffer, Dale C; Kanner, Andres M

2009-05-01

In January 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an alert about an increased risk for suicidality in 199 clinical trials of 11 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for three different indications, including epilepsy. An advisory panel voted against a black-box warning on AED labels, and the FDA has accepted this recommendation. We discuss three potential problems with the alert. First, adverse event data were used rather than systematically collected data. Second, the 11 drugs grouped together as a single class of AEDs have different mechanisms of action and very different relative risks, many of which were not statistically significant and some of which were smaller than one. These facts suggest that they should not be grouped as a class. Third, the risk of adverse effects from uncontrolled seizures almost certainly outweighs the small risk of suicidality. We place our comments in the context of a review of the literature on suicidality and depression in epilepsy and the sparse literature on AEDs and suicidality. We recommend that all patients with epilepsy be routinely evaluated for depression, anxiety, and suicidality, and that future clinical trials include validated instruments to systematically assess these conditions to determine whether the possible signal observed by the FDA is real.

78 FR 30317 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-22

...] Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration (Science Board). General Function of the Committee: The...

78 FR 6332 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-30

...] Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration (Science Board). General Function of the Committee: The...

77 FR 51031 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-23

...] Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration (Science Board). General Function of the Committee: The...

21 CFR 5.1110 - FDA public information offices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA public information offices. 5.1110 Section 5.1110 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL ORGANIZATION Organization § 5.1110 FDA public information offices. (a) Division of Dockets Management. The...

21 CFR 5.1110 - FDA public information offices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA public information offices. 5.1110 Section 5.1110 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL ORGANIZATION Organization § 5.1110 FDA public information offices. (a) Division of Dockets Management. The...

21 CFR 5.1110 - FDA public information offices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA public information offices. 5.1110 Section 5.1110 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL ORGANIZATION Organization § 5.1110 FDA public information offices. (a) Division of Dockets Management. The...

21 CFR 5.1110 - FDA public information offices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA public information offices. 5.1110 Section 5.1110 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL ORGANIZATION Organization § 5.1110 FDA public information offices. (a) Division of Dockets Management. The...

21 CFR 5.1110 - FDA public information offices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA public information offices. 5.1110 Section 5.1110 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL ORGANIZATION Organization § 5.1110 FDA public information offices. (a) Division of Dockets Management. The...

75 FR 73984 - Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug Administration

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 1, 14, and 17 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0560] RIN 0910-AG55 Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug Administration AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug...

FDA plan for statutory compliance. Notice of availability.

PubMed

1998-11-24

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a document entitled "FDA Plan for Statutory Compliance" (the plan). This document is the agency's response to section 406(b) of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA), which requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) to develop a plan bringing the agency into compliance with the requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act).

75 FR 32952 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; “‘Harmful and Potentially...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-06-10

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0281] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; ```Harmful and Potentially Harmful... Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.'' This draft guidance provides written guidance to industry and FDA staff...

New era in drug interaction evaluation: US Food and Drug Administration update on CYP enzymes, transporters, and the guidance process.

PubMed

Huang, Shiew-Mei; Strong, John M; Zhang, Lei; Reynolds, Kellie S; Nallani, Srikanth; Temple, Robert; Abraham, Sophia; Habet, Sayed Al; Baweja, Raman K; Burckart, Gilbert J; Chung, Sang; Colangelo, Philip; Frucht, David; Green, Martin D; Hepp, Paul; Karnaukhova, Elena; Ko, Hon-Sum; Lee, Jang-Ik; Marroum, Patrick J; Norden, Janet M; Qiu, Wei; Rahman, Atiqur; Sobel, Solomon; Stifano, Toni; Thummel, Kenneth; Wei, Xiao-Xiong; Yasuda, Sally; Zheng, Jenny H; Zhao, Hong; Lesko, Lawrence J

2008-06-01

Predicting clinically significant drug interactions during drug development is a challenge for the pharmaceutical industry and regulatory agencies. Since the publication of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) first in vitro and in vivo drug interaction guidance documents in 1997 and 1999, researchers and clinicians have gained a better understanding of drug interactions. This knowledge has enabled the FDA and the industry to progress and begin to overcome these challenges. The FDA has continued its efforts to evaluate methodologies to study drug interactions and communicate recommendations regarding the conduct of drug interaction studies, particularly for CYP-based and transporter-based drug interactions, to the pharmaceutical industry. A drug interaction Web site was established to document the FDA's current understanding of drug interactions (http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/drugInteractions/default.htm). This report provides an overview of the evolution of the drug interaction guidances, includes a synopsis of the steps taken by the FDA to revise the original drug interaction guidance documents, and summarizes and highlights updated sections in the current guidance document, Drug Interaction Studies-Study Design, Data Analysis, and Implications for Dosing and Labeling.

76 FR 30175 - Draft Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and FDA Staff: Financial Disclosure by...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-24

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-1999-D-0792] (Formerly FDA-1999-D-0792) Draft Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and FDA Staff: Financial.... SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance...

76 FR 1180 - FDA Transparency Initiative: Improving Transparency to Regulated Industry

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-01-07

...] FDA Transparency Initiative: Improving Transparency to Regulated Industry AGENCY: Food and Drug... the Transparency Initiative, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a report entitled ``FDA Transparency Initiative: Improving Transparency to Regulated Industry.'' The...

OpenFDA: an innovative platform providing access to a wealth of FDA's publicly available data.

PubMed

Kass-Hout, Taha A; Xu, Zhiheng; Mohebbi, Matthew; Nelsen, Hans; Baker, Adam; Levine, Jonathan; Johanson, Elaine; Bright, Roselie A

2016-05-01

The objective of openFDA is to facilitate access and use of big important Food and Drug Administration public datasets by developers, researchers, and the public through harmonization of data across disparate FDA datasets provided via application programming interfaces (APIs). Using cutting-edge technologies deployed on FDA's new public cloud computing infrastructure, openFDA provides open data for easier, faster (over 300 requests per second per process), and better access to FDA datasets; open source code and documentation shared on GitHub for open community contributions of examples, apps and ideas; and infrastructure that can be adopted for other public health big data challenges. Since its launch on June 2, 2014, openFDA has developed four APIs for drug and device adverse events, recall information for all FDA-regulated products, and drug labeling. There have been more than 20 million API calls (more than half from outside the United States), 6000 registered users, 20,000 connected Internet Protocol addresses, and dozens of new software (mobile or web) apps developed. A case study demonstrates a use of openFDA data to understand an apparent association of a drug with an adverse event. With easier and faster access to these datasets, consumers worldwide can learn more about FDA-regulated products. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association. All rights reserved.

75 FR 73951 - Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug Administration

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 1, 14, and 17 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0560] RIN 0910-AG55 Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug Administration AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Direct final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug...

76 FR 41506 - Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff on In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-14

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0215] Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff on In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

Food and Drug Administration Evaluation and Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Kaufman, Annette R.; Waters, Erika A.; Parascandola, Mark; Augustson, Erik M.; Bansal-Travers, Maansi; Hyland, Andrew; Cummings, K. Michael

2011-01-01

Objectives: To examine the relationship between a belief about Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety evaluation of cigarettes and smoking risk perceptions. Methods: A nationally representative, random-digit-dialed telephone survey of 1046 adult current cigarette smokers. Results: Smokers reporting that the FDA does not evaluate cigarettes for…

76 FR 61366 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Draft Proposals for Public Comment to...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0247] Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Draft Proposals for Public Comment to Increase...: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. [[Page 61367

76 FR 61709 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; FDA Form 3728...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-05

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0708] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; FDA Form 3728, Animal...: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed...

76 FR 78933 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-20

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The...

76 FR 17138 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The...

75 FR 14448 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-25

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practices; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop...

Regulatory and scientific issues regarding use of foreign data in support of new drug applications in the United States: an FDA perspective.

PubMed

Khin, N A; Yang, P; Hung, H M J; Maung-U, K; Chen, Y-F; Meeker-O'Connell, A; Okwesili, P; Yasuda, S U; Ball, L K; Huang, S-M; O'Neill, R T; Temple, R

2013-08-01

Globalization of clinical research has led to an increase in clinical trials conducted outside of the United States that are submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in new drug applications. This article discusses the FDA's experience with these submissions in specific therapeutic areas, including the extent of this practice, differences between the effectiveness and safety outcomes of studies conducted inside and outside the United States, and the FDA's approach to acceptance of these trials.

How are drugs approved? Part 1: the evolution of the Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Howland, Robert H

2008-01-01

The discovery, development, and marketing of drugs for clinical use is a process that is complex, arduous, expensive, highly regulated, often criticized, and sometimes controversial. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the governmental agency responsible for regulating the development and marketing of drugs, medical devices, biologics, foods, cosmetics, radiation-emitting electronic devices, and veterinary products, with the objective of ensuring their safety and efficacy. As part of a broad overview of the drug development process, this article will describe the historical evolution of the FDA. This will provide background for two subsequent articles in this series, which will describe the ethical foundations of clinical research and hethe stages of drug development.

78 FR 42381 - Administrative Detention of Drugs Intended for Human or Animal Use

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-15

... drug supply chain. Specifically, FDA will be able to administratively detain drugs encountered during... integrity of the drug supply chain. Specifically, administrative detention is intended to protect the public... better protect the integrity of the drug supply chain. One of those new authorities is section 709, which...

Radiopharmaceutical regulation and Food and Drug Administration policy.

PubMed

Rotman, M; Laven, D; Levine, G

1996-04-01

The regulatory policy of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on radiopharmaceuticals flows from a rigid, traditional, drug-like interpretation of the FDC Act on the licensing of radiopharmaceuticals. This contributes to significant delays in the drug-approval process for radiopharmaceuticals, which are very costly to the nuclear medicine community and the American public. It seems that radiopharmaceuticals would be better characterized as molecular devices. Good generic rule-making principles include: use of a risk/benefit/cost analysis; intent based on sound science; performance standards prepared by outside experts; a definite need shown by the regulatory agency; to live with the consequences of any erroneous cost estimates; and design individual credential requirements so that additional training results in enhanced professional responsibility. When these common elements are applied to current FDA policy, it seems that the agency is out of sync with the stated goals for revitalizing federal regulatory policies as deemed necessary by the Clinton administration. Recent FDA rulings on positron-emission tomography, Patient Package inserts, and on medical device service accentuate the degree of such asynchronization. Radiopharmaceutical review and licensing flexibility could be dramatically improved by excluding radiopharmaceuticals from the drug category and reviewing them as separate entities. This new category would take into account their excellent record of safety and their lack of pharmacological action. Additionally, their evaluation of efficacy should be based on their ability to provide useful scintiphotos, data, or responses of the physiological system it portends to image, quantitate, or describe. To accomplish the goal of transforming the FDA's rigid, prescriptive policy into a streamlined flexible performance-based policy, the Council on Radionuclides and Radiopharmaceuticals proposal has been presented. In addition, it is suggested that the United

75 FR 28622 - FDA Transparency Initiative: Draft Proposals for Public Comment Regarding Disclosure Policies of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0247] FDA Transparency Initiative: Draft Proposals for Public Comment Regarding Disclosure Policies of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION...

Mining FDA drug labels using an unsupervised learning technique--topic modeling.

PubMed

Bisgin, Halil; Liu, Zhichao; Fang, Hong; Xu, Xiaowei; Tong, Weida

2011-10-18

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drug labels contain a broad array of information, ranging from adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to drug efficacy, risk-benefit consideration, and more. However, the labeling language used to describe these information is free text often containing ambiguous semantic descriptions, which poses a great challenge in retrieving useful information from the labeling text in a consistent and accurate fashion for comparative analysis across drugs. Consequently, this task has largely relied on the manual reading of the full text by experts, which is time consuming and labor intensive. In this study, a novel text mining method with unsupervised learning in nature, called topic modeling, was applied to the drug labeling with a goal of discovering "topics" that group drugs with similar safety concerns and/or therapeutic uses together. A total of 794 FDA-approved drug labels were used in this study. First, the three labeling sections (i.e., Boxed Warning, Warnings and Precautions, Adverse Reactions) of each drug label were processed by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) to convert the free text of each label to the standard ADR terms. Next, the topic modeling approach with latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) was applied to generate 100 topics, each associated with a set of drugs grouped together based on the probability analysis. Lastly, the efficacy of the topic modeling was evaluated based on known information about the therapeutic uses and safety data of drugs. The results demonstrate that drugs grouped by topics are associated with the same safety concerns and/or therapeutic uses with statistical significance (P<0.05). The identified topics have distinct context that can be directly linked to specific adverse events (e.g., liver injury or kidney injury) or therapeutic application (e.g., antiinfectives for systemic use). We were also able to identify potential adverse events that might arise from specific

The complications of controlling agency time discretion: FDA review deadlines and postmarket drug safety.

PubMed

Carpenter, Daniel; Chattopadhyay, Jacqueline; Moffitt, Susan; Nall, Clayton

2012-01-01

Public agencies have discretion on the time domain, and politicians deploy numerous policy instruments to constrain it. Yet little is known about how administrative procedures that affect timing also affect the quality of agency decisions. We examine whether administrative deadlines shape decision timing and the observed quality of decisions. Using a unique and rich dataset of FDA drug approvals that allows us to examine decision timing and quality, we find that this administrative tool induces a piling of decisions before deadlines, and that these “just-before-deadline” approvals are linked with higher rates of postmarket safety problems (market withdrawals, severe safety warnings, safety alerts). Examination of data from FDA advisory committees suggests that the deadlines may impede quality by impairing late-stage deliberation and agency risk communication. Our results both support and challenge reigning theories about administrative procedures, suggesting they embody expected control-expertise trade-offs, but may also create unanticipated constituency losses.

FDA direct-to-consumer advertising for prescription drugs: what are consumer preferences and response tendencies?

PubMed

Khanfar, Nile; Loudon, David; Sircar-Ramsewak, Feroza

2007-01-01

The effect of direct-to-consumer (DTC) television advertising of prescription medications is a growing concern of the United States (U.S.) Congress, state legislatures, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This research study was conducted in order to examine consumers' perceived preferences of DTC television advertisement in relation to "reminder" "help-seeking," and "product-claim" FDA-approved advertisement categories. An additional objective was to examine the influence of DTC television advertising of prescription drugs on consumers' tendency to seek more information about the medication and/or the medical condition. The research indicates that DTC television drug ads appear to be insufficient for consumers to make informed decisions. Their mixed perception and acceptance of the advertisements seem to influence them to seek more information from a variety of medical sources.

77 FR 41415 - Single-Ingredient, Immediate-Release Drug Products Containing Oxycodone for Oral Administration...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-13

... INFORMATION CONTACT: Astrid Lopez-Goldberg, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0563] Single-Ingredient, Immediate-Release Drug Products Containing Oxycodone for Oral Administration and...

76 FR 72953 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-11-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No: FDA-2011-N-0002] Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... pace with technical and scientific evolutions in the fields of regulatory science, on formulating an...

How drugs are developed and approved by the FDA: current process and future directions.

PubMed

Ciociola, Arthur A; Cohen, Lawrence B; Kulkarni, Prasad

2014-05-01

This article provides an overview of FDA's regulatory processes for drug development and approval, and the estimated costs associated with the development of a drug, and also examines the issues and challenges facing the FDA in the near future. A literature search was performed using MEDLINE to summarize the current FDA drug approval processes and future directions. MEDLINE was further utilized to search for all cost analysis studies performed to evaluate the pharmaceutical industry R&D productivity and drug development cost estimates. While the drug approval process remains at high risk and spans over multiple years, the FDA drug review and approval process has improved, with the median approval time for new molecular drugs been reduced from 19 months to 10 months. The overall cost to development of a drug remains quite high and has been estimated to range from $868M to $1,241M USD. Several new laws have been enacted, including the FDA Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) of 2013, which is designed to improve the drug approval process and enhance access to new medicines. The FDA's improved processes for drug approval and post-market surveillance have achieved the goal of providing patients with timely access to effective drugs while minimizing the risk of drug-related harm. The FDA drug approval process is not without controversy, as a number of well-known gastroenterology drugs have been withdrawn from the US market over the past few years. With the approval of the new FDASIA law, the FDA will continue to improve their processes and, working together with the ACG through the FDA-Related Matters Committee, continue to develop safe and effective drugs for our patients.

Administrative Destruction of Certain Drugs Refused Admission to the United States. Final rule.

PubMed

2015-09-15

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is implementing its authority to destroy a drug valued at $2,500 or less (or such higher amount as the Secretary of the Treasury may set by regulation) that has been refused admission into the United States under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), by issuing a rule that provides to the owner or consignee notice and an opportunity to appear and introduce testimony to the Agency prior to destruction. This regulation is authorized by amendments made to the FD&C Act by the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA). Implementation of this authority will allow FDA to better protect the public health by providing an administrative process for the destruction of certain refused drugs, thus increasing the integrity of the drug supply chain.

ClinicalTrials.gov and Drugs@FDA: A comparison of results reporting for new drug approval trials

PubMed Central

Schwartz, Lisa M.; Woloshin, Steven; Zheng, Eugene; Tse, Tony; Zarin, Deborah A.

2016-01-01

Background Pharmaceutical companies and other trial sponsors must submit certain trial results to ClinicalTrials.gov. The validity of these results is unclear. Purpose To validate results posted on ClinicalTrials.gov against publicly-available FDA reviews on Drugs@FDA. Data sources ClinicalTrials.gov (registry and results database) and Drugs@FDA (medical/statistical reviews). Study selection 100 parallel-group, randomized trials for new drug approvals (1/2013 – 7/2014) with results posted on ClinicalTrials.gov (3/15/2015). Data extraction Two assessors systematically extracted, and another verified, trial design, primary/secondary outcomes, adverse events, and deaths. Results The 100 trials were mostly phase 3 (90%) double-blind (92%), placebo-controlled (73%), representing 32 drugs from 24 companies. Of 137 primary outcomes from ClinicalTrials.gov, 134 (98%) had corresponding data in Drugs@FDA, 130 (95%) had concordant definitions, and 107 (78%) had concordant results; most differences were nominal (i.e. relative difference < 10%). Of 100 trials, primary outcome results in 14 could not be validated . Of 1,927 secondary outcomes from ClinicalTrials.gov, 1,061 (55%) definitions could be validated and 367 (19%) had results. Of 96 trials with ≥ 1 serious adverse event in either source, 14 could be compared and 7 were discordant. Of 62 trials with ≥ 1 death in either source, 25 could be compared and 17 were discordant. Limitations Unknown generalizability to uncontrolled or crossover trial results. Conclusion Primary outcome definitions and results were largely concordant between ClinicalTrials.gov and Drugs@FDA. Half of secondary outcomes could not be validated because Drugs@FDA only includes “key outcomes” for regulatory decision-making; nor could serious adverse events and deaths because Drugs@FDA frequently only includes results aggregated across multiple trials. PMID:27294570

78 FR 14557 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Investigational Device Exemption...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0010] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Investigational Device Exemption Guidance for Retinal Prostheses; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The...

77 FR 49449 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The Food...

77 FR 49448 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001] Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Compliance, and Good Clinical Practice; Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The Food...

76 FR 32367 - Draft Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and FDA Staff: Financial Disclosure by...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-1999-D-0742 (formerly Docket No. 1999D-4396)] Draft Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and FDA Staff...: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice that appeared...

Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration as a Tobacco Regulator

PubMed Central

Jarman, Kristen L.; Ranney, Leah M.; Baker, Hannah M.; Vallejos, Quirina M.; Goldstein, Adam O.

