21 CFR 111.610 - What records must be made available to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false What records must be made available to FDA? 111... records must be made available to FDA? (a) You must have all records required under this part, or copies of such records, readily available during the retention period for inspection and copying by FDA when...

FDA's regulation of tanning beds: how much heat?

PubMed

Knapp, Veronica

2011-01-01

This paper considers the problem of indoor tanning bed use by teenagers. The paper explores FDA's current authority to regulate tanning lamps as Class I medical devices, concluding that FDA's authority is poorly tailored to affect teenagers' repeated use of these products. An outright ban is unlikely; therefore, the best available options are to regulate access by minors and to amend the warning label requirements to reflect the current state of knowledge about the risks of tanning bed use.

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.

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.

Reflections on the US FDA's Warning on Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.

PubMed

Yim, Seon-Hee; Chung, Yeun-Jun

2014-12-01

In November 2013, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sent a warning letter to 23andMe, Inc. and ordered the company to discontinue marketing of the 23andMe Personal Genome Service (PGS) until it receives FDA marketing authorization for the device. The FDA considers the PGS as an unclassified medical device, which requires premarket approval or de novo classification. Opponents of the FDA's action expressed their concerns, saying that the FDA is overcautious and paternalistic, which violates consumers' rights and might stifle the consumer genomics field itself, and insisted that the agency should not restrict direct-to-consumer (DTC) genomic testing without empirical evidence of harm. Proponents support the agency's action as protection of consumers from potentially invalid and almost useless information. This action was also significant, since it reflected the FDA's attitude towards medical application of next-generation sequencing techniques. In this review, we followed up on the FDA-23andMe incident and evaluated the problems and prospects for DTC genetic testing.

FDA regulation of tobacco: blessing or curse for FDA professionals?

PubMed

O'Reilly, James T

2009-01-01

Upwards of 400,000 Americans will die that year from the effects of cigarettes, which FDA will now "regulate" very gently, with its hands tied by a slick statutory protection for the largest existing tobacco marketers. Career FDA professionals will be criticized as enablers of mega-marketers' continued sales, working at the margins, arranging the paperwork for protection of megafirms' market share, and sitting by as the deaths and addictive behaviors continue. "Join the Public Health Service, inspired by a public health mission," they were told, and yet they will be unable to do much regulating of the addictive and fatal products for which they now have titular responsibility. This essay observes that these fine FDA professionals are handed the sticky remains of a messy bargain, negotiated in a distracted Congress by expensive lawyers with clients who were potent contributors to political action committees. The only formula that is not secret about the 2009 law is the way in which industry purchased sufficient allegiance to gather the votes for its adoption. The remaining mystery is how FDA could be expected to do these tasks without losing its best and brightest professionals to other fields.

FDA Issues Final Guidance Clarifying FDA and EPA Jurisdiction over Mosquito-Related Products

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

FDA finalized guidance to provide information on FDA and EPA jurisdiction over the regulation of mosquito-related products intended to function as pesticides, including those products intended to function as pesticides

77 FR 14404 - Guidance for the Public, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory Committee Members, and FDA...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2002-D-0094; (formerly Docket No. 02D-0049)] Guidance for the Public, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Advisory... Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a guidance for the public, FDA...

Adherence of Pharmaceutical Advertisements in Medical Journals to FDA Guidelines and Content for Safe Prescribing

PubMed Central

Korenstein, Deborah; Keyhani, Salomeh; Mendelson, Ali; Ross, Joseph S.

2011-01-01

Background Physician-directed pharmaceutical advertising is regulated in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); adherence to current FDA guidelines is unknown. Our objective was to determine adherence rates of physician-directed print advertisements in biomedical journals to FDA guidelines and describe content important for safe prescribing. Methods and Findings Cross-sectional analysis of November 2008 pharmaceutical advertisements within top U.S.-based biomedical journals publishing original research. We excluded advertisements for devices, over the counter medications, and disease awareness. We utilized FDA guideline items identifying unique forms of advertisement bias to categorize advertisements as adherent to FDA guidelines, possibly non-adherent to at least 1 item, or non-adherent to at least 1 item. We also evaluated advertisement content important for safe prescribing, including benefit quantification, risk information and verifiable references. All advertisements were evaluated by 2 or more investigators, with differences resolved by discussion. Twelve journals met inclusion criteria. Nine contained pharmaceutical advertisements, including 192 advertisements for 82 unique products; median 2 per product (range 1–14). Six “teaser” advertisements presented only drug names, leaving 83 full unique advertisements. Fifteen advertisements (18.1%) adhered to all FDA guidelines, 41 (49.4%) were non-adherent with at least one form of FDA-described bias, and 27 (32.5%) were possibly non-adherent due to incomplete information. Content important for safe prescribing was often incomplete; 57.8% of advertisements did not quantify serious risks, 48.2% lacked verifiable references and 28.9% failed to present adequate efficacy quantification. Study limitations included its focus on advertisements from a single month, the subjectivity of FDA guidelines themselves, and the necessary subjectivity of determinations of adherence. Conclusions Few

Adherence of pharmaceutical advertisements in medical journals to FDA guidelines and content for safe prescribing.

PubMed

Korenstein, Deborah; Keyhani, Salomeh; Mendelson, Ali; Ross, Joseph S

2011-01-01

Physician-directed pharmaceutical advertising is regulated in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); adherence to current FDA guidelines is unknown. Our objective was to determine adherence rates of physician-directed print advertisements in biomedical journals to FDA guidelines and describe content important for safe prescribing. Cross-sectional analysis of November 2008 pharmaceutical advertisements within top U.S.-based biomedical journals publishing original research. We excluded advertisements for devices, over the counter medications, and disease awareness. We utilized FDA guideline items identifying unique forms of advertisement bias to categorize advertisements as adherent to FDA guidelines, possibly non-adherent to at least 1 item, or non-adherent to at least 1 item. We also evaluated advertisement content important for safe prescribing, including benefit quantification, risk information and verifiable references. All advertisements were evaluated by 2 or more investigators, with differences resolved by discussion. Twelve journals met inclusion criteria. Nine contained pharmaceutical advertisements, including 192 advertisements for 82 unique products; median 2 per product (range 1-14). Six "teaser" advertisements presented only drug names, leaving 83 full unique advertisements. Fifteen advertisements (18.1%) adhered to all FDA guidelines, 41 (49.4%) were non-adherent with at least one form of FDA-described bias, and 27 (32.5%) were possibly non-adherent due to incomplete information. Content important for safe prescribing was often incomplete; 57.8% of advertisements did not quantify serious risks, 48.2% lacked verifiable references and 28.9% failed to present adequate efficacy quantification. Study limitations included its focus on advertisements from a single month, the subjectivity of FDA guidelines themselves, and the necessary subjectivity of determinations of adherence. Few physician-directed print pharmaceutical advertisements

FDA's proposed rules on patent listing requirements for new drug and 30-month stays on ANDA approval (proposed Oct. 24, 2002).

PubMed

Hui, Yuk Fung

2003-01-01

In order to close the loophole in the generic drug approval process that allows a brand name drug patent holder to delay or defeat generic drug application merely by technicality, the FDA recently proposed to modify its regulations. Those proposals affect the patent listing requirements of a new drug application, and the duration of time that a generic drug application could be put on hold in the event of a patent infringement suit. With the modified rules, the FDA expects to see an increase in the availability of generic drugs, which eventually will lead to lower drug costs. Ms. Hui discusses the contents of the proposed regulations and provides an analysis of the proposed rule's legal authority, implications on patent rights, and impact on the pharmaceutical industry.

Dietary supplement labeling and advertising claims: are clinical studies on the full product required?