2017-01-01

Objectives The U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) now has regulatory authority over all tobacco products. Little is known about public awareness and perceptions of FDA in their new role as a tobacco regulator. This research utilizes focus groups to examine perceptions of FDA as a tobacco regulator so that FDA can better communicate with the public about this role. Methods We conducted 6 focus groups in 2014 among a diverse sample of smokers and non-smokers. Participants were asked if they had heard of FDA, what they knew about FDA, if they associated FDA with tobacco, and their thoughts about this FDA role. Results A total of 41 individuals participated. Although nearly all participants had heard of FDA, most were not aware of FDA’s regulatory authority over tobacco products, did not associate the role of FDA with tobacco, and some drew comparisons between FDA’s work in tobacco and their work regulating food and drugs. Conclusion Data suggest that although public awareness of FDA regulatory authority over tobacco is low, with proper public education, the public may find FDA to be a trustworthy source of tobacco regulation. PMID:29051917

Larval Zebrafish Model for FDA-Approved Drug Repositioning for Tobacco Dependence Treatment

PubMed Central

Cousin, Margot A.; Ebbert, Jon O.; Wiinamaki, Amanda R.; Urban, Mark D.; Argue, David P.; Ekker, Stephen C.; Klee, Eric W.

2014-01-01

Cigarette smoking remains the most preventable cause of death and excess health care costs in the United States, and is a leading cause of death among alcoholics. Long-term tobacco abstinence rates are low, and pharmacotherapeutic options are limited. Repositioning medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may efficiently provide clinicians with new treatment options. We developed a drug-repositioning paradigm using larval zebrafish locomotion and established predictive clinical validity using FDA-approved smoking cessation therapeutics. We evaluated 39 physician-vetted medications for nicotine-induced locomotor activation blockade. We further evaluated candidate medications for altered ethanol response, as well as in combination with varenicline for nicotine-response attenuation. Six medications specifically inhibited the nicotine response. Among this set, apomorphine and topiramate blocked both nicotine and ethanol responses. Both positively interact with varenicline in the Bliss Independence test, indicating potential synergistic interactions suggesting these are candidates for translation into Phase II clinical trials for smoking cessation. PMID:24658307

Comparative Assessment of Off-label and Unlicensed Drug Prescriptions in Children: FDA Versus ANSM Guidelines.

PubMed

Berdkan, Sandra; Rabbaa, Lara; Hajj, Aline; Eid, Bassam; Jabbour, Hicham; Osta, Nada El; Karam, Latife; Khabbaz, Lydia Rabbaa

2016-08-01

The main objectives of this study were to assess the incidence of off-label (OL) and/or unlicensed (UL) prescriptions in a sample of pediatric Lebanese patients by using US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the French Medical Regulatory Authority (ANSM) regulations. The goal was to analyze the divergences between regulations and to identify those drugs most commonly involved in OL-UL utilization. This study was a retrospective analysis (500 pediatric files) conducted in a Lebanese University hospital in 3 pediatric wards (chronic diseases, acute diseases, and the pediatric intensive care unit). The frequency of OL-UL drug use was significantly different between pediatric wards (P < 0.001), with the highest incidence occurring in the intensive care unit. The most frequent OL-UL prescriptions occurred with cancer (oncology) admissions. Age was significantly related to OL-UL frequency (highest incidence in children aged between 0 and 1 year). The number of drugs prescribed per patient ranged between 1 and 20 (mean [SD], 4.13 [2.6]). The incidence of OL-UL prescriptions was significantly higher in patients treated with a greater number of medicines (P < 0.001). Overall, 58.9% of drug prescriptions were authorized according to ANSM and 50.7% according to FDA regulations; 11.1% (ANSM) and 15.8% (FDA) were UL, and 30.2% (ANSM) and 33.5% (FDA), respectively, were OL use (where OL for the indication were the most common). The highest percentage of OL-UL prescriptions was seen with the following groups: blood and blood-forming organs, genitourinary system, and sex hormones. Divergence between FDA and ANSM was mainly observed for OL medicines. UL prescriptions assessed according to both regulations showed similar results. This study highlights the need for prescribers to continuously examine updates to official regulations to avoid using an OL-UL drug whenever possible. It also calls for better harmonization between worldwide official guidelines concerning drugs used in

Use of data mining at the Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Duggirala, Hesha J; Tonning, Joseph M; Smith, Ella; Bright, Roselie A; Baker, John D; Ball, Robert; Bell, Carlos; Bright-Ponte, Susan J; Botsis, Taxiarchis; Bouri, Khaled; Boyer, Marc; Burkhart, Keith; Condrey, G Steven; Chen, James J; Chirtel, Stuart; Filice, Ross W; Francis, Henry; Jiang, Hongying; Levine, Jonathan; Martin, David; Oladipo, Taiye; O'Neill, Rene; Palmer, Lee Anne M; Paredes, Antonio; Rochester, George; Sholtes, Deborah; Szarfman, Ana; Wong, Hui-Lee; Xu, Zhiheng; Kass-Hout, Taha

2016-03-01

This article summarizes past and current data mining activities at the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We address data miners in all sectors, anyone interested in the safety of products regulated by the FDA (predominantly medical products, food, veterinary products and nutrition, and tobacco products), and those interested in FDA activities. Topics include routine and developmental data mining activities, short descriptions of mined FDA data, advantages and challenges of data mining at the FDA, and future directions of data mining at the FDA. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2015. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA action on applications. 812.30 Section 812.30...) MEDICAL DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Application and Administrative Action § 812.30 FDA action on applications. (a) Approval or disapproval. FDA will notify the sponsor in writing of the date...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA action on applications. 812.30 Section 812.30...) MEDICAL DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Application and Administrative Action § 812.30 FDA action on applications. (a) Approval or disapproval. FDA will notify the sponsor in writing of the date...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA action on applications. 812.30 Section 812.30...) MEDICAL DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Application and Administrative Action § 812.30 FDA action on applications. (a) Approval or disapproval. FDA will notify the sponsor in writing of the date...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA action on applications. 812.30 Section 812.30...) MEDICAL DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Application and Administrative Action § 812.30 FDA action on applications. (a) Approval or disapproval. FDA will notify the sponsor in writing of the date...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA action on applications. 812.30 Section 812.30...) MEDICAL DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Application and Administrative Action § 812.30 FDA action on applications. (a) Approval or disapproval. FDA will notify the sponsor in writing of the date...

78 FR 19492 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Formal Meetings Between FDA and Biosimilar Biological Product...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-01

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0286] Draft Guidance for Industry on Formal Meetings Between FDA and Biosimilar Biological Product Sponsors or... Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled...

78 FR 277 - Food and Drug Administration Actions Related to Nicotine Replacement Therapies and Smoking...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-03

... Dependence; Public Hearing; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notification of public hearing; Extension of comment period. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 15 [Docket No...

78 FR 51732 - The Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency Orphan Product Designation and Grant...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001] The Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency Orphan Product Designation and Grant Public Workshop AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. The Food and Drug...

Food and Drug Administration: Helping pharmacists ensure that patients receive high-quality medicines.

PubMed

Kremzner, Mary

2016-01-01

Ensuring that the drugs patients take are safe and effective is critical to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) mission and a major reason for testing an active pharmaceutical ingredient or currently marketed drug product. To address gaps in the assessment of drug quality, FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) has created the Office of Pharmaceutical Quality (OPQ). This newly formed "super-office" within CDER launched a concerted new strategy that enhances the surveillance of drug manufacturing and will bring a comprehensive approach to quality oversight. With OPQ and these new performance measures in place, FDA can sharpen its focus on issues critical to quality and can identify and respond to manufacturing issues before they become major systemic problems. Published by Elsevier Inc.

The Food and Drug Administration advisory committees and panels: how they are applied to the drug regulatory process.

PubMed

Ciociola, Arthur A; Karlstadt, Robyn G; Pambianco, Daniel J; Woods, Karen L; Ehrenpreis, Eli D

2014-10-01

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panels and committees play a critical role in advising the FDA on the safety and efficacy of medical devices and drugs marketed in the US. Advisory panel recommendations are used by the FDA to make decisions regarding medical products. Currently, the FDA utilizes over 50 advisory panels that serve the three major FDA centers, including the Centers for Biologics, Drugs and Device Products. Members of an advisory panel typically include academicians, clinicians, consumers, patients, and industry representatives. The FDA establishes the schedules for advisory panel meetings on an annual basis and a panel usually meets several times a year for two consecutive days in Washington, DC. Typically, the advisory panel discusses issues highlighted by the FDA and is then asked to vote a response to the questions posed in advance by the FDA. Advisory panel recommendations have a strong influence on FDA's decision to approve a product, as evidenced by the 214 Advisory Panels FDA convened between January 2008 to November 2012, during which advisory panel members voted to approve the product (or use of the product) ∼74% of the time, with FDA ultimately approving the medical product (or use of the product) ∼79% of the time. The ACG membership are encouraged to consider serving the public's interest by participating in an FDA advisory panel utilizing their expertise for the evaluation of a new drug or medical device, and providing advice about whether the product should be sold in the US.

75 FR 22819 - Considerations Regarding Food and Drug Administration Review and Regulation of Articles for the...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-30

... Diseases; Public Hearing AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public hearing; request for comment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public hearing... with rare diseases, a recent public law (Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration...

76 FR 789 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Section 905(j) Reports...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-01-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0635] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Section 905(j) Reports: Demonstrating Substantial Equivalence for Tobacco Products; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION...

75 FR 47603 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Recommendations for Premarket...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0395] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Recommendations for Premarket Notifications for Lamotrigine and Zonisamide Assays; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS...

76 FR 50740 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Procedures for Handling...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0514] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Procedures for Handling Section 522 Postmarket Surveillance Studies; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice...

78 FR 20116 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Glass Syringes for Delivering...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-03

...] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Glass Syringes for Delivering Drug... and FDA staff entitled ``Glass Syringes for Delivering Drug and Biological Products: Technical... supplemental data are necessary for FDA to ensure the safe and effective use of glass syringes that comply with...

Current FDA directives for promoting public health

DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI.GOV)

Hayes, A.H. Jr.

1982-03-01

The current directions of the FDA are outlined. The underlying philosophy of the FDA under the Reagan Administration is that both the private sector and the government must address the responsibilities to which they are best suited for the health-care system to work more efficiently. To facilitate this, FDA is conducting comprehensive reviews of FDA regulations and the drug-evaluation process. There are many dimensions to promoting public health, and the FDA alone cannot assure an adequate supply of safe and effective drugs. Innovative science and technology are needed to develop new drugs, followed by maximum potentiation (maximum good and leastmore » harm) after FDA approval. Hospital pharmacists have a role in maximizing the potential benefits of drugs through pharmacy and therapeutics committees. The current status of the pilot program for patient package inserts is described. The response at a recent hearing on the program indicates that the responsibility to protect the public health is shared by the government, health professions, industry, and the public. The FDA's campaign on sodium is based on that shared responsibility. By improving communication and building upon their common objections, both pharmacy and the FDA can do their jobs successfully.« less

Prescription Drug Promotion from 2001-2014: Data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration

PubMed Central

Sullivan, Helen W.; Aikin, Kathryn J.; Chung-Davies, Eunice; Wade, Michael

2016-01-01

The volume of prescription drug promotion over time is often measured by assessing changes in ad spending. However, this method obscures the fact that some types of advertising are more expensive than others. Another way to measure the changes in prescription drug promotion over time is to assess the number of promotional pieces submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Form FDA 2253 collects information such as the date submitted and the type of material submitted. We analyzed data from Forms FDA 2253 received from 2001–2014. We examined the frequency of submissions by audience (consumer and healthcare professional) and type of promotional material. There was a noted increase in prescription drug promotion submissions across all media in the early 2000s. Although non-Internet promotion submissions have since plateaued, Internet promotion continued to increase. These results can help public health advocates and regulators focus attention and resources. PMID:27149513

Neonatal Safety Information Reported to the FDA During Drug Development Studies

PubMed Central

Avant, Debbie; Baer, Gerri; Moore, Jason; Zheng, Panli; Sorbello, Alfred; Ariagno, Ron; Yao, Lynne; Burckart, Gilbert J.; Wang, Jian

2017-01-01

Background Relatively few neonatal drug development studies have been conducted, but an increase is expected with the enactment of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA). Understanding the safety of drugs studied in neonates is complicated by the unique nature of the population and the level of illness. The objective of this study was to examine neonatal safety data submitted to the FDA in studies pursuant to the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) and the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) between 1998 and 2015. Methods FDA databases were searched for BPCA and/or PREA studies that enrolled neonates. Studies that enrolled a minimum of 3 neonates were analyzed for the presence and content of neonatal safety data. Results The analysis identified 40 drugs that were studied in 3 or more neonates. Of the 40 drugs, 36 drugs received a pediatric labeling change as a result of studies between 1998 and 2015, that included information from studies including neonates. Fourteen drugs were approved for use in neonates. Clinical trials for 20 of the drugs reported serious adverse events (SAEs) in neonates. The SAEs primarily involved cardiovascular events such as bradycardia and/or hypotension or laboratory abnormalities such as anemia, neutropenia, and electrolyte disturbances. Deaths were reported during studies of 9 drugs. Conclusions Our analysis revealed that SAEs were reported in studies involving 20 of the 40 drugs evaluated in neonates, with deaths identified in 9 of those studies. Patients enrolled in studies were often critically ill, which complicated determination of whether an adverse event was drug-related. We conclude that the traditional means for collecting safety information in drug development trials needs to be adjusted for neonates and will require the collaboration of regulators, industry, and the clinical and research communities to establish appropriate definitions and reporting strategies for the neonatal

78 FR 44574 - Third Annual Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-24

... . Contact: Brenda Rose, Office of Special Health Issues, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD 20993... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001] Third Annual Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference AGENCY: Food and...

Methodological approaches to evaluate the impact of FDA drug safety communications.

PubMed

Kesselheim, Aaron S; Campbell, Eric G; Schneeweiss, Sebastian; Rausch, Paula; Lappin, Brian M; Zhou, Esther H; Seeger, John D; Brownstein, John S; Woloshin, Steven; Schwartz, Lisa M; Toomey, Timothy; Dal Pan, Gerald J; Avorn, Jerry

2015-06-01

When the US FDA approves a new prescription drug there is still a great deal remaining to be learned about the safe and proper use of that product. When new information addressing these topics emerges post-approval, the FDA may issue a Drug Safety Communication (DSC) to alert patients and physicians. The effectiveness of the communication-how drug safety messaging conveyed in FDA DSCs changes patient or prescriber behavior-may depend on multiple factors, including the way physicians and patients learn about the information, their understanding of the issues conveyed, and their perception of the importance of the information. In 2013, the FDA issued two DSCs addressing critical new warnings related to products containing the sedative/hypnotic zolpidem. In this article, we describe a core set of research initiatives that can be used to study how zolpidem-related DSCs affected subsequent physician and patient decision making. These research initiatives include analyzing drug utilization patterns and related health outcomes; comparing zolpidem-containing products against a comparator with similar indications [eszopiclone (Lunesta)] not covered by the 2013 DSCs; and surveying patients and qualitatively evaluating the dissemination of information regarding these drugs in traditional and social-media channels. Using an integrated, multidisciplinary approach, we can obtain information that can be used to optimize regulatory communications by seeking to understand the impact of the information contained in FDA risk communications.

76 FR 30727 - Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act: Focus on Inspections and Compliance

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0366] Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act: Focus on Inspections and Compliance AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments. SUMMARY: The...

78 FR 5185 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Humanitarian Use Device (HUD...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-24

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0847] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Humanitarian Use Device (HUD) Designations... public comment ``Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Humanitarian Use...

Access to F.D.A. Information.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Sinovic, Dianna

Prior to the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), little of the data collected by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was made public or could be obtained from the agency. Although the FDA files are now open, information is considered exempt from public disclosure when it involves regulatory procedures, program guidelines, work…

General administrative rulings and decisions; amendment to the examination and investigation sample requirements; companion document to direct final rule--FDA. Proposed rule.

PubMed

1998-09-25

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend its regulations regarding the collection of twice the quantity of food, drug, or cosmetic estimated to be sufficient for analysis. This action increases the dollar amount that FDA will consider to determine whether to routinely collect a reserve sample of a food, drug, or cosmetic product in addition to the quantity sufficient for analysis. Experience has demonstrated that the current dollar amount does not adequately cover the cost of most quantities sufficient for analysis plus reserve samples. This proposed rule is a companion to the direct final rule published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register. This action is part of FDA's continuing effort to achieve the objectives of the President's "Reinventing Government" initiative, and it is intended to reduce the burden of unnecessary regulations on food, drugs, and cosmetics without diminishing the protection of the public health.

75 FR 74063 - Supplemental Funding Under the Food and Drug Administration's Convener of Active Medical Product...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0576] Supplemental Funding Under the Food and Drug Administration's Convener of Active Medical Product Surveillance Discussions (U13) RFA- FD-09-012; Request for Supplemental Application AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration...

Comparison of Unlicensed and Off-Label Use of Antipsychotics Prescribed to Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Outpatients for Treatment of Mental and Behavioral Disorders with Different Guidelines: The China Food and Drug Administration Versus the FDA.

PubMed

Zhu, Xiuqing; Hu, Jinqing; Sun, Bin; Deng, Shuhua; Wen, Yuguan; Chen, Weijia; Qiu, Chang; Shang, Dewei; Zhang, Ming

2018-04-01

This study aims to compare the prevalence of unlicensed and off-label use of antipsychotics among child and adolescent psychiatric outpatients with guidelines proposed by the China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to identify factors associated with inconsistencies between the two regulations. A retrospective analysis of 29,326 drug prescriptions for child and adolescent outpatients from the Affiliated Brain Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University was conducted. Antipsychotics were classified as "unlicensed" or "off-label use" according to the latest pediatric license information registered by the CFDA and the FDA or the package inserts of antipsychotics authorized by the CFDA or the FDA for the treatment of pediatric mental and behavioral disorders, respectively. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to assess factors associated with inconsistencies between the two regulations. The total unlicensed use, according to the CFDA analysis, was higher than that found in the FDA analysis (74.14% vs. 22.04%, p < 0.001). However, the total off-label use, according to the FDA analysis, was higher than that found in the CFDA analysis (46.53% vs. 15.77%, p < 0.001). Antipsychotic drug classes, age group, number of diagnoses, and diagnosis of schizophrenia and schizotypal and delusional disorders were associated with inconsistent unlicensed use. Antipsychotic drug classes, age group, number of prescribed psychotropic drugs, gender, diagnosis of schizophrenia and schizotypal and delusional disorders, diagnosis of mood [affective] disorders, diagnosis of mental retardation, and diagnosis of psychological development disorders were associated with inconsistent off-label use. The difference in prevalence of total unlicensed and off-label use of antipsychotics between the two regulations was statistically significant. This inconsistency could be partly attributed to differences in pediatric license

77 FR 52036 - Privacy Act of 1974; Report of a New System of Records; FDA Records Related to Research...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0253] Privacy Act of 1974; Report of a New System of Records; FDA Records Related to Research Misconduct... Drug Administration's (FDA's) regulations for the protection of privacy, FDA is publishing notice of a...

Responding rapidly to FDA drug withdrawals: design and application of a new approach for a consumer health website.

PubMed

Embi, Peter J; Acharya, Prasad; McCuistion, Mark; Kishman, Charles P; Haag, Doris; Marine, Stephen

2006-09-06

Information about drug withdrawals may not reach patients in a timely manner, and this could result in adverse events. Increasingly, the public turns to consumer health websites for health information, but such sites may not update their content for days or weeks following important events like Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug withdrawal actions. There is no recognized standard for how quickly consumer health websites should respond to such events, and reports addressing this issue are lacking. The objective of this study was to develop and implement an approach to enhance the efficiency with which a consumer health website (NetWellness.org) responds to FDA drug withdrawal actions. Evaluation of the current approach used by NetWellness staff to update content affected by FDA action revealed a slow process driven by the goal of performing thorough and comprehensive review and editing. To achieve our desired goal of accurately updating affected content within 24 hours of FDA action, we developed a strategy that included rapid updating of affected Web pages with warning boxes and hyperlinks to the information about the withdrawal. With the next FDA withdrawal event, that of valdecoxib (Bextra) on April 7, 2005, we applied this new approach, observed the time and resource requirements, and monitored the rate at which consumers viewed the updated information to gauge its potential impact. Application of the new approach allowed one person to modify the affected Web pages in less than 1 hour and within 18 hours of the FDA announcement. Using the old strategy, response to a similar event, the withdrawal of rofecoxib (Vioxx) 6 months earlier, had taken over 3 weeks and the efforts of several personnel. Updated valdecoxib content received 188 hits within the first month and 4285 hits within 1 year. Rapid updating of a consumer health website's content in response to an FDA drug withdrawal event was easily accomplished by applying the approach described. This allowed

77 FR 14403 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0167] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Norovirus Serological Reagents; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice...