PubMed

Villafranco, John E; Bond, Katie

2009-01-01

Whether labeling and advertising claims for multi-ingredient dietary supplements may be based on the testing of individual, key ingredients--rather than the actual product--has caused a good deal of confusion. This confusion stems from the dearth of case law and the open-endedness of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on this issue. Nevertheless, the relevant regulatory guidance, case law and self-regulatory case law--when assessed together--indicate that the law allows and even protects "key ingredient claims" (i.e., claims based on efficacy testing of key ingredients in the absence of full product testing). This article provides an overview of the relevant substantiation requirements for dietary supplement claims and then reviews FTC's and FDA's guidance on key ingredient claims; relevant case law; use of key ingredient claims in the advertising of other consumer products; and the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau, Inc.'s (NAD's) approach to evaluating key ingredient claims for dietary supplements. This article concludes that key ingredient claims--provided they are presented in a truthful and non-deceptive manner--are permissible, and should be upheld in litigation and cases subject to industry self-regulation. This article further concludes that the NAD's approach to key ingredient claims provides practical guidance for crafting and substantiating dietary supplement key ingredient claims.

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.

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.

FDA Warns About Stem Cell Therapies

MedlinePlus

... For Consumers Consumer Updates FDA Warns About Stem Cell Therapies Share Tweet Linkedin Pin it More sharing ... the boxed section below for more advice. Stem Cell Uses and FDA Regulation The FDA has the ...

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...

Human factors and the FDA's goals: improved medical device design.

PubMed

Burlington, D B

1996-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration's new human factors design requirements for medical devices were previewed by the director of the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at AAMI/FDA's Human Factors in Medical Devices Conference held in September 1995. Director Bruce Burlington, MD, said the FDA plans to take a closer look at how new medical devices are designed to ensure proper attention has been paid to human error prevention. As a medical practitioner who has witnessed use-related deaths and injuries, Burlington stressed the importance of the medical community's reporting use errors as they occur and manufacturers' creating easy-to-use labeling and packaging. He also called for simplicity and quality of design in medical products, and asked for a consolidated effort of all professionals involved in human factors issues to help implement and further the FDA's new human factors program. An edited version of his presentation appears here.

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

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)

FDA 101: Regulating Biological Products

MedlinePlus

... Home For Consumers Consumer Updates FDA 101: Regulating Biological Products Share Tweet Linkedin Pin it More sharing ... about this diverse and highly important field. What biological products does FDA regulate? The Center for Biologics ...

FDA recognition of consensus standards in the premarket notification program.

PubMed

Marlowe, D E; Phillips, P J

1998-01-01

"The FDA has long advocated the use of standards as a significant contributor to safety and effectiveness of medical devices," Center for Devices and Radiological Health's (CDRH) Donald E. Marlowe and Philip J. Phillips note in the following article, highlighting the latest U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) plans for use of standards. They note that the important role standards can play has been reinforced as part of FDA reengineering efforts undertaken in anticipation of an increased regulatory work-load and declining agency resources. As part of its restructuring effort, the FDA announced last spring that it would recognize some consensus standards for use in the device approval process. Under the new 510(k) paradigm--the FDA's proposal to streamline premarket review, which includes incorporating the use of standards in the review of 510(k) submissions--the FDA will accept proof of compliance with standards as evidence of device safety and effectiveness. Manufacturers may submit declarations of conformity to standards instead of following the traditional review process. The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 60601 series of consensus standards, which deals with many safety issues common to electrical medical devices, was the first to be chosen for regulatory review. Other standards developed by nationally or internationally recognized standards development organizations, such as AAMI, may be eligible for use to ensure review requirements. In the following article, Marlowe and Phillips describe the FDA's plans to use standards in the device review process. The article focuses on the use of standards for medical device review, the development of the standards recognition process for reviewing devices, and the anticipated benefits of using standards to review devices. One important development has been the recent implementation of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA), which advocates the use of standards in the device review process. In

FDA's misplaced priorities: premarket review under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.

PubMed

Jenson, Desmond; Lester, Joelle; Berman, Micah L

2016-05-01

Among other key objectives, the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was designed to end an era of constant product manipulation by the tobacco industry that had led to more addictive and attractive products. The law requires new tobacco products to undergo premarket review by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before they can be sold. To assess FDA's implementation of its premarket review authorities, we reviewed FDA actions on new product applications, publicly available data on industry applications to market new products, and related FDA guidance documents and public statements. We conclude that FDA has not implemented the premarket review process in a manner that prioritises the protection of public health. In particular, FDA has (1) prioritised the review of premarket applications that allow for the introduction of new tobacco products over the review of potentially non-compliant products that are already on the market; (2) misallocated resources by accommodating the industry's repeated submissions of deficient premarket applications and (3) weakened the premarket review process by allowing the tobacco industry to market new and modified products that have not completed the required review process. 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/

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.

Pharmacotherapeutics of Intranasal Scopolamine: FDA Regulations and Procedures for Clinical Applications

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Das, H.; Daniels, V. R.; Vaksman, Z.; Boyd, J. L.; Buckey, J. C.; Locke, J. P.; Putcha, L.

2007-01-01

Space Motion Sickness (SMS) is commonly experienced by astronauts and often requires treatment with medications during the early flight days of a space mission. Bioavailability of oral (PO) SMS medications is often low and highly variable; additionally, physiological changes in a microgravity environment exacerbate variability and decrease bioavailability. These factors prompted NASA to develop an intranasal dosage form of scopolamine (INSCOP) suitable for the treatment of SMS. However, to assure safety and efficacy of treatment in space, NASA physicians prescribe commercially available pharmaceutical products only. Development of a pharmaceutical preparation for clinical use must follow distinct clinical phases of testing, phase I through IV to be exact, before it can be approved by the FDA for approval for clinical use. After a physician sponsored Investigative New Drug (IND) application was approved by the FDA, a phase I clinical trial of INSCOP formulation was completed in normal human subjects and results published. The current project includes three phase II clinical protocols for the assessment of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (PK/PD), efficacy, and safety of INSCOP. Three clinical protocols that were submitted to FDA to accomplish the project objectives: 1) 002-A, a FDA Phase II dose ranging study with four dose levels between 0.1 and 0.4 mg in 12 subjects to assess PK/PD, 2) 002-B, a phase II clinical efficacy study in eighteen healthy subjects to compare efficacy of 0.2 (low dose) and 0.4 mg (high dose) INSCOP for prophylactic treatment of motion-induces (off-axis vertical rotation) symptoms, and (3) 002-C, a phase II clinical study with twelve subjects to determine bioavailability and pharmacodynamics of two doses (0.2 and 0.4 mg) of INSCOP in simulated microgravity, antiorthostatic bedrest. All regulatory procedures were competed that include certification for Good laboratory Procedures by Theradex , clinical documentation, personnel training

Working draft of the FDA GMP final rule (Part II).

PubMed

Donawa, M E

1995-11-01

Part I of this two-part series provided information on the proposed design control provisions of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) working draft of the final rule for new good manufacturing practice regulations for medical devices. The final rule could be published in April or May 1996. It would be in force 180 days after the date of publication. Design control requirements may become effective some months later. This article describes recommended modifications of three provisions that have been intensely discussed during recent FDA-sponsored public meetings.

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

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

PubMed

1994-06-17

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the regulations for delegations of authority relating to general redelegations of authority from the Associate Commissioner of Regulatory Affairs to certain FDA officials in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). The redelegation provides these officials with authority to grant or deny certain citizen petitions for exemption or variance from medical device tracking requirements. This action is being taken to facilitate expeditious handling of citizen petitions. FDA is also issuing a conforming amendment to the medical device tracking regulations to make the regulations consistent.

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…

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA action on petitions. 60.34 Section 60.34 Food... RESTORATION Due Diligence Petitions § 60.34 FDA action on petitions. (a) Within 90 days after FDA receives a... during the regulatory review period. FDA will publish its due diligence determination in the Federal...

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA action on petitions. 60.34 Section 60.34 Food... RESTORATION Due Diligence Petitions § 60.34 FDA action on petitions. (a) Within 90 days after FDA receives a... during the regulatory review period. FDA will publish its due diligence determination in the Federal...

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA action on petitions. 60.34 Section 60.34 Food... RESTORATION Due Diligence Petitions § 60.34 FDA action on petitions. (a) Within 90 days after FDA receives a... during the regulatory review period. FDA will publish its due diligence determination in the Federal...

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA action on petitions. 60.34 Section 60.34 Food... RESTORATION Due Diligence Petitions § 60.34 FDA action on petitions. (a) Within 90 days after FDA receives a... during the regulatory review period. FDA will publish its due diligence determination in the Federal...