FDA Approval for Imiquimod

Cancer.gov

On July 15, 2004, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the approval of a new indication for Aldara® (imiquimod) topical cream for the treatment of superficial basal cell carcinoma (sBCC), a type of skin cancer.

75 FR 17418 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004] Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of Health and... understanding (MOU) between the Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and...

Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: Teaching Drug Marketers How to Inform Better or Spin Better? Comment on "Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A Content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters".

PubMed

Doran, Evan

2016-02-21

Hyosun Kim's report "Trouble Spots in Online Direct to Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters" aims to teach marketers how to avoid breaching current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines in their online drug promotion. While Kim hopes to minimise the potential for online promotion to misinform consumers and the study is carefully conducted, teaching drug marketers how to avoid the common mistakes in online drug promotion is more likely to make marketers more adept at spinning information than appropriately balancing it. © 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

Clinical Evidence Supporting US Food and Drug Administration Approval of Otolaryngologic Prescription Drug Indications, 2005-2014.

PubMed

Rathi, Vinay K; Wang, Bo; Ross, Joseph S; Downing, Nicholas S; Kesselheim, Aaron S; Gray, Stacey T

2017-04-01

Objective The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves indications for prescription drugs based on premarket pivotal clinical studies designed to demonstrate safety and efficacy. We characterized the pivotal studies supporting FDA approval of otolaryngologic prescription drug indications. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Setting Publicly available FDA documents. Subjects Recently approved (2005-2014) prescription drug indications for conditions treated by otolaryngologists or their multidisciplinary teams. Drugs could be authorized for treatment of otolaryngologic disease upon initial approval (original indications) or thereafter via supplemental applications (supplemental indications). Methods Pivotal studies were categorized by enrollment, randomization, blinding, comparator type, and primary endpoint. Results Between 2005 and 2014, the FDA approved 48 otolaryngologic prescription drug indications based on 64 pivotal studies, including 21 original indications (19 drugs, 31 studies) and 27 supplemental indications (18 drugs, 33 studies). Median enrollment was 299 patients (interquartile range, 198-613) for original indications and 197 patients (interquartile range, 64-442) for supplemental indications. Most indications were supported by ≥1 randomized study (original: 20/21 [95%], supplemental: 21/27 [78%]) and ≥1 double-blinded study (original: 14/21 [67%], supplemental: 17/27 [63%]). About half of original indications (9/21 [43%]) and one-quarter of supplemental indications (7/27 [26%]) were supported by ≥1 active-controlled study. Nearly half (original: 8/21 [38%], supplemental: 14/27 [52%]) of all indications were approved based exclusively on studies using surrogate markers as primary endpoints. Conclusion The quality of clinical evidence supporting FDA approval of otolaryngologic prescription drug indications varied widely. Otolaryngologists should consider limitations in premarket evidence when helping patients make informed

Trends in utilization of FDA expedited drug development and approval programs, 1987-2014: cohort study.

PubMed

Kesselheim, Aaron S; Wang, Bo; Franklin, Jessica M; Darrow, Jonathan J

2015-09-23

To evaluate the use of special expedited development and review pathways at the US Food and Drug Administration over the past two decades. Cohort study. FDA approved novel therapeutics between 1987 and 2014. Publicly available sources provided each drug's year of approval, their innovativeness (first in class versus not first in class), World Health Organization Anatomic Therapeutic Classification, and which (if any) of the FDA's four primary expedited development and review programs or designations were associated with each drug: orphan drug, fast track, accelerated approval, and priority review. Logistic regression models evaluated trends in the proportion of drugs associated with each of the four expedited development and review programs. To evaluate the number of programs associated with each approved drug over time, Poisson models were employed, with the number of programs as the dependent variable and a linear term for year of approval. The difference in trends was compared between drugs that were first in class and those that were not. The FDA approved 774 drugs during the study period, with one third representing first in class agents. Priority review (43%) was the most prevalent of the four programs, with accelerated approval (9%) the least common. There was a significant increase of 2.6% per year in the number of expedited review and approval programs granted to each newly approved agent (incidence rate ratio 1.026, 95% confidence interval 1.017 to 1.035, P<0.001), and a 2.4% increase in the proportion of drugs associated with at least one such program (odds ratio 1.024, 95% confidence interval 1.006 to 1.043, P=0.009). Driving this trend was an increase in the proportion of approved, non-first in class drugs associated with at least one program for drugs (P=0.03 for interaction). In the past two decades, drugs newly approved by the FDA have been associated with an increasing number of expedited development or review programs. Though expedited programs

76 FR 77542 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Humanitarian Use Device...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-13

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0847] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Humanitarian Use Device Designations; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and...

76 FR 51993 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on In Vitro Companion...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0215] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; extension...

76 FR 36543 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Applying Human Factors and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-22

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0469] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Applying Human Factors and Usability Engineering To Optimize Medical Device Design; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION...

78 FR 14305 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Types of Communication During...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-05

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0147] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Types of Communication During the Review of Medical Device Submissions; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION...

21 CFR 14.171 - Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... initiative of FDA. 14.171 Section 14.171 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH... Human Prescription Drugs § 14.171 Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. (a) Any... monitoring of the matter and consultation with FDA on behalf of the committee. The member or consultant may...

21 CFR 14.171 - Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... initiative of FDA. 14.171 Section 14.171 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH... Human Prescription Drugs § 14.171 Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. (a) Any... monitoring of the matter and consultation with FDA on behalf of the committee. The member or consultant may...

21 CFR 14.171 - Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... initiative of FDA. 14.171 Section 14.171 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH... Human Prescription Drugs § 14.171 Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. (a) Any... monitoring of the matter and consultation with FDA on behalf of the committee. The member or consultant may...

21 CFR 14.171 - Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... initiative of FDA. 14.171 Section 14.171 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH... Human Prescription Drugs § 14.171 Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. (a) Any... monitoring of the matter and consultation with FDA on behalf of the committee. The member or consultant may...

76 FR 64354 - Burden of Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act Fee Amounts on Small...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-18

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0529] Burden of Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act Fee Amounts on Small Business; Extension of Comment Period AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; extension of comment...

78 FR 102 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; eCopy Program for Medical Device...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1056] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; eCopy Program for Medical Device Submissions; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug...

77 FR 11550 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Notification to Food and Drug Administration of Issues That May...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-27

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0140] Draft Guidance for Industry on Notification to Food and Drug Administration of Issues That May Result in a Prescription Drug Shortage; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice...

Network Analysis of Drug-target Interactions: A Study on FDA-approved New Molecular Entities Between 2000 to 2015.

PubMed

Lin, Hui-Heng; Zhang, Le-Le; Yan, Ru; Lu, Jin-Jian; Hu, Yuanjia

2017-09-25

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves new drugs every year. Drug targets are some of the most important interactive molecules for drugs, as they have a significant impact on the therapeutic effects of drugs. In this work, we thoroughly analyzed the data of small molecule drugs approved by the U.S. FDA between 2000 and 2015. Specifically, we focused on seven classes of new molecular entity (NME) classified by the anatomic therapeutic chemical (ATC) classification system. They were NMEs and their corresponding targets for the cardiovascular system, respiratory system, nerve system, general anti-infective systemic, genito-urinary system and sex hormones, alimentary tract and metabolisms, and antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents. To study the drug-target interaction on the systems level, we employed network topological analysis and multipartite network projections. As a result, the drug-target relations of different kinds of drugs were comprehensively characterized and global pictures of drug-target, drug-drug, and target-target interactions were visualized and analyzed from the perspective of network models.

78 FR 13070 - Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Financial...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-26

... http://www.fda.gov/ScienceResearch/SpecialTopics/RunningClinicalTrials/GuidancesInformationSheetsand...] (formerly 1999D-4396) Guidance for Clinical Investigators, Industry, and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Financial Disclosure by Clinical Investigators; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS...

Examining the FDA's oversight of direct-to-consumer advertising.

PubMed

Gahart, Martin T; Duhamel, Louise M; Dievler, Anne; Price, Roseanne

2003-01-01

Our analysis examined the effects of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) 1997 draft guidance regarding advertisements for prescription drugs broadcast directly to consumers. We found that although direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising spending by pharmaceutical companies has increased, more than 80 percent of their promotional spending is directed to physicians. DTC advertising appears to increase the use of prescription drugs among consumers. The FDA's oversight has not prevented companies from making misleading claims in subsequent advertisements, and a recent policy change has lengthened the FDA's review process, raising the possibility that some misleading campaigns could run their course before review.

76 FR 36133 - Draft Guidances for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Classification of Products...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0429] Draft Guidances for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: Classification of Products as Drugs... Action'' in the Definition of Device Under Section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act...

77 FR 43846 - Food and Drug Administration Pediatric Medical Devices Workshop; Notice of Workshop

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001... Products Development is announcing the following workshop: FDA Pediatric Medical Devices Workshop. This meeting is intended to focus on challenges in pediatric device development--namely, business planning and...

A Comparative Review of Waivers Granted in Pediatric Drug Development by FDA and EMA from 2007-2013.

PubMed

Egger, Gunter F; Wharton, Gerold T; Malli, Suzanne; Temeck, Jean; Murphy, M Dianne; Tomasi, Paolo

2016-09-01

The European Union and the United States have different legal frameworks in place for pediatric drug development, which can potentially lead to different pediatric research requirements for the pharmaceutical industry. This manuscript compares pediatric clinical trial waivers granted by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This is a retrospective review comparing EMA's Paediatric Committee (PDCO) decisions with FDA's Pediatric Review Committee (PeRC) recommendations for all product-specific pediatric full waiver applications submitted to EMA from January 2007 through December 2013. Using baseline data from EMA, we matched product-specific waivers with their FDA equivalents during the study period. For single active substance products, PDCO and PeRC adopted similar opinions in 42 of 49 indications (86%). For fixed-dose combinations, PDCO and PeRC adopted similar opinions in 24 of 31 indications (77%). Despite the different legal frameworks, criteria, and processes of determination, the waiver decisions of the 2 agencies were similar in the majority of cases.

Medical devices; exemptions from premarket notification; class II devices--FDA, Final rule.

PubMed

1998-11-03

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is codifying the exemption from premarket notification of all 62 class II (special controls) devices listed as exempt in a January 21, 1998, Federal Register notice, subject to the limitations on exemptions. FDA has determined that for these exempted devices, manufacturers' submissions of premarket notifications are unnecessary to provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. These devices will remain subject to current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations and other general controls. This rulemaking implements new authorities delegated to FDA under the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA).

Environmental assessments and findings of no significant impact--FDA. Notice.

PubMed

1998-05-18

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that it has reviewed environmental assessments (EA's) and issued findings of no significant impact (FONSI's) relating to the 167 new drug applications (NDA's) and supplemental applications listed in this document. FDA is publishing this notice because Federal regulations require public notice of the availability of environmental documents.

Discovery of FDA-Approved Drugs that Promote Retinal Cell Survival or Regeneration

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-10-01

1 AD______________ AWARD NUMBER: W81XWH-14-1-0407 TITLE:Discovery of FDA-Approved Drugs that Promote Retinal Cell Survival or Regeneration...SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER W81XWH-14-1-0407Discovery of FDA-Approved Drugs that Promote Retinal Cell Survival or Regeneration 5c...vivo drug discovery platform named Automated Reporter Quantification in vivo (ARQiv). ARQiv quantifies reporter activity in transgenic zebrafish at

75 FR 31450 - Memorandum of Understanding by and Between the United States Food and Drug Administration and the...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-06-03

... Administration and the International Anesthesia Research Society for the Safety of Key Inhaled and Intravenous Drugs in Pediatrics Public-Private Partnership AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004...

78 FR 28228 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Best Practices for Conducting and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-14

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0057] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Best Practices for Conducting and Reporting Pharmacoepidemiologic Safety Studies Using Electronic Healthcare Data; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration...

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Cancer Drug Development and US Regulatory Review: Perspectives From Industry, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Patient.

PubMed

Basch, Ethan; Geoghegan, Cindy; Coons, Stephen Joel; Gnanasakthy, Ari; Slagle, Ashley F; Papadopoulos, Elektra J; Kluetz, Paul G

2015-06-01

Data reported directly by patients about how they feel and function are rarely included in oncology drug labeling in the United States, in contrast to Europe and to nononcology labeling in the United States, where this practice is more common. Multiple barriers exist, including challenges unique to oncology trials, and industry's concerns regarding cost, logistical complexities, and the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) rigorous application of its 2009 guidance on the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. A panel consisting of representatives of industry, FDA, the PRO Consortium, clinicians, and patients was assembled at a 2014 workshop cosponsored by FDA to identify practical recommendations for overcoming these barriers. Key recommendations included increasing proactive encouragement by FDA to clinical trial sponsors for including PROs in drug development programs; provision of comprehensive PRO plans by sponsors to FDA early in drug development; promotion of an oncology-specific PRO research agenda; development of an approach to existing ("legacy") PRO measures, when appropriate (focused initially on symptoms and functional status); and increased FDA and industry training in PRO methodology. FDA has begun implementing several of these recommendations.

Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A Content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters.

PubMed

Kim, Hyosun

2015-08-25

For the purpose of understanding the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) concerns regarding online promotion of prescription drugs advertised directly to consumers, this study examines notices of violations (NOVs) and warning letters issued by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers. The FDA's warning letters and NOVs, which were issued to pharmaceutical companies over a 10-year period (2005 to 2014) regarding online promotional activities, were content-analyzed. Six violation categories were identified: risk information, efficacy information, indication information, product labeling, material information issues, and approval issues. The results reveal that approximately 95% of the alleged violations were found on branded drug websites, in online paid advertisements, and in online videos. Of the total 179 violations, the majority of the alleged violations were concerned with the lack of risk information and/or misrepresentation of efficacy information, suggesting that achieving a fair balance of benefit versus risk information is a major problem with regard to the direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs. In addition, the character space limitations of online platforms, eg, sponsored links on search engines, pose challenges for pharmaceutical marketers with regard to adequately communicating important drug information, such as indication information, risk information, and product labeling. Presenting drug information in a fair and balanced manner remains a major problem. Industry guidance should consider addressing visibility and accessibility of information in the web environment to help pharmaceutical marketers meet the requirements for direct-to-consumer promotion and to protect consumers from misleading drug information. Promotion via social media warrants further attention, as pharmaceutical manufacturers have already begun actively establishing a social media presence, and the FDA has thus begun to keep tabs on social media promotions of

77 FR 5027 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Exploratory Program To Increase Access to...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-01

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0247] Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Exploratory Program To Increase Access to the... responsible for a broad range of compliance and enforcement activities. Increasing the transparency of these...

76 FR 43690 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2007-D-0149] (Formerly 2007D-0309) Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Electrocardiograph Electrodes; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug...

Completeness of serious adverse drug event reports received by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2014.

PubMed

Moore, Thomas J; Furberg, Curt D; Mattison, Donald R; Cohen, Michael R

2016-06-01

Adverse drug event reports to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) remain the primary tool for identifying serious drug adverse effects without adequate existing warnings. We assessed the completeness of reports the FDA received in 2014. Serious adverse drug event reports were evaluated for whether they included age, gender, event date, and at least one medical term describing the event in computer excerpts. Report sources were direct reports to the FDA, manufacturer expedited reports about events without adequate warnings, and manufacturer periodic reports about events with existing warnings. In 2014, the FDA received 528,192 new case reports indicating a serious or fatal outcome, 25,038 (4.7%) directly from health professionals and consumers, and 503,154 (95.3%) from drug manufacturers. Overall, 21,595 (86.2%) of serious reports submitted directly to the FDA provided data for all four completeness variables, compared with 271,022 (40.4%) of manufacturer expedited reports and 24,988 (51.3%) of periodic reports. Among manufacturer serious reports, 37.9% lacked age and 46.9% had no event date. Performance by 25 manufacturers submitting 5000 or more reports varied from 24.4% complete on all variables to 67% complete. Patient death cases had the lowest completeness scores in all categories. By these measures, report completeness from drug manufacturers was poor compared with direct submissions to the agency. The FDA needs to update reporting requirements and compliance policies to help industry capture better adverse event information from new forms of manufacturer interactions with health professionals and consumers. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Scientific and regulatory reasons for delay and denial of FDA approval of initial applications for new drugs, 2000-2012.

PubMed

Sacks, Leonard V; Shamsuddin, Hala H; Yasinskaya, Yuliya I; Bouri, Khaled; Lanthier, Michael L; Sherman, Rachel E

Some new drug applications fail because of inadequate drug performance and others are not approved because the information submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is unsatisfactory to make that determination. Resubmission of failed applications is costly, delaying marketing approval and the availability of new drugs to patients. To identify the reasons that FDA marketing approval for new drugs was delayed or denied. A retrospective review of FDA documents and extraction of data were performed. We examined all drug applications first submitted to the FDA between 2000 and 2012 for new molecular entities (NMEs), which are active ingredients never before marketed in the United States in any form. Using FDA correspondence and reviews, we investigated the reasons NMEs failed to obtain FDA approval. Reasons for delayed FDA approval or nonapproval of NME applications. Of the 302 identified NME applications, 151 (50%) were approved when first submitted and 222 (73.5%) were ultimately approved. Seventy-one applications required 1 or more resubmissions before approval, with a median delay to approval of 435 days following the first unsuccessful submission. Of the unsuccessful first-time applications, 24 (15.9%) included uncertainties related to dose selection, 20 (13.2%) choice of study end points that failed to adequately reflect a clinically meaningful effect, 20 (13.2%) inconsistent results when different end points were tested, 17 (11.3%) inconsistent results when different trials or study sites were compared, and 20 (13.2%) poor efficacy when compared with the standard of care. The frequency of safety deficiencies was similar among never-approved drugs compared with those with delayed approval (43 of 80 never approved [53.8%] vs 37 of 71 eventually approved [52.1%]; difference, 1.7% [95% CI, -14.86% to 18.05%]; P = .87). However, efficacy deficiencies were significantly more frequent among the never-approved drugs than among those with delayed approvals

The US Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997: impact on consumers.

PubMed

Golodner, L F

1998-01-01

This paper provides a consumer's perspective on an important issue that has a profound impact on all of us: the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act of 1997. In addition, it provides some background information on the National Consumers League, an organization that promotes consumer safety and protection with the FDA and its predecessors.

Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece: Review of FDA Draft Guidance Testicular Toxicity-Evaluation during Drug Development Guidance for Industry.

PubMed

Hukkanen, Renee R; Halpern, Wendy G; Vidal, Justin D

2016-10-01

In July 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a new draft guidance entitled "Testicular Toxicity: Evaluation during Drug Development Guidance for Industry," with a 90-day public comment period. As the nonclinical assessment of testicular toxicity often relies on the expert interpretation of pathology affecting the male reproductive tract, this draft guidance is considered directly relevant to the toxicologic pathology community. Therefore, a working group was formed through the Scientific and Regulatory Policy Committee of the Society of Toxicologic Pathologists (STPs) to provide a detailed review of the draft guidance. Specific comments on the guidance were submitted to the FDA by the STP. The draft guidance and all comments received are currently under review with the FDA. This commentary provides a summary of the components of the draft guidance and the comments submitted by the STP with acknowledgment of different perspectives reflected in comments from other respondents. © The Author(s) 2016.

Quantifying The Food And Drug Administration's rulemaking delays highlights the need for transparency.