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA action on petitions. 60.34 Section 60.34 Food... RESTORATION Due Diligence Petitions § 60.34 FDA action on petitions. (a) Within 90 days after FDA receives a... during the regulatory review period. FDA will publish its due diligence determination in the Federal...

US FDA perspective on regulatory issues affecting circulatory assist devices.

PubMed

Sapirstein, Wolf; Chen, Eric; Swain, Julie; Zuckerman, Bram

2006-11-01

There has been a rapid development in mechanical circulatory support systems in the decade since the US FDA first approved a mechanical device to provide the circulatory support lacking from a failing heart. Devices are presently approved for marketing by the FDA to replace a failing ventricle, the Ventricular Assist Device or the entire heart, Total Artificial Heart. Contemporaneous with, and permitted by, improvement in technology and design, devices have evolved from units located extracorporeally to paracorporeal systems and totally implanted devices. Clinical studies have demonstrated a parallel improvement in the homeostatic adequacy of the circulatory support provided. Thus, while the circulatory support was initially tolerated for short periods to permit recovery of cardiac function, this technology eventually provided effective circulatory support for increasing periods that permitted the FDA to approve devices for bridging patients in end-stage cardiac failure awaiting transplant and eventually a device for destination therapy where patients in end-stage heart failure are not cardiac transplant candidates. The approved devices have relied on displacement pumps that mimic the pulsatility of the physiological system. Accelerated development of more compact devices that rely on alternative pump mechanisms have challenged both the FDA and device manufacturers to assure that the regulatory requirements for safety and effectiveness are met for use of mechanical circulatory support systems in expanded target populations. An FDA regulatory perspective is reviewed of what can be a potentially critical healthcare issue.

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.

8th GCC: consolidated feedback to US FDA on the 2013 draft FDA guidance on bioanalytical method validation.

PubMed

Bower, Joseph; Fast, Douglas; Garofolo, Fabio; Gouty, Dominique; Hayes, Roger; Lowes, Steve; Nicholson, Robert; LeLacheur, Richard; Bravo, Jennifer; Shoup, Ronald; Dumont, Isabelle; Carbone, Mary; Zimmer, Jennifer; Ortuno, Jordi; Caturla, Maria Cruz; Datin, Jim; Lansing, Tim; Fatmi, Saadya; Struwe, Petra; Sheldon, Curtis; Islam, Rafiqul; Yu, Mathilde; Hulse, Jim; Kamerud, John; Lin, John; Doughty, John; Kurylak, Kai; Tang, Daniel; Buonarati, Mike; Blanchette, Alexandre; Levesque, Ann; Gagnon-Carignan, Sofi; Lin, Jenny; Ray, Gene; Liu, Yanseng; Khan, Masood; Xu, Allan; El-Sulayman, Gibran; DiMarco, Chantal; Bouhajib, Mohammed; Tacey, Dick; Jenkins, Rand; der Strate, Barry van; Briscoe, Chad; Karnik, Shane; Rhyne, Paul; Garofolo, Wei; Schultz, Gary; Roberts, Andrew; Redrup, Mike; DuBey, Ira; Conliffe, Phyllis; Pekol, Teri; Hantash, Jamil; Cojocaru, Laura; Allen, Mike; Reuschel, Scott; Watson, Andrea; Farrell, Colin; Groeber, Elizabeth; Malone, Michele; Nowatzke, William; Fang, Xinping

2014-01-01

The 8th GCC Closed Forum for Bioanalysis was held in Baltimore, MD, USA on 5 December 2013, immediately following the 2013 AAPS Workshop (Crystal City V): Quantitative Bioanalytical Methods Validation and Implementation--The 2013 Revised FDA Guidance. This GCC meeting was organized to discuss the contents of the draft revised FDA Guidance on bioanalytical method validation that was published in September 2013 and consolidate the feedback of the GCC members. In attendance were 63 senior-level participants, from seven countries, representing 46 bioanalytical CRO companies/sites. This event represented a unique opportunity for CRO bioanalytical experts to share their opinions and concerns regarding the draft FDA Guidance, and to build unified comments to be provided to the FDA.

FDA Approves Lutathera for Neuroendocrine Tumors

Cancer.gov

FDA has approved Lutathera® for some people with neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) that affect the digestive tract. On January 29, FDA approved Lutathera® for adult patients with advanced NETs that affect the pancreas or gastrointestinal tract, known as GEP-NETs.

The US FDA pregnancy lactation and labeling rule - Implications for maternal immunization.

PubMed

Gruber, Marion F

2015-11-25

The FDA has responsibility for ensuring that prescription drug and biological products including vaccines are accompanied by labeling that summarizes scientific information concerning their safe and effective use. As part of a broader effort to improve the content and format of prescription drug labeling FDA published a final rule, the Content and Format of Labeling for Human Prescription Drug and Biological Products; Requirements for Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling, referred to as the "Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule (PLLR)." The most significant change to be implemented by this Rule is the removal of the letter risk categories A, B, C, D and X from all labeling, replacing them with a narrative summary of the risks of using a drug or biological product including vaccines during pregnancy. The PLLR requires an evaluation of available information about a product's use in pregnancy and provides an opportunity to update labeling when new information about use of a vaccine in pregnancy becomes available. Implementation of the provisions articulated in the PLLR, as they apply to vaccine product labeling, will require close collaboration between FDA and the vaccine manufacturer for both currently licensed vaccines and those in development. Copyright © 2015 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

FDA Response to the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Facility Incident

MedlinePlus

... products from Japan. This means that whole shipping containers are screened by CBP. FDA field staff also ... by consumers or doctors claiming amazing results; limited availability and advance payment requirements; promises of no-risk, ...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Other FDA closures and... Preserve Frontcountry Developed Area (fda) § 13.980 Other FDA closures and restrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the FDA to protect public health, safety, or park...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2014-07-01 2014-07-01 false Other FDA closures and... Preserve Frontcountry Developed Area (fda) § 13.980 Other FDA closures and restrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the FDA to protect public health, safety, or park...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2011-07-01 2011-07-01 false Other FDA closures and... Preserve Frontcountry Developed Area (fda) § 13.980 Other FDA closures and restrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the FDA to protect public health, safety, or park...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2012-07-01 2012-07-01 false Other FDA closures and... Preserve Frontcountry Developed Area (fda) § 13.980 Other FDA closures and restrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the FDA to protect public health, safety, or park...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... 36 Parks, Forests, and Public Property 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Other FDA closures and... Preserve Frontcountry Developed Area (fda) § 13.980 Other FDA closures and restrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the FDA to protect public health, safety, or park...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 42 Public Health 2 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false FDA categorization of investigational devices. 405... Coverage Decisions That Relate to Health Care Technology § 405.203 FDA categorization of investigational devices. (a) The FDA assigns a device with an FDA-approved IDE to one of two categories: (1) Experimental...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Communications between FDA and applicants. 314.102... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.102 Communications between FDA and applicants. (a) General...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... 42 Public Health 2 2014-10-01 2014-10-01 false FDA categorization of investigational devices. 405... Coverage Decisions That Relate to Health Care Technology § 405.203 FDA categorization of investigational devices. (a) The FDA assigns a device with an FDA-approved IDE to one of two categories: (1) Experimental...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... 42 Public Health 2 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false FDA categorization of investigational devices. 405... Coverage Decisions That Relate to Health Care Technology § 405.203 FDA categorization of investigational devices. (a) The FDA assigns a device with an FDA-approved IDE to one of two categories: (1) Experimental...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Communications between FDA and applicants. 314.102... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.102 Communications between FDA and applicants. (a) General...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Communications between FDA and applicants. 314.102... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.102 Communications between FDA and applicants. (a) General...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Communications between FDA and applicants. 314.102... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.102 Communications between FDA and applicants. (a) General...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... 42 Public Health 2 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false FDA categorization of investigational devices. 405... Coverage Decisions That Relate to Health Care Technology § 405.203 FDA categorization of investigational devices. (a) The FDA assigns a device with an FDA-approved IDE to one of two categories: (1) Experimental...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... 42 Public Health 2 2012-10-01 2012-10-01 false FDA categorization of investigational devices. 405... Coverage Decisions That Relate to Health Care Technology § 405.203 FDA categorization of investigational devices. (a) The FDA assigns a device with an FDA-approved IDE to one of two categories: (1) Experimental...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Communications between FDA and applicants. 314.102... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.102 Communications between FDA and applicants. (a) General...

Guidance for the emergency use of unapproved medical devices; availability--FDA. Notice.

PubMed

1985-10-22

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing guidance, developed by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), with respect to those emergency situations in which the agency would not object to a physician's using a potentially life-saving medical device for a use for which the device ordinarily is required to have, but does not have, an approved application for premarket approval or an investigational device exemption. The guidance is contained in a document entitled "guidance for the Emergency Use of Unapproved Medical Devices."

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

21 CFR 312.86 - Focused FDA regulatory research.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Focused FDA regulatory research. 312.86 Section... Severely-debilitating Illnesses § 312.86 Focused FDA regulatory research. At the discretion of the agency, FDA may undertake focused regulatory research on critical rate-limiting aspects of the preclinical...

21 CFR 312.86 - Focused FDA regulatory research.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Focused FDA regulatory research. 312.86 Section... Severely-debilitating Illnesses § 312.86 Focused FDA regulatory research. At the discretion of the agency, FDA may undertake focused regulatory research on critical rate-limiting aspects of the preclinical...

21 CFR 312.86 - Focused FDA regulatory research.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Focused FDA regulatory research. 312.86 Section... Severely-debilitating Illnesses § 312.86 Focused FDA regulatory research. At the discretion of the agency, FDA may undertake focused regulatory research on critical rate-limiting aspects of the preclinical...

21 CFR 312.86 - Focused FDA regulatory research.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Focused FDA regulatory research. 312.86 Section... Severely-debilitating Illnesses § 312.86 Focused FDA regulatory research. At the discretion of the agency, FDA may undertake focused regulatory research on critical rate-limiting aspects of the preclinical...

21 CFR 312.86 - Focused FDA regulatory research.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Focused FDA regulatory research. 312.86 Section... Severely-debilitating Illnesses § 312.86 Focused FDA regulatory research. At the discretion of the agency, FDA may undertake focused regulatory research on critical rate-limiting aspects of the preclinical...

An evaluation of the FDA's analysis of the costs and benefits of the graphic warning label regulation.

PubMed

Chaloupka, Frank J; Warner, Kenneth E; Acemoğlu, Daron; Gruber, Jonathan; Laux, Fritz; Max, Wendy; Newhouse, Joseph; Schelling, Thomas; Sindelar, Jody

2015-03-01

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory authority over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products and authorised it to assert jurisdiction over other tobacco products. As with other Federal agencies, FDA is required to assess the costs and benefits of its significant regulatory actions. To date, FDA has issued economic impact analyses of one proposed and one final rule requiring graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packaging and, most recently, of a proposed rule that would assert FDA's authority over tobacco products other than cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. Given the controversy over the FDA's approach to assessing net economic benefits in its proposed and final rules on GWLs and the importance of having economic impact analyses prepared in accordance with sound economic analysis, a group of prominent economists met in early 2014 to review that approach and, where indicated, to offer suggestions for an improved analysis. We concluded that the analysis of the impact of GWLs on smoking substantially underestimated the benefits and overestimated the costs, leading the FDA to substantially underestimate the net benefits of the GWLs. We hope that the FDA will find our evaluation useful in subsequent analyses, not only of GWLs but also of other regulations regarding tobacco products. Most of what we discuss applies to all instances of evaluating the costs and benefits of tobacco product regulation and, we believe, should be considered in FDA's future analyses of proposed rules. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

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.

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...

Risk management policy and black-box warnings: a qualitative analysis of US FDA proceedings.

PubMed

Cook, Daniel M; Gurugubelli, Rama K; Bero, Lisa A

2009-01-01

The US FDA increasingly applies risk management to drug safety policy. Little is known about the process by which the FDA approves labelling changes. Although advisory committees can recommend any of the risk management tools, including the use of 'black-box warnings', it is unknown whether they deliberate on these questions or how they apply the principles of risk minimization or management during their considerations of drug licensing. To examine the process by which risk management is considered by the FDA, including the role of FDA advisory committees. We also aimed to identify and describe drug labelling changes and additions, including the prevalence of black-box warnings. We electronically obtained publicly available information regarding drug approvals, drug revisions and advisory committee meetings over 3 years (2004-6) from the FDA. Data in the form of meeting transcripts and full histories of labelling changes were collected on drugs discussed by advisory committees. We then searched and qualitatively analysed the meeting transcripts to identify themes in the discussion. We also created a database of all prescription drug labelling changes for 3 years and examined which drugs have had the most changes. We describe the risk management consideration process and report the frequency and characteristics of labelling changes. Excerpts from the transcripts are selected to illustrate both typical and atypical features of the discussion. A total of 174 black-box changes were made in the 3-year period of our study, of which 77 were new black-box warnings and 97 were revisions in black-box warnings. Of 77 new black-box warning additions, only 11 drugs were discussed by the advisory committees. Of the 17 most frequently revised drug labels in these 3 years, two were discussed in the advisory committee meetings. Advisory meeting discussions revealed confusion about black-box warnings and emphasized potential consequences of the warnings rather than their content

Point-Counterpoint: The FDA Has a Role in Regulation of Laboratory-Developed Tests.

PubMed

Caliendo, Angela M; Hanson, Kimberly E

2016-04-01

Since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its draft guidance on the regulation of laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) in October 2014, there has been a flurry of responses from commercial and hospital-based laboratory directors, clinicians, professional organizations, and diagnostic companies. The FDA defines an LDT as an "in vitrodiagnostic device that is intended for clinical use and is designed, manufactured, and used within a single laboratory." The draft guidance outlines a risk-based approach, with oversight of high-risk and moderate-risk tests being phased in over 9 years. High-risk tests would be regulated first and require premarket approval. Subsequently, moderate-risk tests would require a 510(k) premarket submission to the FDA and low-risk tests would need only to be registered. Oversight discretion would be exercised for LDTs focused on rare diseases (defined as fewer than 4,000 tests, not cases, per year nationally) and unmet clinical needs (defined as those tests for which there is no alternative FDA-cleared or -approved test). There was an open comment period followed by a public hearing in early January of 2015, and we are currently awaiting the final decision regarding the regulation of LDTs. Given that LDTs have been developed by many laboratories and are essential for the diagnosis and monitoring of an array of infectious diseases, changes in their regulation will have far-reaching implications for clinical microbiology laboratories. In this Point-Counterpoint, Angela Caliendo discusses the potential benefits of the FDA guidance for LDTs whereas Kim Hanson discusses the concerns associated with implementing the guidance and why these regulations may not improve clinical care. Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA and IRB approval. 812.42 Section 812.42 Food... DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Responsibilities of Sponsors § 812.42 FDA and IRB approval. A sponsor shall not begin an investigation or part of an investigation until an IRB and FDA have both...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA and IRB approval. 812.42 Section 812.42 Food... DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Responsibilities of Sponsors § 812.42 FDA and IRB approval. A sponsor shall not begin an investigation or part of an investigation until an IRB and FDA have both...

21 CFR 60.10 - FDA assistance on eligibility.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA assistance on eligibility. 60.10 Section 60.10... TERM RESTORATION Eligibility Assistance § 60.10 FDA assistance on eligibility. (a) Upon written request from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, FDA will assist the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in...

21 CFR 60.10 - FDA assistance on eligibility.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA assistance on eligibility. 60.10 Section 60.10... TERM RESTORATION Eligibility Assistance § 60.10 FDA assistance on eligibility. (a) Upon written request from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, FDA will assist the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA and IRB approval. 812.42 Section 812.42 Food... DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Responsibilities of Sponsors § 812.42 FDA and IRB approval. A sponsor shall not begin an investigation or part of an investigation until an IRB and FDA have both...

21 CFR 60.10 - FDA assistance on eligibility.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA assistance on eligibility. 60.10 Section 60.10... TERM RESTORATION Eligibility Assistance § 60.10 FDA assistance on eligibility. (a) Upon written request from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, FDA will assist the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA and IRB approval. 812.42 Section 812.42 Food... DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Responsibilities of Sponsors § 812.42 FDA and IRB approval. A sponsor shall not begin an investigation or part of an investigation until an IRB and FDA have both...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA and IRB approval. 812.42 Section 812.42 Food... DEVICES INVESTIGATIONAL DEVICE EXEMPTIONS Responsibilities of Sponsors § 812.42 FDA and IRB approval. A sponsor shall not begin an investigation or part of an investigation until an IRB and FDA have both...