PubMed

Hwang, Thomas J; Avorn, Jerry; Carpenter, Daniel; Kesselheim, Aaron S

2014-02-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) frequently uses its rulemaking process to establish or modify the way it regulates drugs, medical devices, and other medical products. The federal agency's rulemaking is controversial because of its perceived complexity, lack of transparency, and lengthy duration. To shed light on the FDA's rulemaking process, we examined the evolution of significant rules that the agency published during 2000-12 for drugs, devices, and other medical products. We found that the rules' median time to finalization was 7.3 years, with the pre-rule phase and postreview deliberation within the FDA accounting for the majority of that time. Rules that involved mandatory cost-benefit analyses were associated with an additional delay of approximately two years. We also found that longer review times were significantly associated with a reduction in the stringency of final rules, compared to the originally proposed versions. We recommend improving FDA's rulemaking by allocating additional resources to increase efficiency and by embarking on initiatives to promote transparency by the FDA and other parts of the executive branch.

21 CFR 803.3 - How does FDA define the terms used in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false How does FDA define the terms used in this part... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICE REPORTING General Provisions § 803.3 How does FDA..., for an estimated period of time. FDA, we, or us means the Food and Drug Administration. Five-day...

21 CFR 803.3 - How does FDA define the terms used in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false How does FDA define the terms used in this part... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICE REPORTING General Provisions § 803.3 How does FDA..., for an estimated period of time. FDA, we, or us means the Food and Drug Administration. Five-day...

21 CFR 803.3 - How does FDA define the terms used in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false How does FDA define the terms used in this part... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICE REPORTING General Provisions § 803.3 How does FDA..., for an estimated period of time. FDA, we, or us means the Food and Drug Administration. Five-day...

21 CFR 803.3 - How does FDA define the terms used in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false How does FDA define the terms used in this part... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICE REPORTING General Provisions § 803.3 How does FDA..., for an estimated period of time. FDA, we, or us means the Food and Drug Administration. Five-day...

ISS-N1 makes the First FDA-approved Drug for Spinal Muscular Atrophy.

PubMed

Ottesen, Eric W

2017-01-01

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is one of the leading genetic diseases of children and infants. SMA is caused by deletions or mutations of Survival Motor Neuron 1 ( SMN1 ) gene. SMN2 , a nearly identical copy of SMN1 , cannot compensate for the loss of SMN1 due to predominant skipping of exon 7. While various regulatory elements that modulate SMN2 exon 7 splicing have been proposed, intronic splicing silencer N1 (ISS-N1) has emerged as the most promising target thus far for antisense oligonucleotide-mediated splicing correction in SMA. Upon procuring exclusive license from the University of Massachussets Medical School in 2010, Ionis Pharmaceuticals (formerly ISIS Pharamaceuticals) began clinical development of Spinraza ™ (synonyms: Nusinersen, IONIS-SMN RX , ISIS-SMN RX ), an antisense drug based on ISS-N1 target. Spinraza ™ showed very promising results at all steps of the clinical development and was approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on December 23, 2016. Spinraza ™ is the first FDA-approved treatment for SMA and the first antisense drug to restore expression of a fully functional protein via splicing correction. The success of Spinraza ™ underscores the potential of intronic sequences as promising therapeutic targets and sets the stage for further improvement of antisense drugs based on advanced oligonucleotide chemistries and delivery protocols.

ISS-N1 makes the First FDA-approved Drug for Spinal Muscular Atrophy

PubMed Central

Ottesen, Eric W.

2017-01-01

Abstract Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is one of the leading genetic diseases of children and infants. SMA is caused by deletions or mutations of Survival Motor Neuron 1 (SMN1) gene. SMN2, a nearly identical copy of SMN1, cannot compensate for the loss of SMN1 due to predominant skipping of exon 7. While various regulatory elements that modulate SMN2 exon 7 splicing have been proposed, intronic splicing silencer N1 (ISS-N1) has emerged as the most promising target thus far for antisense oligonucleotide-mediated splicing correction in SMA. Upon procuring exclusive license from the University of Massachussets Medical School in 2010, Ionis Pharmaceuticals (formerly ISIS Pharamaceuticals) began clinical development of Spinraza™ (synonyms: Nusinersen, IONIS-SMNRX, ISIS-SMNRX), an antisense drug based on ISS-N1 target. Spinraza™ showed very promising results at all steps of the clinical development and was approved by US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on December 23, 2016. Spinraza™ is the first FDA-approved treatment for SMA and the first antisense drug to restore expression of a fully functional protein via splicing correction. The success of Spinraza™ underscores the potential of intronic sequences as promising therapeutic targets and sets the stage for further improvement of antisense drugs based on advanced oligonucleotide chemistries and delivery protocols. PMID:28400976

Adolescent dosing and labeling since the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007.

PubMed

Momper, Jeremiah D; Mulugeta, Yeruk; Green, Dionna J; Karesh, Alyson; Krudys, Kevin M; Sachs, Hari C; Yao, Lynn P; Burckart, Gilbert J

2013-10-01

During pediatric drug development, dedicated pharmacokinetic studies are generally performed in all relevant age groups to support dose selection for subsequent efficacy trials. To our knowledge, no previous assessments regarding the need for an intensive pharmacokinetic study in adolescents have been performed. To compare U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved adult and adolescent drug dosing and to assess the utility of allometric scaling for the prediction of drug clearance in the adolescent population. Adult and adolescent dosing and drug clearance data were obtained from FDA-approved drug labels and publicly available databases containing reviews of pediatric trials submitted to the FDA. Dosing information was compared for products with concordant indications for adolescent and adult patients. Adolescent drug clearance was predicted from adult pharmacokinetic data by using allometric scaling and compared with observed values. Adolescent and adult dosing information and drug clearance. There were 126 unique products with pediatric studies submitted to the FDA since the FDA Amendments Act of 2007, of which 92 had at least 1 adolescent indication concordant with an adult indication. Of these 92 products, 87 (94.5%) have equivalent dosing for adults and adolescent patients. For 18 of these 92 products, a minimum weight or body surface area threshold is recommended for adolescents to receive adult dosing. Allometric scaling predicted adolescent drug clearance with an overall mean absolute percentage error of 17.0%. Approved adult and adolescent drug dosing is equivalent for 94.5% of products with an adolescent indication studied since the FDA Amendments Act of 2007. Allometric scaling may be a useful tool to avoid unnecessary dedicated pharmacokinetic studies in the adolescent population during pediatric drug development, although each development program in adolescents requires a full discussion of drug dosing with the FDA.

75 FR 6209 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration; Guidance for the Use of Bayesian...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-02-08

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2006-D-0410] (formerly Docket No. 2006D-0191) Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration; Guidance for the Use of Bayesian Statistics in Medical Device Clinical Trials; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug...

US Food and Drug Administration Perspectives on Clinical Mass Spectrometry.

PubMed

Lathrop, Julia Tait; Jeffery, Douglas A; Shea, Yvonne R; Scholl, Peter F; Chan, Maria M

2016-01-01

Mass spectrometry-based in vitro diagnostic devices that measure proteins and peptides are underutilized in clinical practice, and none has been cleared or approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for marketing or for use in clinical trials. One way to increase their utilization is through enhanced interactions between the FDA and the clinical mass spectrometry community to improve the validation and regulatory review of these devices. As a reference point from which to develop these interactions, this article surveys the FDA's regulation of mass spectrometry-based devices, explains how the FDA uses guidance documents and standards in the review process, and describes the FDA's previous outreach to stakeholders. Here we also discuss how further communication and collaboration with the clinical mass spectrometry communities can identify opportunities for the FDA to provide help in the development of mass spectrometry-based devices and enhance their entry into the clinic. © 2015 American Association for Clinical Chemistry.

FDA actions against health economic promotions, 2002-2011.

PubMed

Neumann, Peter J; Bliss, Sarah K

2012-01-01

To investigate Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory actions against drug companies' health economic promotions from 2002 through 2011 to understand how frequently and in what circumstances the agency has considered such promotions false or misleading. We reviewed all warning letters and notices of violation ("untitled letters") issued by the FDA's Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) to pharmaceutical companies from January 2002 through December 2011. We analyzed letters containing a violation related to "health economic promotion," defined according to one of several categories (e.g., implied claims of cost savings due to work productivity or economic claims containing unsupported statements about effectiveness or safety). We also collected information on factors such as the indication and type of media involved and whether the letter referenced Section 114 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act. Of 291 DDMAC letters sent to pharmaceutical companies during the study period, 35 (12%) cited a health economic violation. The most common type of violation cited was an implied claim of cost savings due to work productivity or functioning (found in 20 letters) and economic claims containing unsubstantiated comparative claims of effectiveness, safety, or interchangeability (7 letters). The violations covered various indications, mostly commonly psychiatric disorders (6 letters) and pain (6 letters). No DDMAC letter pertained to Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act Section 114. The FDA has cited inappropriate health economic promotions in roughly 12% of the letters issued by the DDMAC. The letters highlight drug companies' interest in promoting the value of their products and the FDA's concerns in certain cases about the lack of supporting evidence. Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

New technology in electrophysiology: FDA process and perspective.

PubMed

Selzman, Kimberly A; Fellman, Mark; Farb, Andrew; de Del Castillo, Sergio; Zuckerman, Bram

2016-10-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a large regulatory agency that monitors everything from food, tobacco, and veterinary medicine to pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices. The Mission statement of the CDRH, one of the Centers of the FDA, in its most succinct form is to protect and promote public health. This is accomplished through timely and continued access to safe, effective, and high quality medical devices. This paper aims to review the overarching principles of the Agency's review process for cardiac devices as well as highlight some of the newer programs that FDA has engaged in to facilitate innovation, device development, research, and timely market approval.

The Conundrum of Online Prescription Drug Promotion Comment on "Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A Content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters".

PubMed

Wanasika, Isaac

2016-03-26

This commentary discusses pertinent issues from Hyosun Kim's paper on online prescription drug promotion. The study is well-designed and the findings highlight some of the consequences of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) decision to deregulate online advertising of prescription drugs. While Kim's findings confirm some of the early concerns, they also provide a perspective of implementation challenges in the ever-changing technological environment. © 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

76 FR 55927 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Demonstrating the Substantial...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0147] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Demonstrating the Substantial Equivalence of a New Tobacco Product: Responses to Frequently Asked Questions; Availability AGENCY: Food and...

Pharmacogenomics in the assessment of therapeutic risks versus benefits: inside the United States Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Zineh, Issam; Pacanowski, Michael A

2011-08-01

Pharmacogenomics is the study of how genetic variations influence responses to drugs, diagnostics, or biologic agents. The field of pharmacogenomics has significant potential to enhance drug development and aid in making regulatory decisions. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has supported pharmacogenomics for nearly a decade by providing regulatory advice and reviewing applications, with the intent of discovering and applying genetic determinants of treatment effects. The FDA will continue to develop policies and processes centered on genomics and individualized therapeutics to guide rational drug development. It will also continue to inform the public of clinically relevant pharmacogenomic issues through various mechanisms of communication, such as drug labeling. In this review, we provide a perspective on several pharmacogenomic activities at the FDA. In addition, we attempt to clarify what we believe are several misperceptions regarding the FDA's pharmacogenomic initiatives. We hope this perspective provides a window into some ways in which the FDA is enabling individualized therapeutics through its mission-critical activities.

21 CFR 14.171 - Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. 14.171 Section 14.171 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH... Human Prescription Drugs § 14.171 Utilization of an advisory committee on the initiative of FDA. (a) Any...

Development of a Course of Study in FDA Drug Regulatory Procedures

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Jacobs, Robin Wills; King, James C.

1977-01-01

It is evident that more colleges of pharmacy should establish some major course of study in the area of governmental drug regulatory procedures. This study is aimed at expanding cooperative educational programs through an FDA residency for pharmacy students and preparing a didactic course in FDA procedures. (LBH)

76 FR 20588 - FDA Food Safety Modernization Act: Focus on Preventive Controls for Facilities; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-13

.... FDA-2011-N-0251] FDA Food Safety Modernization Act: Focus on Preventive Controls for Facilities... comment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting entitled ``FDA... controls for facilities provisions of the recently enacted FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). FDA is...

The 2015 US Food and Drug Administration Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule.

PubMed

Brucker, Mary C; King, Tekoa L

2017-05-01

As of 2015, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) discontinued the pregnancy risk categories (ABCDX) that had been used to denote the putative safety of drugs for use among pregnant women. The ABCDX system has been replaced by the FDA Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule (PLLR) that requires narrative text to describe risk information, clinical considerations, and background data for the drug. The new rule includes 3 overarching categories: 1) pregnancy, which includes labor and birth; 2) lactation; and 3) females and males of reproductive potential. This article reviews the key components of the PLLR and clinical implications, and provides resources for clinicians who prescribe drugs for women of reproductive age. © 2017 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.

78 FR 29141 - Center for Devices and Radiological Health Appeals Processes; Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-17

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0893] Center for Devices and Radiological Health Appeals Processes; Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff... Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the guidance entitled ``Center for Devices and...

Regulatory administrative databases in FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: convergence toward a unified database.

PubMed

Smith, Jeffrey K

2013-04-01

Regulatory administrative database systems within the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) are essential to supporting its core mission, as a regulatory agency. Such systems are used within FDA to manage information and processes surrounding the processing, review, and tracking of investigational and marketed product submissions. This is an area of increasing interest in the pharmaceutical industry and has been a topic at trade association conferences (Buckley 2012). Such databases in CBER are complex, not for the type or relevance of the data to any particular scientific discipline but because of the variety of regulatory submission types and processes the systems support using the data. Commonalities among different data domains of CBER's regulatory administrative databases are discussed. These commonalities have evolved enough to constitute real database convergence and provide a valuable asset for business process intelligence. Balancing review workload across staff, exploring areas of risk in review capacity, process improvement, and presenting a clear and comprehensive landscape of review obligations are just some of the opportunities of such intelligence. This convergence has been occurring in the presence of usual forces that tend to drive information technology (IT) systems development toward separate stovepipes and data silos. CBER has achieved a significant level of convergence through a gradual process, using a clear goal, agreed upon development practices, and transparency of database objects, rather than through a single, discrete project or IT vendor solution. This approach offers a path forward for FDA systems toward a unified database.

76 FR 62073 - Guidance for Industry on Implementation of the Fee Provisions of the FDA Food Safety...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-06

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0721] Guidance for Industry on Implementation of the Fee Provisions of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act... Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled ``Implementation of the...

78 FR 9396 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Civil Money Penalties for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-08

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1083] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Civil Money Penalties for Tobacco... guidance for industry entitled ``Civil Money Penalties for Tobacco Retailers: Responses to Frequently Asked...

78 FR 72900 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Civil Money Penalties for Tobacco...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-12-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-1083] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Civil Money Penalties for Tobacco Retailers... the guidance entitled ``Civil Money Penalties for Tobacco Retailers: Responses to Frequently Asked...

78 FR 9701 - Draft Joint Food and Drug Administration/Health Canada Quantitative Assessment of the Risk of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-11

... on the sources of L. monocytogenes contamination, the effects of individual manufacturing and/or... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1182] Draft Joint Food and Drug Administration/Health Canada Quantitative Assessment of the Risk of...

75 FR 59726 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-28

... method comparison section and the sample selection inclusion and exclusion criteria section. The... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0428] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

76 FR 48870 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-09

... selection inclusion and exclusion criteria section. The revisions define and differentiate the required... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0428] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance Document...

77 FR 70955 - FDA Actions Related to Nicotine Replacement Therapies and Smoking-Cessation Products; Report to...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-11-28

.... FDA-2012-N-1148] FDA Actions Related to Nicotine Replacement Therapies and Smoking-Cessation Products... comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a 1-day public hearing to obtain...

76 FR 22905 - Guidance for Food and Drug Administration Staff and Tobacco Retailers on Civil Money Penalties...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-25

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0431] Guidance for Food and Drug Administration Staff and Tobacco Retailers on Civil Money Penalties and No... entitled ``Civil Money Penalties and No- Tobacco-Sale Orders for Tobacco Retailers.'' This guidance...

75 FR 53316 - Draft Guidance for Food and Drug Administration Staff and Tobacco Retailers on Civil Money...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-31

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0431] Draft Guidance for Food and Drug Administration Staff and Tobacco Retailers on Civil Money Penalties and... guidance entitled ``Civil Money Penalties and No-Tobacco-Sale Orders for Tobacco Retailers.'' This guidance...

Pharmacogenomic biomarker information in drug labels approved by the United States food and drug administration: prevalence of related drug use.

PubMed

Frueh, Felix W; Amur, Shashi; Mummaneni, Padmaja; Epstein, Robert S; Aubert, Ronald E; DeLuca, Teresa M; Verbrugge, Robert R; Burckart, Gilbert J; Lesko, Lawrence J

2008-08-01

To review the labels of United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs to identify those that contain pharmacogenomic biomarker information, and to collect prevalence information on the use of those drugs for which pharmacogenomic information is included in the drug labeling. Retrospective analysis. The Physicians' Desk Reference Web site, Drugs@FDA Web site, and manufacturers' Web sites were used to identify drug labels containing pharmacogenomic information, and the prescription claims database of a large pharmacy benefits manager (insuring > 55 million individuals in the United States) was used to obtain drug utilization data. Pharmacogenomic biomarkers were defined, FDA-approved drug labels containing this information were identified, and utilization of these drugs was determined. Of 1200 drug labels reviewed for the years 1945-2005, 121 drug labels contained pharmacogenomic information based on a key word search and follow-up screening. Of those, 69 labels referred to human genomic biomarkers, and 52 referred to microbial genomic biomarkers. Of the labels referring to human biomarkers, 43 (62%) pertained to polymorphisms in cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme metabolism, with CYP2D6 being most common. Of 36.1 million patients whose prescriptions were processed by a large pharmacy benefits manager in 2006, about 8.8 million (24.3%) received one or more drugs with human genomic biomarker information in the drug label. Nearly one fourth of all outpatients received one or more drugs that have pharmacogenomic information in the label for that drug. The incorporation and appropriate use of pharmacogenomic information in drug labels should be tested for its ability to improve drug use and safety in the United States.

Rethinking the Food and Drug Administration's 2013 guidance on developing drugs for early-stage Alzheimer's disease.

PubMed

Schneider, Lon S

2014-03-01

The February 2013 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft guidance for developing drugs for early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) creates certain challenges as they guide toward the use of one cognitive outcome to gain accelerated marketing approval for preclinical AD drugs, and a composite clinical scale - the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale in particular - for the primary outcome for prodromal AD clinical trials. In light of the developing knowledge regarding early stage diagnoses and clinical trials outcomes, we recommend that FDA describe its requirements for validating preclinical AD diagnoses for drug development purposes, maintain the principle for requiring coprimary outcomes, and encourage the advancement of outcomes for early stage AD trials. The principles for drug development for early stage AD should not differ from those for clinical AD, especially as the diagnoses of prodromal and early AD impinge on each other. The FDA should not recommend that a composite scale be used as a sole primary efficacy outcome to support a marketing claim unless it requires that the cognitive and functional components of such a scale are demonstrated to be individually meaningful. The current draft guidelines may inadvertently constrain efforts to better assess the clinical effects of new drugs and inhibit innovation in an area where evidence-based clinical research practices are still evolving. Copyright © 2014 The Alzheimer's Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Evaluating oversight of human drugs and medical devices: a case study of the FDA and implications for nanobiotechnology.

PubMed

Paradise, Jordan; Tisdale, Alison W; Hall, Ralph F; Kokkoli, Efrosini

2009-01-01

This article evaluates the oversight of drugs and medical devices by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) using an integration of public policy, law, and bioethics approaches and employing multiple assessment criteria, including economic, social, safety, and technological. Criteria assessment and expert elicitation are combined with existing literature, case law, and regulations in an integrative historical case studies approach. We then use our findings as a tool to explore possibilities for effective oversight and regulatory mechanisms for nanobiotechnology. Section I describes oversight mechanisms for human drugs and medical devices and presents current nanotechnology products. Section II describes the results of expert elicitation research. Section III highlights key criteria and relates them to the literature and larger debate. We conclude with broad lessons for the oversight of nanobiotechnology informed by Sections I-III in order to provide useful analysis from multiple disciplines and perspectives to guide discussions regarding appropriate FDA oversight.

Rationale, Procedures, and Response Rates for the 2015 Administration of NCI's Health Information National Trends Survey: HINTS-FDA 2015.