21 CFR 60.10 - FDA assistance on eligibility.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA assistance on eligibility. 60.10 Section 60.10... TERM RESTORATION Eligibility Assistance § 60.10 FDA assistance on eligibility. (a) Upon written request from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, FDA will assist the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in...

An evaluation of the FDA's analysis of the costs and benefits of the graphic warning label regulation

PubMed Central

Chaloupka, Frank J; Warner, Kenneth E; Acemoğlu, Daron; Gruber, Jonathan; Laux, Fritz; Max, Wendy; Newhouse, Joseph; Schelling, Thomas; Sindelar, Jody

2015-01-01

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gave the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory authority over cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products and authorised it to assert jurisdiction over other tobacco products. As with other Federal agencies, FDA is required to assess the costs and benefits of its significant regulatory actions. To date, FDA has issued economic impact analyses of one proposed and one final rule requiring graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packaging and, most recently, of a proposed rule that would assert FDA’s authority over tobacco products other than cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. Given the controversy over the FDA's approach to assessing net economic benefits in its proposed and final rules on GWLs and the importance of having economic impact analyses prepared in accordance with sound economic analysis, a group of prominent economists met in early 2014 to review that approach and, where indicated, to offer suggestions for an improved analysis. We concluded that the analysis of the impact of GWLs on smoking substantially underestimated the benefits and overestimated the costs, leading the FDA to substantially underestimate the net benefits of the GWLs. We hope that the FDA will find our evaluation useful in subsequent analyses, not only of GWLs but also of other regulations regarding tobacco products. Most of what we discuss applies to all instances of evaluating the costs and benefits of tobacco product regulation and, we believe, should be considered in FDA's future analyses of proposed rules. PMID:25550419

21 CFR 806.30 - FDA access to records.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA access to records. 806.30 Section 806.30 Food... DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICES; REPORTS OF CORRECTIONS AND REMOVALS Reports and Records § 806.30 FDA access to... designated by FDA and under section 704(e) of the act, permit such officer or employee at all reasonable...

21 CFR 806.30 - FDA access to records.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA access to records. 806.30 Section 806.30 Food... DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICES; REPORTS OF CORRECTIONS AND REMOVALS Reports and Records § 806.30 FDA access to... designated by FDA and under section 704(e) of the act, permit such officer or employee at all reasonable...

21 CFR 806.30 - FDA access to records.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA access to records. 806.30 Section 806.30 Food... DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICES; REPORTS OF CORRECTIONS AND REMOVALS Reports and Records § 806.30 FDA access to... designated by FDA and under section 704(e) of the act, permit such officer or employee at all reasonable...

21 CFR 806.30 - FDA access to records.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA access to records. 806.30 Section 806.30 Food... DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICES; REPORTS OF CORRECTIONS AND REMOVALS Reports and Records § 806.30 FDA access to... designated by FDA and under section 704(e) of the act, permit such officer or employee at all reasonable...

21 CFR 806.30 - FDA access to records.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA access to records. 806.30 Section 806.30 Food... DEVICES MEDICAL DEVICES; REPORTS OF CORRECTIONS AND REMOVALS Reports and Records § 806.30 FDA access to... designated by FDA and under section 704(e) of the act, permit such officer or employee at all reasonable...

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…

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.

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.

21 CFR 830.100 - FDA accreditation of an issuing agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA accreditation of an issuing agency. 830.100... (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA Accreditation of an Issuing Agency § 830.100 FDA... issuing agency. (b) Accreditation criteria. FDA may accredit an organization as an issuing agency, if the...

Agenda: EDRN FDA Education Workshop — EDRN Public Portal

Cancer.gov

The purpose of this workshop was to open dialogue between FDA staff that provide oversight for review of in vitro diagnostic applications and EDRN scientists currently performing clinical validation studies on cancer biomarkers. Issues related to FDA review of diagnostic tests were presented by FDA personnel. Representatives from EDRN provided details on supporting data of their validation studies and the resources developed within EDRN to facilitate such research for FDA compliance. The agenda provided here provides links to the presentations by each speaker.

Fisher, Neyman, and Bayes at FDA.

PubMed

Rubin, Donald B

2016-01-01

The wise use of statistical ideas in practice essentially requires some Bayesian thinking, in contrast to the classical rigid frequentist dogma. This dogma too often has seemed to influence the applications of statistics, even at agencies like the FDA. Greg Campbell was one of the most important advocates there for more nuanced modes of thought, especially Bayesian statistics. Because two brilliant statisticians, Ronald Fisher and Jerzy Neyman, are often credited with instilling the traditional frequentist approach in current practice, I argue that both men were actually seeking very Bayesian answers, and neither would have endorsed the rigid application of their ideas.

FDA publishes conflict of interest rules for clinical trials. Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

James, J S

1998-03-06

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published new rules defining conflict of interests between drug companies and medical researchers and clinicians. Certain financial arrangements will need to be disclosed, although the FDA estimates that only one to ten percent of pharmaceutical companies will need to submit disclosures for one or more of their investigators. The purpose of the new rule is to prevent bias in safety and efficacy studies of drugs and medical devices. The full rule is published in the Federal Register.

FDA use of international standards in the premarket review process.

PubMed

Rechen, E; Barth, D J; Marlowe, D; Kroger, L

1998-01-01

"This is an exciting time," says Eric Rechen, policy analyst in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Office of Device Evaluation (ODE). "We're entering an era in which standards will have a more prominent role in the review of medical devices than ever before." During the past 10 years, there has been significant growth in the importance of standards in regulatory processes, as Donald J. Barth, regulatory staff manager for the Medical Products Group at Hewlett Packard Company, notes in setting the stage for discussion of the latest developments. Donald Marlowe, director of the FDA's Office of Science and Technology, and Rechen explain the use of standards in the regulatory review process as part of FDA efforts to ensure public safety in a time of shrinking agency resources. Marlowe discusses provisions of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 that allow manufacturers to submit a declaration of conformity to a standard to satisfy premarket review requirements. A guidance on the recognition and use of consensus standards, a list of recognized standards, and a list of frequently asked questions are available at the Web site of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at www.fda.gov/cdrh and via the AAMI Web site at www.aami.org. The information is also available by telephone via CDRH Facts on Demand at 800-899-0381. Rechen provides details about the two new approaches for premarket notifications available under the new 510(k) paradigm. Manufacturers may demonstrate substantial equivalence through special and abbreviated 510(k)s in addition to traditional 510(k)s. A copy of the new 510(k) paradigm is available at the AAMI and CDRH Web sites and through Facts on Demand. As the FDA and many manufacturers enter the new world of abbreviated and special 510(k)s, Larry Kroger, GE Medical Systems, provides his comments based on the 4 years of experience manufacturers of diagnostic x-ray products have had with simplified 510(k)s. A comparison of the European

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive approval. 316.34... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE ORPHAN DRUGS Orphan-drug Exclusive Approval § 316.34 FDA recognition of exclusive approval. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or, the permanent-resident agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive approval. 316.34... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE ORPHAN DRUGS Orphan-drug Exclusive Approval § 316.34 FDA recognition of exclusive approval. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or, the permanent-resident agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive approval. 316.34... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE ORPHAN DRUGS Orphan-drug Exclusive Approval § 316.34 FDA recognition of exclusive approval. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or, the permanent-resident agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive approval. 316.34... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE ORPHAN DRUGS Orphan-drug Exclusive Approval § 316.34 FDA recognition of exclusive approval. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or, the permanent-resident agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive approval. 316.34... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE ORPHAN DRUGS Orphan-drug Exclusive Approval § 316.34 FDA recognition of exclusive approval. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or, the permanent-resident agent, if applicable) timely...

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.