PubMed

Blake, Kelly D; Portnoy, David B; Kaufman, Annette R; Lin, Chung-Tung Jordan; Lo, Serena C; Backlund, Eric; Cantor, David; Hicks, Lloyd; Lin, Amy; Caporaso, Andrew; Davis, Terisa; Moser, Richard P; Hesse, Bradford W

2016-12-01

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) developed the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) to monitor population trends in cancer communication practices, information preferences, health risk behaviors, attitudes, and cancer knowledge. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized HINTS as a unique data resource for informing its health communication endeavors and partnered with NCI to field HINTS-FDA 2015. HINTS-FDA 2015 was a self-administered paper instrument sent by mail May 29 to September 8, 2015, using a random probability-based sample of U.S. postal addresses stratified by county-level smoking rates, with an oversampling of high and medium-high smoking strata to increase the yield of current smokers responding to the survey. The response rate for HINTS-FDA 2015 was 33% (N = 3,738). The yield of current smokers (n = 495) was lower than expected, but the sampling strategy achieved the goal of obtaining more former smokers (n = 1,132). Public-use HINTS-FDA 2015 data and supporting documentation have been available for download and secondary data analyses since June 2016 at http://hints.cancer.gov . NCI and FDA encourage the use of HINTS-FDA for health communication research and practice related to tobacco-related communications, public knowledge, and behaviors as well as beliefs and actions related to medical products and dietary supplements.

Update on medical and regulatory issues pertaining to compounded and FDA-approved drugs, including hormone therapy

PubMed Central

Pinkerton, JoAnn V.; Pickar, James H.

2016-01-01

Abstract Objective: We review the historical regulation of drug compounding, concerns about widespread use of non-Food and Drug Admiistration (FDA)-approved compounded bioidentical hormone therapies (CBHTs), which do not have proper labeling and warnings, and anticipated impact of the 2013 Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA) on compounding. Methods: US government websites were searched for documents concerning drug compounding regulation and oversight from 1938 (passage of Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FDCA]) through 2014, including chronologies, Congressional testimony, FDA guidelines and enforcements, and reports. The FDCA and DQSA were reviewed. PubMed and Google were searched for articles on compounded drugs, including CBHT. Results: Congress explicitly granted the FDA limited oversight of compounded drugs in a 1997 amendment to the FDCA, but the FDA has encountered obstacles in exercising that authority. After 64 patient deaths and 750 adversely affected patients from the 2012 meningitis outbreak due to contaminated compounded steroid injections, Congress passed the DQSA, authorizing the FDA to create a voluntary registration for facilities that manufacture and distribute sterile compounded drugs in bulk and reinforcing FDCA regulations for traditional compounding. Given history and current environment, concerns remain about CBHT product regulation and their lack of safety and efficacy data. Conclusions: The DQSA and its reinforcement of §503A of the FDCA solidifies FDA authority to enforce FDCA provisions against compounders of CBHT. The new law may improve compliance and accreditation by the compounding industry; support state and FDA oversight; and prevent the distribution of misbranded, adulterated, or inconsistently compounded medications, and false and misleading claims, thus reducing public health risk. PMID:26418479

21 CFR Appendix B to Part 101 - Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA B Appendix B to Part 101 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Enhancements Used by the FDA ER01JA93.364 ER11JY03.006 [58 FR 17332, Apr. 2, 1993, as amended at 68 FR 41506...

21 CFR Appendix B to Part 101 - Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA B Appendix B to Part 101 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Enhancements Used by the FDA ER01JA93.364 ER11JY03.006 [58 FR 17332, Apr. 2, 1993, as amended at 70 FR 41506...

21 CFR Appendix B to Part 101 - Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA B Appendix B to Part 101 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Enhancements Used by the FDA ER01JA93.364 ER11JY03.006 [58 FR 17332, Apr. 2, 1993, as amended at 70 FR 41506...

21 CFR Appendix B to Part 101 - Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA B Appendix B to Part 101 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Enhancements Used by the FDA ER01JA93.364 ER11JY03.006 [58 FR 17332, Apr. 2, 1993, as amended at 68 FR 41506...

21 CFR Appendix B to Part 101 - Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Graphic Enhancements Used by the FDA B Appendix B to Part 101 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Enhancements Used by the FDA ER01JA93.364 ER11JY03.006 [58 FR 17332, Apr. 2, 1993, as amended at 70 FR 41506...

76 FR 16425 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-23

...: Ovarian Adnexal Mass Assessment Score Test System; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS... assessment score test system into class II (special controls) under section 513(f)(2) of the Federal Food... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0028...

Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee Recommendations and Approval of Cancer Drugs by the US Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Tibau, Ariadna; Ocana, Alberto; Anguera, Geòrgia; Seruga, Bostjan; Templeton, Arnoud J; Barnadas, Agustí; Amir, Eitan

2016-06-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committees influence decisions relating to the regulatory approval of drugs in the United States. Outside of the field of oncology, prosponsor voting bias has been observed among members with financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs). To explore factors associated with Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) recommendations and the influence ODAC members' FCOIs on the drug approval process. Retrospective analysis of 82 ODAC meeting transcripts between January 2000 and December 2014. Analysis was restricted to meetings at which votes were cast relating to oncologic drugs. The influence of methodology of trials supporting approval and frequency and type of self-reported FCOIs of voting members was explored using logistic regression. ODAC recommendation for drug approval and subsequent FDA approval. Eighty-two transcripts of ODAC meetings between January 2000 and December 2014 were available for analysis. During the time period analyzed, ODAC members voted on 68 applications in 79 meetings (the remaining 3 meetings included voting questions regarding postmarketing safety or trial design). There was agreement between ODAC recommendations and final FDA approval; FDA approval was received for all 41 drugs that ODAC recommended approval. Additionally, the FDA approved 7 out of 41 agents that were not recommended for approval by ODAC (κ = 0.83). In 51 of 79 meetings, more than 1 trial was available to support the indication of a particular drug, and favorable ODAC recommendations were more likely when this was the case (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.19-2.78; P = .01). Availability of randomized data did not appear to be important with selected single-arm phase 2 trials leading to recommendations for approval, especially in rare diseases. There has been a significant reduction in FCOIs over time (31 of 77 voting members [40%] in 2000 vs 0 of 20 voting members in 2014 [0%]; P < .001). Recommendations for

Cyberpharmacies and the role of the US Food And Drug Administration

PubMed Central

2001-01-01

The sale of consumer products over the Internet has grown rapidly, including the sale of drugs. While the growth in online drug sales by reputable pharmacies is a trend that may provide benefits to consumers, online drug sales also present risks to purchasers and some unique challenges to regulators, law enforcement officials and policy makers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is concerned about the public health implications of Internet drug sales, and we are responding to these concerns as part of our overall goal of developing and implementing risk-based strategies to protect public health and safety. Although other products regulated by the Agency, such as medical devices, medical test products, foods, dietary supplements and animal drugs also are sold online, this paper focuses on online drug sales. We discuss the advantages and risks of online drug sales, outline FDA's authority and enforcement activities in this area, and describe new initiatives we are taking to better respond to the regulatory challenges we face. PMID:11720945

76 FR 44594 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0465] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Class II Special Controls Guidance Document... guidance document will serve as the special control for rTMS systems. Section 513(f)(2) of the Federal Food...

75 FR 79383 - Unapproved Animal Drugs

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-20

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0528] Unapproved Animal Drugs AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency) is soliciting comments from stakeholders on...

21 CFR 1271.3 - How does FDA define important terms in this part?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false How does FDA define important terms in this part? 1271.3 Section 1271.3 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) REGULATIONS UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ACTS ADMINISTERED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION...

77 FR 20825 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; User Fees for 513(g) Requests for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-06

...] Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; User Fees for 513(g) Requests for Information... Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry and Food and... ``Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; User Fees for 513(g) Requests for Information...

76 FR 74791 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-01

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0005] Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's... memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural and Marketing...

78 FR 6762 - Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act: Proposed Rules To Establish Standards...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-31

... Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Public Meeting... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 1, 16, 106, 110, 112, 114, 117, 120, 123, 129, 179, and 211 [Docket Nos. FDA-2011-N-0920 and FDA-2011-N-0921] Food and...

78 FR 10107 - Food and Drug Administration Food Safety Modernization Act: Proposed Rules To Establish Standards...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-13

... Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for Human Food; Public Meeting... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 1, 16, 106, 110, 112, 114, 117, 120, 123, 129, 179, and 211 [Docket Nos. FDA-2011-N-0920 and FDA-2011-N-0921] Food and...

International Conference on Harmonisation; Electronic Transmission of Postmarket Individual Case Safety Reports for Drugs and Biologics, Excluding Vaccines; Availability of Food and Drug Administration Regional Implementation Specifications for ICH E2B(R3) Reporting to the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System. Notice of Availability.

PubMed

2016-06-23

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of its FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) Regional Implementation Specifications for the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E2B(R3) Specification. FDA is making this technical specifications document available to assist interested parties in electronically submitting individual case safety reports (ICSRs) (and ICSR attachments) to the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). This document, entitled "FDA Regional Implementation Specifications for ICH E2B(R3) Implementation: Postmarket Submission of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) for Drugs and Biologics, Excluding Vaccines" supplements the "E2B(R3) Electronic Transmission of Individual Case Safety Reports (ICSRs) Implementation Guide--Data Elements and Message Specification" final guidance for industry and describes FDA's technical approach for receiving ICSRs, for incorporating regionally controlled terminology, and for adding region-specific data elements when reporting to FAERS.

Amendment to examination and investigation sample requirements--FDA. Direct final rule.

PubMed

1998-09-25

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its regulations regarding the collection of twice the quantity of food, drug, or cosmetic estimated to be sufficient for analysis. This action increases the dollar amount that FDA will consider to determine whether to routinely collect a reserve sample of a food, drug, or cosmetic product in addition to the quantity sufficient for analysis. Experience has demonstrated that the current dollar amount does not adequately cover the cost of most quantities sufficient for analysis plus reserve samples. This direct final rule is part of FDA's continuing effort to achieve the objectives of the President's "Reinventing Government" initiative, and is intended to reduce the burden of unnecessary regulations on food, drugs, and cosmetics without diminishing the protection of the public health. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is publishing a companion proposed rule under FDA's usual procedures for notice and comment to provide a procedural framework to finalize the rule in the event the agency receives any significant adverse comment and withdraws this direct final rule.

Have antiepileptic drug prescription claims changed following the FDA suicidality warning? An evaluation in a state Medicaid program.

PubMed

Mittal, Manish; Harrison, Donald L; Miller, Michael J; Farmer, Kevin C; Thompson, David M; Ng, Yu-Tze

2014-05-01

In January 2008, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) communicated concerns and, in May 2009, issued a warning about an increased risk of suicidality for all antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). This research evaluated the association between the FDA suicidality communications and the AED prescription claims among members with epilepsy and/or psychiatric disorder. A longitudinal interrupted time-series design was utilized to evaluate Oklahoma Medicaid claims data from January 2006 through December 2009. The study included 9289 continuously eligible members with prevalent diagnoses of epilepsy and/or psychiatric disorder and at least one AED prescription claim. Trends, expressed as monthly changes in the log odds of AED prescription claims, were compared across three time periods: before (January 2006 to January 2008), during (February 2008 to May 2009), and after (June 2009 to December 2009) the FDA warning. Before the FDA warning period, a significant upward trend of AED prescription claims of 0.01% per month (99% CI: 0.008% to 0.013%, p<0.0001) was estimated. In comparison to the prewarning period, no significant change in trend was detected during (-20.0%, 99% CI: -70.0% to 30.0%, p=0.34) or after (80.0%, 99% CI: -20.0% to 200.0%, p=0.03) the FDA warning period. After stratification, no diagnostic group (i.e., epilepsy alone, epilepsy and comorbid psychiatric disorder, and psychiatric disorder alone) experienced a significant change in trend during the entire study period (p>0.01). During the time period considered, the FDA AED-related suicidality warning does not appear to have significantly affected prescription claims of AED medications for the study population. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Combination products regulation at the FDA.

PubMed

Lauritsen, K J; Nguyen, T

2009-05-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for protecting the public health by assuring the safety, efficacy, and security of drugs, biological products, and medical devices. As single-entity products, drugs are generally regulated by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), devices by the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and biologics by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). In recent years, technological advances have led to a blurring of the historical lines of separation between the centers.

75 FR 1275 - New Animal Drugs; Ractopamine

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-01-11

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 558 [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0665] New Animal Drugs; Ractopamine AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to...

75 FR 81455 - New Animal Drugs; Deslorelin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510 and 522 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Deslorelin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

76 FR 17025 - New Animal Drugs; Oxytetracycline

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 520 and 529 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Oxytetracycline AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

76 FR 57906 - New Animal Drugs; Gamithromycin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 522 and 556 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Gamithromycin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

Clinical trial registration, reporting, publication and FDAAA compliance: a cross-sectional analysis and ranking of new drugs approved by the FDA in 2012

PubMed Central

Miller, Jennifer E; Korn, David; Ross, Joseph S

2015-01-01

Objective To evaluate clinical trial registration, reporting and publication rates for new drugs by: (1) legal requirements and (2) the ethical standard that all human subjects research should be publicly accessible to contribute to generalisable knowledge. Design Cross-sectional analysis of all clinical trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for drugs approved in 2012, sponsored by large biopharmaceutical companies. Data sources Information from Drugs@FDA, ClinicalTrials.gov, MEDLINE-indexed journals and drug company communications. Main outcome measures Clinical trial registration and results reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov, publication in the medical literature, and compliance with the 2007 FDA Amendments Acts (FDAAA), analysed on the drug level. Results The FDA approved 15 drugs sponsored by 10 large companies in 2012. We identified 318 relevant trials involving 99 599 research participants. Per drug, a median of 57% (IQR 32–83%) of trials were registered, 20% (IQR 12–28%) reported results in ClinicalTrials.gov, 56% (IQR 41–83%) were published, and 65% (IQR 41–83%) were either published or reported results. Almost half of all reviewed drugs had at least one undisclosed phase II or III trial. Per drug, a median of 17% (IQR 8–20%) of trials supporting FDA approvals were subject to FDAAA mandated public disclosure; of these, a median of 67% (IQR 0–100%) were FDAAA-compliant. 68% of research participants (67 629 of 99 599) participated in FDAAA-subject trials, with 51% (33 405 of 67 629) enrolled in non-compliant trials. Transparency varied widely among companies. Conclusions Trial disclosures for new drugs remain below legal and ethics standards, with wide variation in practices among drugs and their sponsors. Best practices are emerging. 2 of our 10 reviewed companies disclosed all trials and complied with legal disclosure requirements for their 2012 approved drugs. Ranking new drugs on transparency criteria may improve

Rationale, Procedures, and Response Rates for the 2015 Administration of NCI’s Health Information National Trends Survey: HINTS-FDA 2015

PubMed Central

BLAKE, KELLY D.; PORTNOY, DAVID B.; KAUFMAN, ANNETTE R.; LIN, CHUNG-TUNG JORDAN; LO, SERENA C.; BACKLUND, ERIC; CANTOR, DAVID; HICKS, LLOYD; LIN, AMY; CAPORASO, ANDREW; DAVIS, TERISA; MOSER, RICHARD P.; HESSE, BRADFORD W.

2016-01-01

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) developed the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) to monitor population trends in cancer communication practices, information preferences, health risk behaviors, attitudes, and cancer knowledge. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recognized HINTS as a unique data resource for informing its health communication endeavors and partnered with NCI to field HINTS-FDA 2015. HINTS-FDA 2015 was a self-administered paper instrument sent by mail May 29 to September 8, 2015, using a random probability-based sample of U.S. postal addresses stratified by county-level smoking rates, with an oversampling of high and medium-high smoking strata to increase the yield of current smokers responding to the survey. The response rate for HINTS-FDA 2015 was 33% (N = 3,738). The yield of current smokers (n = 495) was lower than expected, but the sampling strategy achieved the goal of obtaining more former smokers (n = 1,132). Public-use HINTS-FDA 2015 data and supporting documentation have been available for download and secondary data analyses since June 2016 at http://hints.cancer.gov. NCI and FDA encourage the use of HINTS-FDA for health communication research and practice related to tobacco-related communications, public knowledge, and behaviors as well as beliefs and actions related to medical products and dietary supplements. PMID:27892827

77 FR 70168 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; The Content of Investigational...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-11-23

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the guidance entitled ``The Content of Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) and Premarket Approval (PMA) Applications for Artificial Pancreas Device Systems.'' FDA is issuing this guidance to inform industry and Agency staff of its recommendations for analytical and clinical performance studies to support premarket submissions for artificial pancreas systems.

75 FR 48179 - Comprehensive List of Guidance Documents at the Food and Drug Administration

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-09

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing a comprehensive list of all guidance documents currently in use at the agency. This list is being published under FDA's Good Guidance Practices (GGPs). It is intended to inform the public of the existence and availability of all of our current guidance documents. It also provides information on guidance documents that have been added or withdrawn in the past 5 years.

Anti-Obesity Agents and the US Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Casey, Martin F; Mechanick, Jeffrey I

2014-09-01

Despite the growing market for obesity care, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved only two new pharmaceutical agents-lorcaserin and combination phentermine/topiramate-for weight reduction since 2000, while removing three agents from the market in the same time period. This article explores the FDA's history and role in the approval of anti-obesity medications within the context of a public health model of obesity. Through the review of obesity literature and FDA approval documents, we identified two major barriers preventing fair evaluation of anti-obesity agents including: (1) methodological pitfalls in clinical trials and (2) misaligned values in the assessment of anti-obesity agents. Specific recommendations include the use of adaptive (Bayesian) design protocols, value-based analyses of risks and benefits, and regulatory guidance based on a comprehensive, multi-platform obesity disease model. Positively addressing barriers in the FDA approval process of anti-obesity agents may have many beneficial effects within an obesity disease model.

Current good manufacturing practice in manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding of drugs; revision of certain labeling controls--FDA. Final rule.

PubMed

1993-08-03

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for human and veterinary drug products to revise certain labeling control provisions. Specifically, the final rule defines the term "gang-printed labeling," specifies conditions for the use of gang-printed or cut labeling, exempts manufacturers that employ automated 100-percent labeling inspection systems from CGMP labeling reconciliation requirements, and requires manufacturers to identify filled drug product containers that are set aside and held in an unlabeled condition for future labeling operations. These changes are intended to reduce the frequency of drug product mislabeling and associated drug product recalls.

75 FR 79295 - New Animal Drugs; Mupirocin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-20

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510 and 524 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Mupirocin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to...

76 FR 6326 - New Animal Drugs; Masitinib

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-02-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510 and 516 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Masitinib AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to...

21 CFR 4.2 - How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart? 4.2 Section 4.2 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN... Combination Products § 4.2 How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart? The terms listed in this...

21 CFR 4.2 - How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart? 4.2 Section 4.2 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN... Combination Products § 4.2 How does FDA define key terms and phrases in this subpart? The terms listed in this...

Influence of kidney disease on drug disposition: An assessment of industry studies submitted to the FDA for new chemical entities 1999-2010.

PubMed

Matzke, Gary R; Dowling, Thomas C; Marks, Samantha A; Murphy, John E

2016-04-01

In 1998, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released the first guidance for industry regarding pharmacokinetic (PK) studies in renally impaired patients. This study aimed to determine if the FDA renal PK guidance influenced the frequency and rigor of renal studies conducted for new chemical entities (NCEs). FDA-approved package inserts (APIs) and clinical pharmacology review documents were analyzed for 194 NCEs approved from 1999 to 2010. Renal studies were conducted in 71.6% of NCEs approved from 1999 to 2010, a significant increase over the 56.3% conducted from 1996 to 1997 (P = .0242). Renal studies were more likely to be completed in highly renally excreted drugs (fe ≥ 30%) compared with drugs with low renal excretion, fe < 30% (89.6% vs 65.8%, P = .0015). PK studies to assess the impact of dialysis were conducted for 31.7% of NCEs that had a renal study: a greater proportion of high fe NCEs were studied (44.2% vs 26.0%, P = .0335). No significant change in frequency or rigor of PK studies was detected over time. The majority of NCEs (76.3%) with a renal study provided specific dosing recommendations in the API. The adoption of the 1998 FDA guidance has resulted in improved availability of PK and drug-dosing recommendations, particularly for high fe drugs. © 2015, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.