Dose Matters: FDA's Guidance on Children's X-rays

MedlinePlus

... Consumers Home For Consumers Consumer Updates Dose Matters: FDA's Guidance on Children's X-rays Share Tweet Linkedin ... extra care to “child size” the radiation dose. FDA’s Role The FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological ...

FDA 101: Dietary Supplements

MedlinePlus

... too good to be true, it probably is. Report Problems Adverse effects with dietary supplements should be ... immediately. Both of you are then encouraged to report this problem to FDA. For information on how ...

21 CFR 14.15 - Committees working under a contract with FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Committees working under a contract with FDA. 14... under a contract with FDA. (a) FDA may enter into contracts with independent scientific or technical... contract initially executed with FDA after July 1, 1975, but which is determined not to be an advisory...

21 CFR 14.15 - Committees working under a contract with FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Committees working under a contract with FDA. 14... under a contract with FDA. (a) FDA may enter into contracts with independent scientific or technical... contract initially executed with FDA after July 1, 1975, but which is determined not to be an advisory...

21 CFR 14.15 - Committees working under a contract with FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Committees working under a contract with FDA. 14... under a contract with FDA. (a) FDA may enter into contracts with independent scientific or technical... contract initially executed with FDA after July 1, 1975, but which is determined not to be an advisory...

21 CFR 14.15 - Committees working under a contract with FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Committees working under a contract with FDA. 14... under a contract with FDA. (a) FDA may enter into contracts with independent scientific or technical... contract initially executed with FDA after July 1, 1975, but which is determined not to be an advisory...

21 CFR 14.15 - Committees working under a contract with FDA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Committees working under a contract with FDA. 14... under a contract with FDA. (a) FDA may enter into contracts with independent scientific or technical... contract initially executed with FDA after July 1, 1975, but which is determined not to be an advisory...

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.

FDA's Activities Supporting Regulatory Application of "Next Gen" Sequencing Technologies.

PubMed

Wilson, Carolyn A; Simonyan, Vahan

2014-01-01

Applications of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies require availability and access to an information technology (IT) infrastructure and bioinformatics tools for large amounts of data storage and analyses. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) anticipates that the use of NGS data to support regulatory submissions will continue to increase as the scientific and clinical communities become more familiar with the technologies and identify more ways to apply these advanced methods to support development and evaluation of new biomedical products. FDA laboratories are conducting research on different NGS platforms and developing the IT infrastructure and bioinformatics tools needed to enable regulatory evaluation of the technologies and the data sponsors will submit. A High-performance Integrated Virtual Environment, or HIVE, has been launched, and development and refinement continues as a collaborative effort between the FDA and George Washington University to provide the tools to support these needs. The use of a highly parallelized environment facilitated by use of distributed cloud storage and computation has resulted in a platform that is both rapid and responsive to changing scientific needs. The FDA plans to further develop in-house capacity in this area, while also supporting engagement by the external community, by sponsoring an open, public workshop to discuss NGS technologies and data formats standardization, and to promote the adoption of interoperability protocols in September 2014. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies are enabling breakthroughs in how the biomedical community is developing and evaluating medical products. One example is the potential application of this method to the detection and identification of microbial contaminants in biologic products. In order for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be able to evaluate the utility of this technology, we need to have the information technology infrastructure and

FDA regulation of labeling and promotional claims in therapeutic color vision devices: a tutorial.

PubMed

Drum, Bruce

2004-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for determining whether medical device manufacturers have provided reasonable assurance, based on valid scientific evidence, that new devices are safe and effective for their intended use before they are introduced into the U.S. market. Most existing color vision devices pose so little risk that their manufacturers are not required to submit a premarket notification [510(k)] to FDA prior to market. However, even low-risk devices may not be acceptable if they are marketed on the basis of misleading or excessive claims. Although most color vision devices are diagnostic, two types that are therapeutic rather than diagnostic are colored lenses intended to improve deficient color vision and colored lenses intended to improve reading performance. Both of these devices have presented special regulatory challenges to FDA because the intended uses and effectiveness claims initially proposed by the manufacturers were not supported by valid scientific evidence. In each instance, however, FDA worked with the manufacturer to restrict labeling and promotional claims in ways that were consistent with the available device performance data and that allowed for the legal marketing of the device.

Subarray-based FDA radar to counteract deceptive ECM signals

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Abdalla, Ahmed; Wang, Wen-Qin; Yuan, Zhao; Mohamed, Suhad; Bin, Tang

2016-12-01

In recent years, the frequency diverse array (FDA) radar concept has attracted extensive attention, as it may benefit from a small frequency increment, compared to the carrier frequency across the array elements and thereby achieve an array factor that is a function of the angle, the time, and the range which is superior to the conventional phase array radar (PAR). However, limited effort on the subject of FDA in electronic countermeasure scenarios, especially in the presence of mainbeam deceptive jamming, has been published. Basic FDA is not desirable for anti-jamming applications, due to the range-angle coupling response of targets. In this paper, a novel method based on subarrayed FDA signal processing is proposed to counteract deceptive ECM signals. We divide the FDA array into multiple subarrays, each of which employs a distinct frequency increment. As a result, in the subarray-based FDA, the desired target can be distinguished at subarray level in joint range-angle-Doppler domain by utilizing the fact that the jammer generates false targets with the same ranges to each subarray without reparations. The performance assessment shows that the proposed solution is effective for deceptive ECM targets suppression. The effectiveness is verified by simulation results.

21 CFR 807.100 - FDA action on a premarket notification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA action on a premarket notification. 807.100... IMPORTERS OF DEVICES Premarket Notification Procedures § 807.100 FDA action on a premarket notification. (a) After review of a premarket notification, FDA will: (1) Issue an order declaring the device to be...

21 CFR 807.100 - FDA action on a premarket notification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA action on a premarket notification. 807.100... IMPORTERS OF DEVICES Premarket Notification Procedures § 807.100 FDA action on a premarket notification. (a) After review of a premarket notification, FDA will: (1) Issue an order declaring the device to be...

21 CFR 807.100 - FDA action on a premarket notification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA action on a premarket notification. 807.100... IMPORTERS OF DEVICES Premarket Notification Procedures § 807.100 FDA action on a premarket notification. (a) After review of a premarket notification, FDA will: (1) Issue an order declaring the device to be...

21 CFR 807.100 - FDA action on a premarket notification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA action on a premarket notification. 807.100... IMPORTERS OF DEVICES Premarket Notification Procedures § 807.100 FDA action on a premarket notification. (a) After review of a premarket notification, FDA will: (1) Issue an order declaring the device to be...

21 CFR 807.100 - FDA action on a premarket notification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA action on a premarket notification. 807.100... IMPORTERS OF DEVICES Premarket Notification Procedures § 807.100 FDA action on a premarket notification. (a) After review of a premarket notification, FDA will: (1) Issue an order declaring the device to be...

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.

FDA marketing claims, and the practitioner.

PubMed

Runner, Susan

2006-03-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the federal agency that is tasked with regulating market entry for medical devices. The laws that govern this process are codified in the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (the Act) and the regulations are based on this law. The medical device amendments to the Act were instituted in 1976, instituting the methods for classification of medical devices and the format for the premarket review of devices. Information for practitioners on how medical devices come to market, what data are required, how specific claims are cleared, and how the practitioner can give input to the system are critical for the further development of safe and effective medical devices.

The FDA's Experience with Emerging Genomics Technologies-Past, Present, and Future.

PubMed

Xu, Joshua; Thakkar, Shraddha; Gong, Binsheng; Tong, Weida

2016-07-01

The rapid advancement of emerging genomics technologies and their application for assessing safety and efficacy of FDA-regulated products require a high standard of reliability and robustness supporting regulatory decision-making in the FDA. To facilitate the regulatory application, the FDA implemented a novel data submission program, Voluntary Genomics Data Submission (VGDS), and also to engage the stakeholders. As part of the endeavor, for the past 10 years, the FDA has led an international consortium of regulatory agencies, academia, pharmaceutical companies, and genomics platform providers, which was named MicroArray Quality Control Consortium (MAQC), to address issues such as reproducibility, precision, specificity/sensitivity, and data interpretation. Three projects have been completed so far assessing these genomics technologies: gene expression microarrays, whole genome genotyping arrays, and whole transcriptome sequencing (i.e., RNA-seq). The resultant studies provide the basic parameters for fit-for-purpose application of these new data streams in regulatory environments, and the solutions have been made available to the public through peer-reviewed publications. The latest MAQC project is also called the SEquencing Quality Control (SEQC) project focused on next-generation sequencing. Using reference samples with built-in controls, SEQC studies have demonstrated that relative gene expression can be measured accurately and reliably across laboratories and RNA-seq platforms. Besides prediction performance comparable to microarrays in clinical settings and safety assessments, RNA-seq is shown to have better sensitivity for low expression and reveal novel transcriptomic features. Future effort of MAQC will be focused on quality control of whole genome sequencing and targeted sequencing.

Regulating nanomedicine - can the FDA handle it?

PubMed

Bawa, Raj

2011-05-01

There is enormous excitement and expectation surrounding the multidisciplinary field of nanomedicine - the application of nanotechnology to healthcare - which is already influencing the pharmaceutical industry. This is especially true in the design, formulation and delivery of therapeutics. Currently, nanomedicine is poised at a critical stage. However, regulatory guidance in this area is generally lacking and critically needed to provide clarity and legal certainty to manufacturers, policymakers, healthcare providers as well as public. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of nanoproducts on the market for human use but little is known of their health risks, safety data and toxicity profiles. Less is known of nanoproducts that are released into the environment and that come in contact with humans. These nanoproducts, whether they are a drug, device, biologic or combination of any of these, are creating challenges for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as regulators struggle to accumulate data and formulate testing criteria to ensure development of safe and efficacious nanoproducts (products incorporating nanoscale technologies). Evidence continues to mount that many nanoproducts inherently posses novel size-based properties and toxicity profiles. Yet, this scientific fact has been generally ignored by the FDA and the agency continues to adopt a precautionary approach to the issue in hopes of countering future potential negative public opinion. As a result, the FDA has simply maintained the status quo with regard to its regulatory policies pertaining to nanomedicine. Therefore, there are no specific laws or mechanisms in place for oversight of nanomedicine and the FDA continues to treat nanoproducts as substantially equivalent ("bioequivalent") to their bulk counterparts. So, for now nanoproducts submitted for FDA review will continue to be subjected to an uncertain regulatory pathway. Such regulatory uncertainty could negatively impact venture funding, stifle

21 CFR 516.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 6 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. 516... SPECIES Designation of a Minor Use or Minor Species New Animal Drug § 516.34 FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or the permanent-resident U.S. agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 516.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 6 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. 516... SPECIES Designation of a Minor Use or Minor Species New Animal Drug § 516.34 FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or the permanent-resident U.S. agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 516.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 6 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. 516... SPECIES Designation of a Minor Use or Minor Species New Animal Drug § 516.34 FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or the permanent-resident U.S. agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 516.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 6 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. 516... SPECIES Designation of a Minor Use or Minor Species New Animal Drug § 516.34 FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or the permanent-resident U.S. agent, if applicable) timely...

21 CFR 516.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 6 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. 516... SPECIES Designation of a Minor Use or Minor Species New Animal Drug § 516.34 FDA recognition of exclusive marketing rights. (a) FDA will send the sponsor (or the permanent-resident U.S. agent, if applicable) timely...

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...

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.

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...

New FDA draft guidance on immunogenicity.

PubMed

Parenky, Ashwin; Myler, Heather; Amaravadi, Lakshmi; Bechtold-Peters, Karoline; Rosenberg, Amy; Kirshner, Susan; Quarmby, Valerie

2014-05-01

A "Late Breaking" session was held on May 20 at the 2013 American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists-National Biotech Conference (AAPS-NBC) to discuss the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 2013 draft guidance on Immunogenicity Assessment for Therapeutic Protein Products. The session was initiated by a presentation from the FDA which highlighted several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance pertaining to immunogenicity risk, the potential impact on patient safety and product efficacy, and risk mitigation. This was followed by an open discussion on the draft guidance which enabled delegates from biopharmaceutical companies to engage the FDA on topics that had emerged from their review of the draft guidance. The multidisciplinary audience fostered an environment that was conducive to scientific discussion on a broad range of topics such as clinical impact, immune mitigation strategies, immune prediction and the role of formulation, excipients, aggregates, and degradation products in immunogenicity. This meeting report highlights several key aspects of the 2013 draft guidance together with related dialog from the session.

21 CFR 830.220 - Termination of FDA service as an issuing agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Termination of FDA service as an issuing agency... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA as an Issuing Agency § 830.220 Termination of FDA service as an issuing agency. (a) FDA may end our services as an issuing agency if we...

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.

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

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.

21 CFR 830.120 - Responsibilities of an FDA-accredited issuing agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Responsibilities of an FDA-accredited issuing... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA Accreditation of an Issuing Agency § 830.120 Responsibilities of an FDA-accredited issuing agency. To maintain its accreditation, an...

Interview with Janet Woodcock: progress on the FDA's critical path initiative.

PubMed

Woodcock, Janet

2009-12-01

Janet Woodcock is the Director of the US FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Dr Woodcock has held various positions within the FDA's Office of the Commissioner from October 2003 until 1 April, 2008, as Deputy Commissioner and Chief Medical Officer, Deputy Commissioner for Operations and Chief Operating Officer and Director of the Critical Path Programs. She oversaw scientific and medical regulatory operations for the FDA. Dr Woodcock served as Director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the FDA from 1994 to 2005. She previously served in other positions at the FDA including Director of the Office of Therapeutics Research and Review and Acting Deputy Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Dr Woodcock received her MD from Northwestern Medical School (IL, USA), and completed further training and held teaching appointments at the Pennsylvania State University (PA, USA)and the University of California in San Francisco (CA, USA). She joined the FDA in 1986.

Integration of new technology into clinical practice after FDA approval.

PubMed

Govil, Ashul; Hao, Steven C

2016-10-01

Development of new medical technology is a crucial part of the advancement of medicine and our ability to better treat patients and their diseases. This process of development is long and arduous and requires a significant investment of human, financial and material capital. However, technology development can be rewarded richly by its impact on patient outcomes and successful sale of the product. One of the major regulatory hurdles to technology development is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval process, which is necessary before a technology can be marketed and sold in the USA. Many businesses, medical providers and consumers believe that the FDA approval process is the only hurdle prior to use of the technology in day-to-day care. In order for the technology to be adopted into clinical use, reimbursement for both the device as well as the associated work performed by physicians and medical staff must be in place. Work and coverage decisions require Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code development and Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) valuation determination. Understanding these processes is crucial to the timely availability of new technology to patients and providers. Continued and better partnerships between physicians, industry, regulatory bodies and payers will facilitate bringing technology to market sooner and ensure appropriate utilization.

21 CFR 60.20 - FDA action on regulatory review period determinations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false FDA action on regulatory review period... SERVICES GENERAL PATENT TERM RESTORATION Regulatory Review Period Determinations § 60.20 FDA action on regulatory review period determinations. (a) FDA will consult its records and experts to verify the dates...

21 CFR 60.20 - FDA action on regulatory review period determinations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false FDA action on regulatory review period... SERVICES GENERAL PATENT TERM RESTORATION Regulatory Review Period Determinations § 60.20 FDA action on regulatory review period determinations. (a) FDA will consult its records and experts to verify the dates...

21 CFR 60.20 - FDA action on regulatory review period determinations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false FDA action on regulatory review period... SERVICES GENERAL PATENT TERM RESTORATION Regulatory Review Period Determinations § 60.20 FDA action on regulatory review period determinations. (a) FDA will consult its records and experts to verify the dates...

21 CFR 60.20 - FDA action on regulatory review period determinations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false FDA action on regulatory review period... SERVICES GENERAL PATENT TERM RESTORATION Regulatory Review Period Determinations § 60.20 FDA action on regulatory review period determinations. (a) FDA will consult its records and experts to verify the dates...

21 CFR 60.20 - FDA action on regulatory review period determinations.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false FDA action on regulatory review period... SERVICES GENERAL PATENT TERM RESTORATION Regulatory Review Period Determinations § 60.20 FDA action on regulatory review period determinations. (a) FDA will consult its records and experts to verify the dates...