Food and Drug Administration Perspective on Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia as a Target for a Drug Treatment Claim

PubMed Central

Laughren, Thomas; Levin, Robert

2006-01-01

Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are not adequately addressed by available treatments for schizophrenia. Thus, it is reasonable to consider them as a target for a drug claim. This article describes the thought process that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will undertake in considering negative symptoms of schizophrenia as a novel and distinct drug target. Beyond this basic question, this article identifies a number of design issues that the FDA needs to consider regarding how best to conduct studies to support claims for this target. These design issues include (1) what population to study, (2) what phase of illness to target, (3) whether to focus on the negative symptom domain overall or on some specific aspect of negative symptoms, (4) the role of functional measures in negative symptom trials, and (5) optimal designs for targeting drugs for add-on therapy or broad-spectrum agents. PMID:16079389

Patient Experience Data in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Regulatory Decision Making:: A Policy Process Perspective.

PubMed

Kuehn, Carrie M

2018-01-01

The influence of patient advocates on FDA regulatory decision making has increased. Despite enhanced engagement with FDA, there remain challenges to achieving the regulatory goals of patients within FDA's regulatory framework. Gaps exist between patient advocates' knowledge of the agency's processes and FDA's need for rigorous, clinically meaningful patient experience data. This study examined the policy process in which patient experience data are collected by patient advocates and provided to FDA for regulatory decision making. Semistructured, narrative interviews were conducted with 14 professionals working in patient advocacy or at FDA. The purpose was to examine, in depth, participants' perceptions and experiences regarding this new regulatory process. Interviews were coded and examined for themes. The use of patient experience data by FDA is an evolving regulatory process. Participants identified a number of barriers and contributors to regulatory success. Well-organized and sophisticated patient advocacy groups with access to scientific and policy expertise are more likely to find success meeting FDA's patient experience data requirements. A conceptual model of this regulatory process was developed. Use of patient experience data by FDA has the potential to positively influence the regulation of medical products in the United States. Success within this new regulatory process will depend on clear guidance from FDA regarding the collection, analysis, and use of patient experience data. Patient advocacy groups must enhance internal capacity and expertise while engaging in substantive collaborations with FDA and other stakeholders in order to meaningfully contribute to the regulatory review of new therapeutics.

The Food and Drug Administration and pragmatic clinical trials of marketed medical products

PubMed Central

Anderson, Monique L; Griffin, Joseph; Goldkind, Sara F; Zeitler, Emily P; Wing, Liz; Al-Khatib, Sana M; Sherman, Rachel E

2015-01-01

Pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) can help answer questions of comparative effectiveness for interventions routinely used in medical practice. PCTs may examine outcomes of one or more marketed medical products, and they are heterogeneous in design and risk. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with protecting the rights, safety, and welfare of individuals enrolled in clinical investigations, as well as assuring the integrity upon which approval of medical products are made. The FDA has broad jurisdiction over drugs and medical devices (whether or not they are approved for marketing), and as such, clinical investigations of these products are subject to applicable FDA regulations. While many PCTs will meet the criteria for an exemption from the requirements for an investigational new drug application (IND) or investigational device exemption (IDE), in general all clinical investigations of medical products that fall under FDA jurisdiction must adhere to regulations for informed consent and review by an institutional review board (IRB). We are concerned that current FDA requirements for obtaining individual informed consent may deter or delay the conduct of PCTs intended to develop reliable evidence of comparative safety and effectiveness of approved medical products that are regulated by the FDA. Under current regulations, there are no described mechanisms to alter or waive informed consent to make it less burdensome or more practicable for low-risk PCTs. We recommend that the FDA establish a risk-based approach to obtaining informed consent in PCTs that would facilitate the conduct of PCTs without compromising the protection of enrolled individuals or the integrity of the resulting data. PMID:26374684

76 FR 11794 - Drugs for Human Use; Unapproved and Misbranded Oral Drugs Labeled for Prescription Use and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-03

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0100... Relief of Symptoms of Cold, Cough, or Allergy; Enforcement Action Dates AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing its intention...

THPdb: Database of FDA-approved peptide and protein therapeutics.

PubMed

Usmani, Salman Sadullah; Bedi, Gursimran; Samuel, Jesse S; Singh, Sandeep; Kalra, Sourav; Kumar, Pawan; Ahuja, Anjuman Arora; Sharma, Meenu; Gautam, Ankur; Raghava, Gajendra P S

2017-01-01

THPdb (http://crdd.osdd.net/raghava/thpdb/) is a manually curated repository of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved therapeutic peptides and proteins. The information in THPdb has been compiled from 985 research publications, 70 patents and other resources like DrugBank. The current version of the database holds a total of 852 entries, providing comprehensive information on 239 US-FDA approved therapeutic peptides and proteins and their 380 drug variants. The information on each peptide and protein includes their sequences, chemical properties, composition, disease area, mode of activity, physical appearance, category or pharmacological class, pharmacodynamics, route of administration, toxicity, target of activity, etc. In addition, we have annotated the structure of most of the protein and peptides. A number of user-friendly tools have been integrated to facilitate easy browsing and data analysis. To assist scientific community, a web interface and mobile App have also been developed.

75 FR 24394 - Animal Drugs, Feeds, and Related Products; Withdrawal of Approval of a New Animal Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-05

... [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002] Animal Drugs, Feeds, and Related Products; Withdrawal of Approval of a New Animal Drug Application; Buquinolate; Coumaphos AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations by...

Considering the Future of Pharmaceutical Promotions in Social Media Comment on "Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A Content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters".

PubMed

Carpentier, Francesca Renee Dillman

2016-02-09

This commentary explores the implications of increased social media marketing by drug manufacturers, based on findings in Hyosun Kim's article of the major themes in recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning letters and notices of violation regarding online direct-to-consumer promotions of pharmaceuticals. Kim's rigorous analysis of FDA letters over a 10-year span highlights a relative abundance of regulatory action toward marketer-controlled websites and sponsored advertisements, compared to branded and unbranded social media messaging. However, social media marketing efforts are increasing, as is FDA attention to these efforts. This commentary explores recent developments and continuing challenges in the FDA's attempts to provide guidance and define pharmaceutical company accountability in marketer-controlled and -uncontrolled claims disseminated through social media. © 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

78 FR 12762 - Joint Meeting of the Medical Imaging Drugs Advisory Committee and the Oncologic Drugs Advisory...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-25

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001...; Notice of Meeting. AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will...

78 FR 22 - New Animal Drugs; Meloxicam; Nicarbazin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 520 and 558 [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Meloxicam; Nicarbazin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

Food and Drug Administration tobacco regulation and product judgments.

PubMed

Kaufman, Annette R; Finney Rutten, Lila J; Parascandola, Mark; Blake, Kelly D; Augustson, Erik M

2015-04-01

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act granted the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to regulate tobacco products in the U.S. However, little is known about how regulation may be related to judgments about tobacco product-related risks. To understand how FDA tobacco regulation beliefs are associated with judgments about tobacco product-related risks. The Health Information National Trends Survey is a national survey of the U.S. adult population. Data used in this analysis were collected from October 2012 through January 2013 (N=3,630) by mailed questionnaire and analyzed in 2013. Weighted bivariate chi-square analyses were used to assess associations among FDA regulation belief, tobacco harm judgments, sociodemographics, and smoking status. A weighted multinomial logistic regression was conducted where FDA regulation belief was regressed on tobacco product judgments, controlling for sociodemographic variables and smoking status. About 41% believed that the FDA regulates tobacco products in the U.S., 23.6% reported the FDA does not, and 35.3% did not know. Chi-square analyses showed that smoking status was significantly related to harm judgments about electronic cigarettes (p<0.0001). The multinomial logistic regression revealed that uncertainty about FDA regulation was associated with tobacco product harm judgment uncertainty. Tobacco product harm perceptions are associated with beliefs about tobacco product regulation by the FDA. These findings suggest the need for increased public awareness and understanding of the role of tobacco product regulation in protecting public health. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.

78 FR 22553 - Generic Drug Facilities, Sites, and Organizations

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0391] Generic Drug Facilities, Sites, and Organizations AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that the generic drug facility self...

77 FR 60125 - Generic Drug Facilities, Sites and Organizations

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-10-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1006] Generic Drug Facilities, Sites and Organizations AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of Requirement. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is notifying generic drug facilities...

Food and Drug Administration criteria for the diagnosis of drug-induced valvular heart disease in patients previously exposed to benfluorex: a prospective multicentre study.

PubMed

Maréchaux, Sylvestre; Rusinaru, Dan; Jobic, Yannick; Ederhy, Stéphane; Donal, Erwan; Réant, Patricia; Arnalsteen, Elise; Boulanger, Jacques; Garban, Thierry; Ennezat, Pierre-Vladimir; Jeu, Antoine; Szymanski, Catherine; Tribouilloy, Christophe

2015-02-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria for diagnosis of drug-induced valvular heart disease (DIVHD) are only based on the observation of aortic regurgitation ≥ mild and/or mitral regurgitation ≥ moderate. We sought to evaluate the diagnostic value of FDA criteria in a cohort of control patients and in a cohort of patients exposed to a drug (benfluorex) known to induce VHD. This prospective, multicentre study included 376 diabetic control patients not exposed to valvulopathic drugs and 1000 subjects previously exposed to benfluorex. Diagnosis of mitral or aortic DIVHD was based on a combined functional and morphological echocardiographic analysis of cardiac valves. Patients were classified according to the FDA criteria [mitral or aortic-FDA(+) and mitral or aortic-FDA(-)]. Among the 376 control patients, 2 were wrongly classified as mitral-FDA(+) and 17 as aortic-FDA(+) (0.53 and 4.5% of false positives, respectively). Of those exposed to benfluorex, 48 of 58 with a diagnosis of mitral DIVHD (83%) were classified as mitral-FDA(-), and 901 of the 910 patients (99%) without a diagnosis of the mitral DIVHD group were classified as mitral-FDA(-). All 40 patients with a diagnosis of aortic DIVHD were classified as aortic-FDA(+), and 105 of the 910 patients without a diagnosis of aortic DIVHD (12%) were classified aortic-FDA(+). Older age and lower BMI were independent predictors of disagreement between FDA criteria and the diagnosis of DIVHD in patients exposed to benfluorex (both P ≤ 0.001). FDA criteria solely based on the Doppler detection of cardiac valve regurgitation underestimate for the mitral valve and overestimate for the aortic valve the frequency of DIVHD. Therefore, the diagnosis of DIVHD must be based on a combined echocardiographic and Doppler morphological and functional analysis of cardiac valves. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2014. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

78 FR 5713 - New Animal Drugs; Cefpodoxime; Meloxicam

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, and 522 [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Cefpodoxime; Meloxicam AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

77 FR 10753 - Draft Guidance for Industry: Food and Drug Administration Records Access Authority Under the...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-23

...] Draft Guidance for Industry: Food and Drug Administration Records Access Authority Under the Federal... industry entitled ``FDA Records Access Authority Under Sections 414 and 704 of the Federal Food, Drug...). This updated draft guidance is intended to provide individuals in the human and animal food industries...

Real-World Evidence, Public Participation, and the FDA.

PubMed

Schwartz, Jason L

2017-11-01

For observers of pharmaceutical regulation and the Food and Drug Administration, these are uncertain times. Events in late 2016 raised concerns that the FDA's evidentiary standards were being weakened, compromising the agency's ability to adequately perform its regulatory and public health responsibilities. Two developments most directly contributed to these fears-the approval of eteplirsen, a treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, against the recommendations of both FDA staff and an advisory committee and the December 2016 signing of the 21st Century Cures Act, which encouraged greater use by the FDA of "real-world" evidence not obtained through randomized controlled trials. The arrival of the Trump administration-with its deregulatory, industry-friendly approach-has only amplified concerns over the future of the FDA. It is too early to know whether the recent developments are truly harbingers of an FDA less likely to prevent unsafe or ineffective products from reaching the market. But elements in the two events-the role of patient narratives in deliberations regarding eteplirsen and the enthusiasm for real-world evidence in the 21st Century Cures Act-raise critical issues for the future of evidence in the FDA's work. The rigorous, inclusive approach under way to consider issues related to real-world evidence provides a model for a similarly needed inquiry regarding public participation in FDA decision-making. © 2017 The Hastings Center.

FDA's perspectives on cardiovascular devices.

PubMed

Chen, Eric A; Patel-Raman, Sonna M; O'Callaghan, Kathryn; Hillebrenner, Matthew G

2009-06-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decision process for approving or clearing medical devices is often determined by a review of robust clinical data and extensive preclinical testing of the device. The mission statement for the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is to review the information provided by manufacturers so that it can promote and protect the health of the public by ensuring the safety and effectiveness of medical devices deemed appropriate for human use (Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act, Section 903(b)(1, 2(C)), December 31, 2004; accessed December 17, 2008 http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/fdcact/fdctoc.htm). For high-risk devices, such as ventricular assist devices (VADs), mechanical heart valves, stents, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) devices, pacemakers, and defibrillators, the determination is based on FDA's review of extensive preclinical bench and animal testing followed by use of the device in a clinical trial in humans. These clinical trials allow the manufacturer to evaluate a device in the intended use population. FDA reviews the data from the clinical trial to determine if the device performed as predicted and the clinical benefits outweigh the risks. This article reviews the regulatory framework for different marketing applications related to cardiovascular devices and describes the process of obtaining approval to study a cardiovascular device in a U.S. clinical trial.

Synergy testing of FDA-approved drugs identifies potent drug combinations against Trypanosoma cruzi.

PubMed

Planer, Joseph D; Hulverson, Matthew A; Arif, Jennifer A; Ranade, Ranae M; Don, Robert; Buckner, Frederick S

2014-07-01

An estimated 8 million persons, mainly in Latin America, are infected with Trypanosoma cruzi, the etiologic agent of Chagas disease. Existing antiparasitic drugs for Chagas disease have significant toxicities and suboptimal effectiveness, hence new therapeutic strategies need to be devised to address this neglected tropical disease. Due to the high research and development costs of bringing new chemical entities to the clinic, we and others have investigated the strategy of repurposing existing drugs for Chagas disease. Screens of FDA-approved drugs (described in this paper) have revealed a variety of chemical classes that have growth inhibitory activity against mammalian stage Trypanosoma cruzi parasites. Aside from azole antifungal drugs that have low or sub-nanomolar activity, most of the active compounds revealed in these screens have effective concentrations causing 50% inhibition (EC50's) in the low micromolar or high nanomolar range. For example, we have identified an antihistamine (clemastine, EC50 of 0.4 µM), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (fluoxetine, EC50 of 4.4 µM), and an antifolate drug (pyrimethamine, EC50 of 3.8 µM) and others. When tested alone in the murine model of Trypanosoma cruzi infection, most compounds had insufficient efficacy to lower parasitemia thus we investigated using combinations of compounds for additive or synergistic activity. Twenty-four active compounds were screened in vitro in all possible combinations. Follow up isobologram studies showed at least 8 drug pairs to have synergistic activity on T. cruzi growth. The combination of the calcium channel blocker, amlodipine, plus the antifungal drug, posaconazole, was found to be more effective at lowering parasitemia in mice than either drug alone, as was the combination of clemastine and posaconazole. Using combinations of FDA-approved drugs is a promising strategy for developing new treatments for Chagas disease.

Synergy Testing of FDA-Approved Drugs Identifies Potent Drug Combinations against Trypanosoma cruzi

PubMed Central

Ranade, Ranae M.; Don, Robert; Buckner, Frederick S.

2014-01-01

An estimated 8 million persons, mainly in Latin America, are infected with Trypanosoma cruzi, the etiologic agent of Chagas disease. Existing antiparasitic drugs for Chagas disease have significant toxicities and suboptimal effectiveness, hence new therapeutic strategies need to be devised to address this neglected tropical disease. Due to the high research and development costs of bringing new chemical entities to the clinic, we and others have investigated the strategy of repurposing existing drugs for Chagas disease. Screens of FDA-approved drugs (described in this paper) have revealed a variety of chemical classes that have growth inhibitory activity against mammalian stage Trypanosoma cruzi parasites. Aside from azole antifungal drugs that have low or sub-nanomolar activity, most of the active compounds revealed in these screens have effective concentrations causing 50% inhibition (EC50's) in the low micromolar or high nanomolar range. For example, we have identified an antihistamine (clemastine, EC50 of 0.4 µM), a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (fluoxetine, EC50 of 4.4 µM), and an antifolate drug (pyrimethamine, EC50 of 3.8 µM) and others. When tested alone in the murine model of Trypanosoma cruzi infection, most compounds had insufficient efficacy to lower parasitemia thus we investigated using combinations of compounds for additive or synergistic activity. Twenty-four active compounds were screened in vitro in all possible combinations. Follow up isobologram studies showed at least 8 drug pairs to have synergistic activity on T. cruzi growth. The combination of the calcium channel blocker, amlodipine, plus the antifungal drug, posaconazole, was found to be more effective at lowering parasitemia in mice than either drug alone, as was the combination of clemastine and posaconazole. Using combinations of FDA-approved drugs is a promising strategy for developing new treatments for Chagas disease. PMID:25033456

Regulating (for the benefit of) future persons: a different perspective on the FDA's jurisdiction to regulate human reproductive cloning.

PubMed

Javitt, Gail H; Hudson, Kathy

2003-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has taken the position that human reproductive cloning falls within its regulatory jurisdiction. This position has been subject to criticism on both procedural and substantive grounds. Some have contended that the FDA has failed to follow administrative law principles in asserting its jurisdiction, while others claim the FDA is ill suited to the task of addressing the ethical and social implications of human cloning. This Article argues, that, notwithstanding these criticisms, the FDA could plausibly assert jurisdiction over human cloning as a form of human gene therapy, an area in which the FDA is already regarded as having primary regulatory authority. Such an assertion would require that the FDA's jurisdiction extend to products affecting future persons, i.e., those not yet born. This Article demonstrates, for the first time, that such jurisdiction was implicit in the enactment of the 1962 Kefauver-Harris Amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and that the FDA has historically relied on such authority in promulgating regulations for drugs and devices.

77 FR 55414 - New Animal Drugs; Enrofloxacin; Tylvalosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-09-10

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 520, 522, and 556 [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Enrofloxacin; Tylvalosin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal...

Drug Advertising and the FDA.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Levesque, Cynthia

With increases in consumer focused advertising for prescription drugs, the Federal Drug Administration has renewed efforts to protect the public from false advertising. In 1982, it charged that the press kits Eli Lilly and Company distributed to reporters on its new antiarthritis drug, Oraflex, misrepresented the product. It recommended that Lilly…

Delegations of authority and organization; Center for Devices and Radiological Health--FDA. Final rule.

PubMed

1991-10-10

The Commissioner of Food and Drugs is redelegating authorities to certain officials of the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) to temporarily suspend premarket approval applications and to recall devices in the event those devices would cause serious adverse consequences to health or death. These authorities were given to the FDA by the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990.

Laboratory-based testing to evaluate abuse-deterrent formulations and satisfy the Food and Drug Administration's recommendation for Category 1 Testing.

PubMed

Altomare, Christopher; Kinzler, Eric R; Buchhalter, August R; Cone, Edward J; Costantino, Anthony

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers the development of abuse-deterrent formulations of solid oral dosage forms a public health priority and has outlined a series of premarket studies that should be performed prior to submitting an application to the Agency. Category 1 studies are performed to characterize whether the abuse-deterrent properties of a new formulation can be easily defeated. Study protocols are designed to evaluate common abuse patterns of prescription medications as well as more advanced methods that have been reported on drug abuse websites and forums. Because FDA believes Category 1 testing should fully characterize the abuse-deterrent characteristics of an investigational formulation, Category 1 testing is time consuming and requires specialized laboratory resources as well as advanced knowledge of prescription medication abuse. Recent Advisory Committee meetings at FDA have shown that Category 1 tests play a critical role in FDA's evaluation of an investigational formulation. In this article, we will provide a general overview of the methods of manipulation and routes of administration commonly utilized by prescription drug abusers, how those methods and routes are evaluated in a laboratory setting, and discuss data intake, analysis, and reporting to satisfy FDA's Category 1 testing requirements.

76 FR 2807 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-01-18

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 510 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to...

A Comparative Review of Waivers Granted in Pediatric Drug Development by FDA and EMA from 2007-2013

PubMed Central

Egger, Gunter F.; Wharton, Gerold T.; Malli, Suzanne; Temeck, Jean; Murphy, M. Dianne; Tomasi, Paolo

2016-01-01

Background The European Union and the United States have different legal frameworks in place for pediatric drug development, which can potentially lead to different pediatric research requirements for the pharmaceutical industry. This manuscript compares pediatric clinical trial waivers granted by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods This is a retrospective review comparing EMA’s Paediatric Committee (PDCO) decisions with FDA’s Pediatric Review Committee (PeRC) recommendations for all product-specific pediatric full waiver applications submitted to EMA from January 2007 through December 2013. Using baseline data from EMA, we matched product-specific waivers with their FDA equivalents during the study period. Results For single active substance products, PDCO and PeRC adopted similar opinions in 42 of 49 indications (86%). For fixed-dose combinations, PDCO and PeRC adopted similar opinions in 24 of 31 indications (77%). Conclusion Despite the different legal frameworks, criteria, and processes of determination, the waiver decisions of the 2 agencies were similar in the majority of cases. PMID:27274951

77 FR 32897 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-06-04

.... FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug... 21 CFR Part 510 Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and...

The Food and Drug Administration reports provided more data but were more difficult to use than the European Medicines Agency reports.

PubMed

Schroll, Jeppe Bennekou; Abdel-Sattar, Maher; Bero, Lisa

2015-01-01

To compare the accessibility, comprehensiveness, and usefulness of data available from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug reports. This is a cross-sectional study. All new molecular drugs approved between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2012 from the FDA and EMA Web sites were eligible. We included 27 drug reports. Most were searchable, but the FDA table of contents did not match the file's page numbers. Several FDA documents must be searched compared with a single EMA document, but the FDA reports contain more summary data on harms. Detailed information about harms was reported for 93% of the FDA reports (25 of 27 reports) and 26% of the EMA reports (7 of 27 reports). The reports contained information about trial methodology but did not include trial registry IDs or investigator names. All reports but one contained sufficient information to be used in a meta-analysis. Detailed data on efficacy and harms are available at the two agencies. The FDA has more summary data on harms, but the documents are harder to navigate. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Stimulated reporting: the impact of US food and drug administration-issued alerts on the adverse event reporting system (FAERS).

PubMed

Hoffman, Keith B; Demakas, Andrea R; Dimbil, Mo; Tatonetti, Nicholas P; Erdman, Colin B

2014-11-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses the Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) to support post-marketing safety surveillance programs. Currently, almost one million case reports are submitted to FAERS each year, making it a vast repository of drug safety information. Sometimes cited as a limitation of FAERS, however, is the assumption that "stimulated reporting" of adverse events (AEs) occurs in response to warnings, alerts, and label changes that are issued by the FDA. To determine the extent of "stimulated reporting" in the modern-day FAERS database. One hundred drugs approved by the FDA between 2001 and 2010 were included in this analysis. FDA alerts were obtained by a comprehensive search of the FDA's MedWatch and main websites. Publicly available FAERS data were used to assess the "primary suspect" AE reporting pattern for up to four quarters before, and after, the issuance of an FDA alert. A few drugs did demonstrate "stimulated reporting" trends. A majority of the drugs, however, showed little evidence for significant reporting changes associated with the issuance of alerts. When we compared the percentage changes in reporting after an FDA alert with those after a sham "control alert", the overall reporting trends appeared to be quite similar. Of 100 drugs analyzed for short-term reporting trends, 21 real alerts and 25 sham alerts demonstrated an increase (greater than or equal to 1 %) in reporting. The long-term analysis of 91 drugs showed that 24 real alerts and 28 sham alerts demonstrated a greater than or equal to 1 % increase. Our results suggest that most of modern day FAERS reporting is not significantly affected by the issuance of FDA alerts.

Hematology and pathology devices; reclassification; restricted devices; OTC test sample collection systems for drugs of abuse testing. Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Final rule.

PubMed

2000-04-07

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is reclassifying over-the-counter (OTC) test sample collection systems for drugs of abuse testing from class III (premarket approval) into class I (general controls) and exempting them from premarket notification (510(k)) and current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) requirements. FDA is also designating OTC test sample collection systems for drugs of abuse testing as restricted devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) and establishing restrictions intended to assure consumers that: The underlying laboratory test(s) are accurate and reliable; the laboratory performing the test(s) has adequate expertise and competency; and the product has adequate labeling and methods of communicating test results to consumers. Finally, FDA is adding a conforming amendment to the existing classification regulation for specimen transport and storage containers to clarify that it does not apply to specimen transport and storage containers that are part of an OTC test sample collection system for the purpose of testing for the presence of drugs of abuse or their metabolites in a laboratory.

United States Food and Drug Administration Regulation of Gene and Cell Therapies.

PubMed

Bailey, Alexander M; Arcidiacono, Judith; Benton, Kimberly A; Taraporewala, Zenobia; Winitsky, Steve

2015-01-01

The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a regulatory agency that has oversight for a wide range of products entering the US market, including gene and cell therapies. The regulatory approach for these products is similar to other medical products within the United States and consists of a multitiered framework of statutes, regulations, and guidance documents. Within this framework, there is considerable flexibility which is necessary due to the biological and technical complexity of these products in general. This chapter provides an overview of the US FDA regulatory oversight of gene and cell therapy products.

Zohydro approval by food and drug administration: controversial or frightening?

PubMed

Manchikanti, Laxmaiah; Atluri, Sairam; Candido, Kenneth D; Boswell, Mark V; Simopoulos, Thomas T; Grider, Jay S; Falco, Frank J E; Hirsch, Joshua A

2014-01-01

The actions and regulations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are crucial to the entire population of the U.S., specifically the public who take a multitude of drugs and providers who prescribe drugs and devices. Further, the FDA is relevant to investors, specifically in regards to biotech and pharmaceutical companies involved in developing new drugs. The FDA has been criticized for a lack of independence on the one hand and excessive regulatory and expanding authority without evidence and consistency of the actions on the other hand. The FDA approved a single-entity, long-acting, hydrocodone product (Zohydro, Zogenix, San Diego, CA) on October 25, 2013, against the recommendation of the FDA's own appointed scientific advisory panel, which voted 11 to 2 against the approval of Zohydro. Subsequent to the approval, multiple consumer safety organizations, health care agencies, addiction treatment providers, professional organizations, and other groups on the frontline of the opioid addiction epidemic have expressed concern. In addition, the US Congress and various state attorneys general raised serious concerns about the approval of Zohydro, which is highly addictive and may enhance the opioid addiction epidemic. Supporters of Zohydro contend that it is necessary and essential to manage chronic pain and improve functional status with no additional risk. Over the past 15 years, prescriptions for opioids have skyrocketed with the United States consuming more than 84% of the global oxycodone and more than 99% of the hydrocodone supply. The sharp increase in opioid prescribing has led to parallel increases in opioid addiction and overdose deaths, surpassing motor vehicle injuries in the U.S. Recent studies assessing the trends of medical use and misuse of opioid analgesics from 2000 to 2011 have concluded that the present trend of the continued increase in the medical use of opioid analgesics appears to contribute to increasing misuse, resulting in multiple health

76 FR 76738 - Generic Drug User Fee; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-08

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0381] Generic Drug User Fee; Public Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting to...

78 FR 17595 - New Animal Drugs; Changes of Sponsor

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-22

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 522, 524, 529, and 558 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Changes of Sponsor AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

76 FR 40808 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Amprolium

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-12

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Amprolium AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

76 FR 59023 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tylosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-23

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tylosin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

75 FR 67031 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Domperidone

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-01

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0002] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Domperidone AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

77 FR 3927 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Deracoxib

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-01-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Deracoxib AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

77 FR 15960 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Pergolide

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Pergolide AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

76 FR 18648 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Robenacoxib

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-05

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Robenacoxib AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

76 FR 78149 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Estriol

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-16

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Estriol AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug...

77 FR 4224 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-01-27

.... FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug.... 801-808. List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 510 Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs...

76 FR 3910 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Orphan Drugs...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-01-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0015... Designation (Form FDA 3671) AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of...

78 FR 35277 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Orphan Drugs...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-12

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0653... Designation (Form FDA 3671) AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of...

76 FR 79198 - Generic Drug User Fee; Public Meeting; Correction

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0381] Generic Drug User Fee; Public Meeting; Correction AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice; correction. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting a notice that appeared...

A common feature pharmacophore for FDA-approved drugs inhibiting the Ebola virus.

PubMed

Ekins, Sean; Freundlich, Joel S; Coffee, Megan

2014-01-01

We are currently faced with a global infectious disease crisis which has been anticipated for decades. While many promising biotherapeutics are being tested, the search for a small molecule has yet to deliver an approved drug or therapeutic for the Ebola or similar filoviruses that cause haemorrhagic fever. Two recent high throughput screens published in 2013 did however identify several hits that progressed to animal studies that are FDA approved drugs used for other indications. The current computational analysis uses these molecules from two different structural classes to construct a common features pharmacophore. This ligand-based pharmacophore implicates a possible common target or mechanism that could be further explored. A recent structure based design project yielded nine co-crystal structures of pyrrolidinone inhibitors bound to the viral protein 35 (VP35). When receptor-ligand pharmacophores based on the analogs of these molecules and the protein structures were constructed, the molecular features partially overlapped with the common features of solely ligand-based pharmacophore models based on FDA approved drugs. These previously identified FDA approved drugs with activity against Ebola were therefore docked into this protein. The antimalarials chloroquine and amodiaquine docked favorably in VP35. We propose that these drugs identified to date as inhibitors of the Ebola virus may be targeting VP35. These computational models may provide preliminary insights into the molecular features that are responsible for their activity against Ebola virus in vitro and in vivo and we propose that this hypothesis could be readily tested.

A common feature pharmacophore for FDA-approved drugs inhibiting the Ebola virus

PubMed Central

Ekins, Sean; Freundlich, Joel S.; Coffee, Megan

2014-01-01

We are currently faced with a global infectious disease crisis which has been anticipated for decades. While many promising biotherapeutics are being tested, the search for a small molecule has yet to deliver an approved drug or therapeutic for the Ebola or similar filoviruses that cause haemorrhagic fever. Two recent high throughput screens published in 2013 did however identify several hits that progressed to animal studies that are FDA approved drugs used for other indications. The current computational analysis uses these molecules from two different structural classes to construct a common features pharmacophore. This ligand-based pharmacophore implicates a possible common target or mechanism that could be further explored. A recent structure based design project yielded nine co-crystal structures of pyrrolidinone inhibitors bound to the viral protein 35 (VP35). When receptor-ligand pharmacophores based on the analogs of these molecules and the protein structures were constructed, the molecular features partially overlapped with the common features of solely ligand-based pharmacophore models based on FDA approved drugs. These previously identified FDA approved drugs with activity against Ebola were therefore docked into this protein. The antimalarials chloroquine and amodiaquine docked favorably in VP35. We propose that these drugs identified to date as inhibitors of the Ebola virus may be targeting VP35. These computational models may provide preliminary insights into the molecular features that are responsible for their activity against Ebola virus in vitro and in vivo and we propose that this hypothesis could be readily tested. PMID:25653841

FDA Procedures for Standardization and Certification of Retail Food Inspection/Training Officers, 2000.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Food and Drug Administration (DHHS/PHS), Rockville, MD.

This document provides information, standards, and behavioral objectives for standardization and certification of retail food inspection personnel in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The procedures described in the document are based on the FDA Food Code, updated to reflect current Food Code provisions and to include a more refined focus on…

Development times, clinical testing, postmarket follow-up, and safety risks for the new drugs approved by the US food and drug administration: the class of 2008.

PubMed

Moore, Thomas J; Furberg, Curt D

2014-01-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has advanced multiple proposals to promote biomedical innovation by making new drugs available more quickly but with shorter, smaller, and more selective clinical trials and less rigorous end points. To inform the debate about appropriate standards, we studied the development times, clinical testing, postmarket follow-up, and safety risks for the new drugs approved by the FDA in 2008, when most provisions of current law, regulation, and policies were in effect. Descriptive study of the drugs classified as new molecular entities using preapproval FDA evaluation documents, agency drug information databases, prescribing information, and other primary data sources. Comparison of drugs that received standard review and those deemed sufficiently innovative to receive expedited review with regard to clinical development and FDA review time, the size and duration of efficacy trials, safety issues, and postmarket follow-up. In 2008, the FDA approved 20 therapeutic drugs, 8 with expedited review and 12 with standard review. The expedited drugs took a median of 5.1 years (range, 1.6-10.6 years) of clinical development to obtain marketing approval compared with 7.5 years (range, 4.7-19.4 years) for the standard review drugs (P = .05). The expedited drugs were tested for efficacy in a median of 104 patients receiving the active drug (range, 23-599), compared with a median of 580 patients (range, 75-1207) for standard review drugs (P = .003). Nonclinical testing showed that 6 therapeutic drugs were animal carcinogens, 5 were in vitro mutagens, and 14 were animal teratogens. Other safety concerns resulted in 5 Boxed Warnings; 8 drugs required risk management plans. The FDA required 85 postmarket commitments. By 2013, 5 drugs acquired a new or expanded Boxed Warning; 26 of 85 (31%) of the postmarketing study commitments had been fulfilled, and 8 (9%) had been submitted for agency review. For new drugs approved by the FDA in 2008, those

78 FR 21058 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, 522, 524, 526, 529, and 558 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

The legal and scientific basis for FDA's assertion of jurisdiction over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco.

PubMed

Kessler, D A; Barnett, P S; Witt, A; Zeller, M R; Mande, J R; Schultz, W B

1997-02-05

On August 28, 1996, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) asserted jurisdiction over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Under this Act, a product is a "drug" or "device" subject to FDA jurisdiction if it is "intended to affect the structure or any function of the body." The FDA determined that nicotine in cigarettes and smokeless tobacco does "affect the structure or any function of the body" because nicotine causes addiction and other pharmacological effects. The FDA then determined that these pharmacological effects are "intended" because (1) a scientific consensus has emerged that nicotine is addictive; (2) recent studies have shown that most consumers use cigarettes and smokeless tobacco for pharmacological purposes, including satisfying their addiction to nicotine; and (3) newly disclosed evidence from the tobacco manufacturers has revealed that the manufacturers know that nicotine causes pharmacological effects, including addiction, and design their products to provide pharmacologically active doses of nicotine. The FDA thus concluded that cigarettes and smokeless tobacco are subject to FDA jurisdiction because they contain a "drug," nicotine, and a "device" for delivering this drug to the body.

77 FR 15961 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Phenylpropanolamine

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 520 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Phenylpropanolamine AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal...

75 FR 71450 - Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Amendment of Notice

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-23

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001] Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Amendment of Notice AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an amendment to the notice of a...

77 FR 43844 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Drug User...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0748... Cover Sheet; Form FDA 3794 AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed...

77 FR 69630 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; New Animal Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-11-20

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-1131... Applications and Supporting Regulations, and Form FDA 356V AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment...

The FDA Unapproved Drugs Initiative: An Observational Study of the Consequences for Drug Prices and Shortages in the United States.

PubMed

Gupta, Ravi; Dhruva, Sanket S; Fox, Erin R; Ross, Joseph S

2017-10-01

Hundreds of drug products are currently marketed in the United States without approval from the FDA. The 2006 Unapproved Drugs Initiative (UDI) requires manufacturers to remove these drug products from the market or obtain FDA approval by demonstrating evidence of safety and efficacy. Once the FDA acts against an unapproved drug, fewer manufacturers remain in the market, potentially enabling drug price increases and greater susceptibility to drug shortages. There is a need for systematic study of the UDI's effect on prices and shortages of all targeted drugs. To examine the clinical evidence for approval and association with prices and shortages of previously unapproved prescription drugs after being addressed by the UDI. Previously unapproved prescription drugs that faced UDI regulatory action or with at least 1 product that received FDA approval through manufacturers' voluntary compliance with the UDI between 2006 and 2015 were identified. The clinical evidence was categorized as either newly conducted clinical trials or use of previously published literature and/or bioequivalence studies to demonstrate safety and efficacy. We determined the change in average wholesale price, presence of shortage, and duration of shortage for each drug during the 2 years before and after UDI regulatory action or approval through voluntary compliance. Between 2006 and 2015, 34 previously unapproved prescription drugs were addressed by the UDI. Nearly 90% of those with a drug product that received FDA approval were supported by literature reviews or bioequivalence studies, not new clinical trial evidence. Among the 26 drugs with available pricing data, average wholesale price during the 2 years before and after voluntary approval or UDI action increased by a median of 37% (interquartile range [IQR] = 23%-204%; P < 0.001). The number of drugs in shortage increased from 17 (50.0%) to 25 (73.5%) during the 2 years before and after, respectively (P = 0.046). The median shortage

77 FR 37911 - Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Amendment of Notice

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-06-25

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0001] Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Amendment of Notice AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an amendment to the notice of meeting of the...

Medtronic, Inc.; premarket approval of the Interstim Sacral Nerve Stimulation (SNS) System--FDA. Notice.

PubMed

1998-01-29

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing its approval of the application by Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, MN, for premarket approval, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act), of the Interstim Sacral Nerve Stimulation (SNS) System. After reviewing the recommendation of the Gastroenterology and Urology Devices Panel, FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) notified the applicant, by letter of September 29, 1997, of the approval of the application.

FDA pregnancy risk categories and the CPS

PubMed Central

Law, Ruth; Bozzo, Pina; Koren, Gideon; Einarson, Adrienne

2010-01-01

ABSTRACT QUESTION My patient is taking a medication for a chronic condition and has just found out that she is 6 weeks pregnant. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has assigned this medication to pregnancy risk category D, and the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties provides no additional data. How should I interpret this information, and how does the Motherisk Program evaluate the safety or risks of drug use in pregnancy? ANSWER Pregnancy safety data provided by the FDA pregnancy risk categories and the Compendium of Pharmaceuticals and Specialties are insufficient to guide clinical decisions on how to proceed with a pregnancy following exposure to a category D medication. The Motherisk Program creates peer-reviewed statements derived from the primary literature, and we examine fetal outcomes as well as the risk-benefit profile of maternal treatment when evaluating the safety of medication use in pregnancy. The FDA announced in May 2008 that it is dropping its pregnancy risk categories and adopting a method similar to the one we use at Motherisk. PMID:20228306

78 FR 43209 - Narcolepsy Public Meeting on Patient-Focused Drug Development

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0815] Narcolepsy Public Meeting on Patient-Focused Drug Development AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

78 FR 58313 - Fibromyalgia Public Meeting on Patient-Focused Drug Development

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-23

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-1041] Fibromyalgia Public Meeting on Patient-Focused Drug Development AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

Gaps, tensions, and conflicts in the FDA approval process: implications for clinical practice.

PubMed

Deyo, Richard A

2004-01-01

Despite many successes, drug approval at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is subject to gaps, internal tensions, and conflicts of interest. Recalls of drugs and devices and studies demonstrating advantages of older drugs over newer ones highlight the importance of these limitations. The FDA does not compare competing drugs and rarely requires tests of clinical efficacy for new devices. It does not review advertisements before use, assess cost-effectiveness, or regulate surgery (except for devices). Many believe postmarketing surveillance of drugs and devices is inadequate. A source of tension within the agency is pressure for speedy approvals. This may have resulted in "burn-out" among medical officers and has prompted criticism that safety is ignored. Others argue, however, that the agency is unnecessarily slow and bureaucratic. Recent reports identify conflicts of interest (stock ownership, consulting fees, research grants) among some members of the FDA's advisory committees. FDA review serves a critical function, but physicians should be aware that new drugs may not be as effective as old ones; that new drugs are likely to have undiscovered side effects at the time of marketing; that direct-to-consumer ads are sometimes misleading; that new devices generally have less rigorous evidence of efficacy than new drugs; and that value for money is not considered in approval.

New orthopedic devices and the FDA.

PubMed

Sheth, Ujash; Nguyen, Nhu-An; Gaines, Sean; Bhandari, Mohit; Mehlman, Charles T; Klein, Guy

2009-01-01

Each year the field of orthopedics is introduced to an influx of new medical devices. Each of these medical devices has faced certain hurdles prior to being approved for marketing by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Among the regulatory pathways available, the 510(k) premarket notification is by far the one most commonly used. The 510(k) premarket notification allows the manufacturer to receive prompt approval of their device by demonstrating that it is "substantially equivalent" to an existing legally marketed device. In most instances, this proof of substantial equivalence allows manufacturers of medical devices to bypass the use of clinical trials, which are a hallmark of the approval process for new drugs. As a result, most medical devices are approved without demonstrating safety or effectiveness. This article reviews the regulatory processes used by the FDA to evaluate new orthopedic devices.

Raising suspicions with the Food and Drug Administration: detecting misconduct.

PubMed

Hamrell, Michael R

2010-12-01

The clinical Bioresearch Monitoring (BIMO) oversight program of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) assesses the quality and integrity of data submitted to the FDA for new product approvals and human subjects protection during clinical studies. A comprehensive program of on-site inspections and data verification, the BIMO program routinely performs random inspections to verify studies submitted to the FDA to support a marketing application. On occasion the FDA will conduct a directed inspection of a specific site or study to look for problems that may have previously been identified. The inspection of a clinical study sometimes uncovers evidence of research fraud or misconduct and it must be decided how to deal with the investigator and the suspect data. The prevention of [or] decreasing the incidence of fraud and misconduct through monitoring by the sponsor is one way to manage compliance issues and can help prevent misconduct. A training program is another way to manage compliance issues in clinical research. While training does not guarantee quality, it does help to ensure that all individuals involved understand the rules and the consequences of research misconduct.

76 FR 48714 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor; Moxidectin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 520, 522, and 524 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor; Moxidectin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal...

75 FR 59732 - Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-28

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001] Gastrointestinal Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting...

76 FR 19375 - Safety and Efficacy of Hypnotic Drugs; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-07

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Safety and Efficacy of Hypnotic Drugs; Public Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public meeting to...

Efficacy, Safety, and Regulatory Approval of Food and Drug Administration-Designated Breakthrough and Nonbreakthrough Cancer Medicines.

PubMed

Hwang, Thomas J; Franklin, Jessica M; Chen, Christopher T; Lauffenburger, Julie C; Gyawali, Bishal; Kesselheim, Aaron S; Darrow, Jonathan J

2018-04-24

Purpose The breakthrough therapy program was established in 2012 to expedite the development and review of new medicines. We evaluated the times to approval, efficacy, and safety of breakthrough-designated versus non-breakthrough-designated cancer drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Methods We studied all new cancer drugs approved by the FDA between January 2012 and December 2017. Regulatory and therapeutic characteristics (time to FDA approval, pivotal trial efficacy end point, novelty of mechanism of action) were compared between breakthrough-designated and non-breakthrough-designated cancer drugs. Random-effects meta-regression was used to assess the association between breakthrough therapy designation and hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS), response rates (RRs) for solid tumors, serious adverse events, and deaths not attributed to disease progression. Results Between 2012 and 2017, the FDA approved 58 new cancer drugs, 25 (43%) of which received breakthrough therapy designation. The median time to first FDA approval was 5.2 years for breakthrough-designated drugs versus 7.1 years for non-breakthrough-designated drugs (difference, 1.9 years; P = .01). There were no statistically significant differences between breakthrough-designated and non-breakthrough-designated drugs in median PFS gains (8.6 v 4.0 months; P = .11), hazard ratios for PFS (0.43 v 0.51; P = .28), or RRs for solid tumors (37% v 39%; P = .74). Breakthrough therapy-designated drugs were not more likely to act via a novel mechanism of action (36% v 39%; P = 1.00). Rates of deaths (6% v 4%; P = .99) and serious adverse events (38% v 36%; P = 0.93) were also similar in breakthrough-designated and non-breakthrough-designated drugs. Conclusion Breakthrough-designated cancer drugs were associated with faster times to approval, but there was no evidence that these drugs provide improvements in safety or novelty; nor was there a statistically significant efficacy

FDA Proposes New Safety Measures for Indoor Tanning Devices: The Facts

MedlinePlus

... Consumers Home For Consumers Consumer Updates FDA Proposes New Safety Measures for Indoor Tanning Devices: The Facts ... Website Policies U.S. Food and Drug Administration 10903 New Hampshire Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20993 1-888- ...

Association of the FDA Amendment Act with trial registration, publication, and outcome reporting.

PubMed

Phillips, Adam T; Desai, Nihar R; Krumholz, Harlan M; Zou, Constance X; Miller, Jennifer E; Ross, Joseph S

2017-07-18

Selective clinical trial publication and outcome reporting has the potential to bias the medical literature. The 2007 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendment Act (FDAAA) mandated clinical trial registration and outcome reporting on ClinicalTrials.gov, a publicly accessible trial registry. Using publicly available data from ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA documents, and PubMed, we determined registration, publication, and reporting of findings for all efficacy trials supporting FDA approval of new drugs for cardiovascular disease and diabetes between 2005 and 2014, before and after the FDAAA. For published trials, we compared the published interpretation of the findings (positive, equivocal, or negative) with the FDA reviewer's interpretation. Between 2005 and 2014, the FDA approved 30 drugs for 32 indications of cardiovascular disease (n = 17) and diabetes (n = 15) on the basis of 183 trials (median per indication 5.7 (IQR, 3-8)). Compared with pre FDAAA, post-FDAAA studies were more likely to be registered (78 of 78 (100%) vs 73 of 105 (70%); p < 0.001), to be published (76 of 78 (97%) vs 93 of 105 (89%); p = 0.03), and to present findings concordant with the FDA reviewer's interpretation (74 of 76 (97%) vs 78 of 93 (84%); p = 0.004). Pre FDAAA, the FDA reviewer interpreted 80 (76%) trials as positive and 91 (98%) were published as positive. Post FDAAA, the FDA reviewer interpreted 71 (91%) trials as positive and 71 (93%) were published as positive. FDAAA was associated with increased registration, publication, and FDA-concordant outcome reporting for trials supporting FDA approval of new drugs for cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

76 FR 36542 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: The Content of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-22

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the draft guidance document entitled ``Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff: The Content of Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) and Premarket Approval (PMA) Applications for Low Glucose Suspend (LGS) Device Systems.'' This draft guidance document provides industry and Agency staff with recommendations that are intended to improve the safety and effectiveness of LGS Device Systems. This draft guidance is not final nor is it in effect at this time.

76 FR 40612 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name and Address

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-11

.... FDA-2011-N-0003] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name and Address AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal... Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements...

Data Sets Representative of the Structures and Experimental Properties of FDA-Approved Drugs.

PubMed

Douguet, Dominique

2018-03-08

Presented here are several data sets that gather information collected from the labels of the FDA approved drugs: their molecular structures and those of the described active metabolites, their associated pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics data, and the history of their marketing authorization by the FDA. To date, 1852 chemical structures have been identified with a molecular weight less than 2000 of which 492 are or have active metabolites. To promote the sharing of data, the original web server was upgraded for browsing the database and downloading the data sets (http://chemoinfo.ipmc.cnrs.fr/edrug3d). It is believed that the multidimensional chemistry-oriented collections are an essential resource for a thorough analysis of the current drug chemical space. The data sets are envisioned as being used in a wide range of endeavors that include drug repurposing, drug design, privileged structures analyses, structure-activity relationship studies, and improving of absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination predictive models.

75 FR 76259 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tylosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-08

.... FDA-2010-N-0002] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tylosin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval of an original abbreviated new animal drug application (ANADA) filed by...

EBOLA and FDA: reviewing the response to the 2014 outbreak, to find lessons for the future

PubMed Central

Largent, Emily A.

2016-01-01

Abstract In 2014, West Africa confronted the most severe outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) in history. At the onset of the outbreak—as now—there were no therapies approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for prevention of, post-exposure prophylaxis against, or treatment of EVD. As a result, the outbreak spurred interest in developing novel treatments, sparked calls to use experimental interventions in the field, and highlighted challenges to the standard approach to FDA approval of new drugs. Although the outbreak was geographically centered in West Africa, it showcased FDA's global role in drug development, approval, and access. FDA's response to EVD highlights the panoply of agency powers and demonstrates the flexibility of FDA's regulatory framework. This paper evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of FDA's response and makes policy recommendations regarding how FDA should respond to new and re-emerging public health threats. In particular, it argues that greater emphasis should be placed on drug development in interoutbreak periods and on assuring access to approved products. The current pandemic of Zika virus infection is but one example of an emerging health threat that will require FDA involvement in order to achieve a successful response. PMID:28852537

76 FR 11490 - Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Phenylbutazone; Pyrantel; Tylosin...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0033... AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA... INFORMATION CONTACT: John Bartkowiak, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration...

78 FR 52429 - New Animal Drugs; Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Diethylcarbamazine...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-23

... 558 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0839] New Animal Drugs; Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug...: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect the withdrawal of approval of three new animal drug applications (NADAs) at the sponsors' request...

76 FR 30176 - Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-24

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Dermatologic and Ophthalmic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee...

75 FR 54016 - New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name and Address

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-03

.... FDA-2010-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Name and Address AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal... in 21 CFR Part 510 Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and...

78 FR 64956 - Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001] Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee...

75 FR 22146 - Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-27

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001] Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Advisory...

76 FR 70462 - Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-11-14

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0002] Advisory Committee for Reproductive Health Drugs; Notice of Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration... Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The meeting will be open to the public. Name of Committee: Advisory...

New and incremental FDA black box warnings from 2008 to 2015.

PubMed

Solotke, Michael T; Dhruva, Sanket S; Downing, Nicholas S; Shah, Nilay D; Ross, Joseph S

2018-02-01

The boxed warning (also known as 'black box warning [BBW]') is one of the strongest drug safety actions that the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) can implement, and often warns of serious risks. The objective of this study was to comprehensively characterize BBWs issued for drugs after FDA approval. We identified all post-marketing BBWs from January 2008 through June 2015 listed on FDA's MedWatch and Drug Safety Communications websites. We used each drug's prescribing information to classify its BBW as new, major update to a preexisting BBW, or minor update. We then characterized these BBWs with respect to pre-specified BBW-specific and drug-specific features. There were 111 BBWs issued to drugs on the US market, of which 29% (n = 32) were new BBWs, 32% (n = 35) were major updates, and 40% (n = 44) were minor updates. New BBWs and major updates were most commonly issued for death (51%) and cardiovascular risk (27%). The new BBWs and major updates impacted 200 drug formulations over the study period, of which 64% were expected to be used chronically and 58% had available alternatives without a BBW. New BBWs and incremental updates to existing BBWs are frequently added to drug labels after regulatory approval.

Right to experimental treatment: FDA new drug approval, constitutional rights, and the public's health.

PubMed

Leonard, Elizabeth Weeks

2009-01-01

On May 2, 2006, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a startling opinion, Abigail Alliance for Better Access to Developmental Drugs v. Eschenbach, held that terminally ill patients who have exhausted all other available options have a constitutional right to experimental treatment that FDA has not yet approved. Although ultimately overturned by the full court, Abigail Alliance generated considerable interest from various constituencies. Meanwhile, FDA proposed similar regulatory amendments, as have lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Congress. But proponents of expanded access fail to consider public health and consumer safety concerns. In particular, allowing patients to try unproven treatments, outside of controlled clinical trials risks both the study's outcome and the health of patients who might benefit from the deliberate, careful process of new drug approval as it currently operates under FDA's auspices.

76 FR 38554 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Amprolium

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-01

.... FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Amprolium AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval of an original abbreviated new animal drug application (ANADA) filed by Cross...

75 FR 54492 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tiamulin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-08

.... FDA-2010-N-0002] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Tiamulin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval of a supplemental new animal drug application (NADA) filed by Novartis Animal...

A brave new beef: The US Food and Drug Administration's review of the safety of cloned animal products.

PubMed

Solomon, Louis M; Noll, Rebekka C; Mordkoff, David S; Murphy, Patrick; Rolerson, Marcy

2009-09-01

To meet its public mandate, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) collected studies on the potential health hazards of eating or drinking cloned food products. Based on an earlier National Academy of Sciences study that, on closer analysis, was not nearly as sanguine, the FDA's report found no evidence of a health risk from the public's ingestion of cloned food products. This article analyzes the risks the FDA considered, and concludes that there is a disconnect between the risks the FDA assessed in these studies and the risks that might arise from cloned food products. The FDA should consider instituting effective tracking mechanisms and other diagnostics that would permit scientists and the public to answer the question of health risks posed by cloned food products.

"Off Label" Use of FDA-Approved Devices and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

PubMed

Kopans, Daniel B

2015-11-01

The purpose of this article is to clarify for radiologists the meaning of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval with respect to Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT). DBT is a major improvement over 2D mammography in the detection of cancers (sensitivity) and the reduction in recalls resulting from screening (specificity). Most imaging systems that have been approved by the FDA are used "off label" for breast imaging. Although the FDA determines which claims a manufacturer can make for a device, physicians may use approved devices, such as DBT, off label to provide better patient care.

78 FR 13348 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration Advisory Committee; Amendment of Notice

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-27

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0001... for Devices and Radiological Health Research Review subcommittee and the Global Health subcommittee. Progress updates will be presented regarding the Global Health subcommittee and the recently established...

77 FR 56650 - Food and Drug Administration/American Glaucoma Society Workshop on the Validity, Reliability, and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-09-13

...] Food and Drug Administration/American Glaucoma Society Workshop on the Validity, Reliability, and... entitled ``FDA/American Glaucoma Society (AGS) Workshop on the Validity, Reliability, and Usability of... research. The purpose of this public workshop is to provide a forum for discussing the validity...

Improving the effect of FDA-mandated drug safety alerts with Internet-based continuing medical education.

PubMed

Kraus, Carl N; Baldwin, Alan T; McAllister, R G

2013-02-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires risk communication as an element of Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) to alert and educate healthcare providers about severe toxicities associated with approved drugs. The educational effectiveness of this approach has not been evaluated. To support the communication plan element of the ipilimumab REMS, a Medscape Safe Use Alert (SUA) letter was distributed by Medscape via email and mobile device distribution to clinicians specified in the REMS. This alert contained the FDA-approved Dear Healthcare Provider (DHCP) letter mandated for distribution. A continuing medical education (CME) activity describing ipilimumab toxicities and the appropriate management was simultaneously posted on the website and distributed to Medscape members. Data were collected over a 6-month period regarding the handling of the letter and the responses to pre- and post-test questions for those who participated in the CME activity. Analysis of the answers to the pre- and posttest questions showed that participation in the CME activity resulted in an improvement in correct answer responses of 47%. Our experience shows that there are likely distinct information sources that are utilized by different HCP groups. The ready availability of a brief CME activity was utilized by 24,063 individuals, the majority of whom showed enhanced understanding of ipilimumab toxicity by improvement in post-test scores, educational data that are not available via implementation of standard safety alert communications. These results demonstrate that improvement in understanding of specific drug toxicities is enhanced by a CME intervention.

FDA-approved drugs that are spermatotoxic in animals and the utility of animal testing for human risk prediction.

PubMed

Rayburn, Elizabeth R; Gao, Liang; Ding, Jiayi; Ding, Hongxia; Shao, Jun; Li, Haibo

2018-02-01

This study reviews FDA-approved drugs that negatively impact spermatozoa in animals, as well as how these findings reflect on observations in human male gametes. The FDA drug warning labels included in the DailyMed database and the peer-reviewed literature in the PubMed database were searched for information to identify single-ingredient, FDA-approved prescription drugs with spermatotoxic effects. A total of 235 unique, single-ingredient, FDA-approved drugs reported to be spermatotoxic in animals were identified in the drug labels. Forty-nine of these had documented negative effects on humans in either the drug label or literature, while 31 had no effect or a positive impact on human sperm. For the other 155 drugs that were spermatotoxic in animals, no human data was available. The current animal models are not very effective for predicting human spermatotoxicity, and there is limited information available about the impact of many drugs on human spermatozoa. New approaches should be designed that more accurately reflect the findings in men, including more studies on human sperm in vitro and studies using other systems (ex vivo tissue culture, xenograft models, in silico studies, etc.). In addition, the present data is often incomplete or reported in a manner that prevents interpretation of their clinical relevance. Changes should be made to the requirements for pre-clinical testing, drug surveillance, and the warning labels of drugs to ensure that the potential risks to human fertility are clearly indicated.

78 FR 70062 - Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Carbarsone; Roxarsone

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-22

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Carbarsone; Roxarsone AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval of...

Working with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to obtain approval of products under the Animal Rule.

PubMed

Park, Glen D; Mitchel, Jules T

2016-06-01

While the development of medical products and approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is well known, the development of countermeasures against exposure to toxic levels of radiation, chemicals, and infectious agents requires special consideration, and there has been, to date, little experience in working with the FDA to obtain approval of these products. The FDA has published a regulation entitled "Approval of Biological Products when Human Efficacy Studies are not Ethical or Feasible." This regulation, known simply as the "Animal Rule," was designed to permit approval or licensing of drugs and biologics when efficacy studies in humans are not ethical or feasible. To date, 12 products have been approved under the Animal Rule. It is highly recommended that sponsors of products that are to be developed under the Animal Rule meet with the FDA and other government entities early in the development process to ensure that the efficacy and safety studies that are planned will meet the FDA's requirements for approval of the product. © 2016 New York Academy of Sciences.

Food and Drug Administration workshop on indirect mechanisms of carcinogenesis.

PubMed

Poirier, L A

1996-01-01

A workshop sponsored by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was held on March 4-5, 1996, at the Lister Hill Auditorium of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Campus in Bethesda, Maryland. The workshop considered both the scientific aspects and the regulatory implications of indirect-acting carcinogens. A wide variety of agents and of prospective mechanisms was discussed. The organizing committee for the workshop consisted of Drs. James Farrelly and Joseph DeGeorge of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), Ronald J. Lorentzen and Sidney Green of the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN), Martin D. Green of the Center for Biologics, Evaluation and Research (CBER), C. Darnell Jackson and Lionel A. Poirier of the National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR). Rosalie K. Elespuru of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and David G. Longfellow of the National Cancer Institute (NCI). Following an introduction by Dr. Poirier, who provided a description of indirect carcinogens, the major talks were grouped into three formal sessions: indirect-acting compounds and agents of FDA interest, biological and biochemical endpoints commonly seen with indirect agents, and specific problems associated with the indirect-acting compounds. A panel discussion followed and the concluding remarks were made by Dr. Bernard A. Schwetz, Associate Commissioner for Science, FDA.

77 FR 4226 - Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Gentamicin Sulfate

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-01-27

.... FDA-2011-N-0003] Oral Dosage Form New Animal Drugs; Gentamicin Sulfate AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval of an original abbreviated new animal drug application (ANADA...

A review of the FDA draft guidance document for software validation: guidance for industry.

PubMed

Keatley, K L

1999-01-01

A Draft Guidance Document (Version 1.1) was issued by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to address the software validation requirement of the Quality System Regulation, 21 CFR Part 820, effective June 1, 1997. The guidance document outlines validation considerations that the FDA regards as applicable to both medical device software and software used to "design, develop or manufacture" medical devices. The Draft Guidance is available at the FDA web site http:@www.fda.gov/cdrh/comps/swareval++ +.html. Presented here is a review of the main features of the FDA document for Quality System Regulation (QSR), and some guidance for its implementation in industry.

78 FR 70496 - Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Arsanilic Acid

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 558 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Arsanilic Acid AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

78 FR 70566 - Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Arsanilic Acid

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-26

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Arsanilic Acid AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is withdrawing approval of a new...