76 FR 44013 - Draft Guidance for Industry: Implementation of Acceptable Full-Length and Abbreviated Donor...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-22

... and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0487... dated December 2010, as an acceptable mechanism that is consistent with FDA's requirements and...

Labeling of trans fatty acid content in food, regulations and limits-the FDA view.

PubMed

Moss, Julie

2006-05-01

With the scientific evidence associating trans fatty acid (TFA) intake with an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a final rule that requires the declaration of the amount of TFA present in foods, including dietary supplements, on the nutrition label by January 1, 2006. The addition of TFA to the nutrition label will lead to the prevention of 600 to 1200 cases of CHD and 240-480 deaths each year saving Dollars 900 million to Dollars 1.8 billion per year in medical costs, lost productivity, and pain and suffering. For the purpose of nutrition labeling, TFA are defined as the sum of all unsaturated fatty acids that contain one or more isolated (i.e. non-conjugated) double bonds in a trans configuration. There are many issues that FDA has yet to resolve: (1) defining nutrient content claims for "free" and "reduced" levels of trans fat, (2) placing limits on the amount of TFA in conjunction with saturated fat limits for nutrient content claims, health claims, and disclosure and disqualifying levels, (3) a daily value, and (4) a possible footnote or disclosure statement to enhance consumer understanding of cholesterol raising lipids. FDA issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) requesting comments on the unresolved issues. FDA will also be conducting consumer research to determine consumer understanding of various TFA labeling possibilities. Comments to the ANPR, results of consumer research and current science will be used by FDA to resolve these issues and to determine future rulemaking for TFA labeling.

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.

21 CFR 1271.27 - Will FDA assign me a registration number?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Will FDA assign me a registration number? 1271.27..., TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS Procedures for Registration and Listing § 1271.27 Will FDA assign me a registration number? (a) FDA will assign each location a permanent registration number. (b...

21 CFR 1271.27 - Will FDA assign me a registration number?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Will FDA assign me a registration number? 1271.27..., TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS Procedures for Registration and Listing § 1271.27 Will FDA assign me a registration number? (a) FDA will assign each location a permanent registration number. (b...

21 CFR 1271.27 - Will FDA assign me a registration number?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Will FDA assign me a registration number? 1271.27..., TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS Procedures for Registration and Listing § 1271.27 Will FDA assign me a registration number? (a) FDA will assign each location a permanent registration number. (b...

21 CFR 1271.27 - Will FDA assign me a registration number?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Will FDA assign me a registration number? 1271.27..., TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS Procedures for Registration and Listing § 1271.27 Will FDA assign me a registration number? (a) FDA will assign each location a permanent registration number. (b...

21 CFR 1271.27 - Will FDA assign me a registration number?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Will FDA assign me a registration number? 1271.27..., TISSUES, AND CELLULAR AND TISSUE-BASED PRODUCTS Procedures for Registration and Listing § 1271.27 Will FDA assign me a registration number? (a) FDA will assign each location a permanent registration number. (b...

Characteristics of FDA drug recalls: A 30-month analysis.

PubMed

Hall, Kelsey; Stewart, Tyler; Chang, Jongwha; Freeman, Maisha Kelly

2016-02-15

The characteristics of drug recalls issued over 30 months by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) were analyzed. All FDA-issued recalls for drugs (prescription and nonprescription, including dietary supplements) and biological products issued from June 20, 2012, to December 31, 2014, were included in this retrospective analysis. Data for all drug recalls were downloaded and sorted by the inclusion criteria from weekly FDA enforcement reports. The following data were analyzed: product type, recall firm, type of recall firm (compounding or noncompounding), country, voluntary or involuntary recall, method of communication of recall, recall number, FDA recall classification (class I, II, or III), product availability (prescription or nonprescription), reason for recall, recall initiation date, and recall report date. A total of 21,120 products were recalled during the 30-month study period. Of these, 3,045 drug products (14.4%) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. A total of 348 total manufacturers were associated with recalled drug products. The 5 firms most frequently involved in recalls accounted for 299, 273, 212, 118, and 112 recalls. The most common reasons for recalls were contamination, mislabeling, adverse reaction, defective product, and incorrect potency. There was a significant association between FDA recall classification and the following outcomes: reasons for recall, product availability, type of recall firm, and form of communication. An investigation of FDA drug recalls revealed that the five most common recall reasons were contamination, mislabeling, adverse reaction, defective product, and incorrect potency. Compounding firms were associated more frequently with contamination than were noncompounding firms. Copyright © 2016 by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, Inc. All rights reserved.

Evaluation of efficacy of heartworm preventive products at the FDA.

PubMed

Hampshire, Victoria A

2005-10-24

The Center for Veterinary Medicine, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA/CVM) has authority under the United States Code 21 under Section 514.80 to monitor for adverse experiences of approved animal products. Although veterinarians voluntarily report suspect drug-related events to manufacturers, firms that market FDA-approved animal products must report serious events to the FDA within 15 working days of the veterinarian or pet-owner's call to them. Under the present regulations, canine heartworm preventatives are approved for 100% efficacy after testing in laboratory and field conditions. The report of lack of efficacy against heartworm larvae is a serious adverse drug event because the resulting condition or the treatment of the condition is life threatening. Information on lack of effect that are deemed possibly, probably, or definitely drug-related available for review under generic product on the FDA/CVM website Surveillance of these reports indicates there are some failures for virtually all heartworm prevention product categories. Most failures have been reported in heartworm-endemic states. At this time, it is unclear whether these are representative of the rare occurrences of failure that have been in existence for a long time, but not reported regularly or promptly, or whether there is a true increase in complaints of ineffectiveness and real variability between products. This paper discusses methods, personnel, and procedures in place in the Division of Surveillance that will aid the FDA to better assess heartworm preventive treatment failures. It discusses scoring paradigms presently utilized by FDA/CVM to assess severity of complaints of lack of efficacy against heartworms, and welcomes audience input as to how to improve existing processes. Results suggest that more comprehensive reporting will provide FDA/CVM more accurate surveillance information regarding efficacy problems. Such practices will permit FDA/CVM to better interpret both incidence and

21 CFR 1.393 - What information must FDA include in the detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false What information must FDA include in the detention... Consumption How Does Fda Order A Detention? § 1.393 What information must FDA include in the detention order? (a) FDA must issue the detention order in writing, in the form of a detention notice, signed and...

21 CFR 1.393 - What information must FDA include in the detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false What information must FDA include in the detention... Consumption How Does Fda Order A Detention? § 1.393 What information must FDA include in the detention order? (a) FDA must issue the detention order in writing, in the form of a detention notice, signed and...

21 CFR 1.393 - What information must FDA include in the detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false What information must FDA include in the detention... Consumption How Does Fda Order A Detention? § 1.393 What information must FDA include in the detention order? (a) FDA must issue the detention order in writing, in the form of a detention notice, signed and...

21 CFR 830.210 - Eligibility for use of FDA as an issuing agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Eligibility for use of FDA as an issuing agency... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA as an Issuing Agency § 830.210 Eligibility for use of FDA as an issuing agency. When FDA acts as an issuing agency, any labeler will be...

21 CFR 1.393 - What information must FDA include in the detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false What information must FDA include in the detention... Consumption How Does Fda Order A Detention? § 1.393 What information must FDA include in the detention order? (a) FDA must issue the detention order in writing, in the form of a detention notice, signed and...

21 CFR 1.393 - What information must FDA include in the detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false What information must FDA include in the detention... Consumption How Does Fda Order A Detention? § 1.393 What information must FDA include in the detention order? (a) FDA must issue the detention order in writing, in the form of a detention notice, signed and...

FDA's Flexibility in Subpart H Approvals: Assessing Quantum of Effectiveness Evidence.

PubMed

Sasinowski, Frank J; Varond, Alexander J

2016-08-01

This article examines the strength of scientific and clinical evidence for FDA's nineteen non-AIDS, non-cancer Subpart H approval determinations over the Accelerated Approval program's twenty-four year existence. The authors researched the bases for FDA's determinations when an unvalidated surrogate or intermediate clinical endpoint is "reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit." The four key factors set forth in FDA's "Guidance for Industry, Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions - Drugs and Biologics" were applied to past Subpart H approvals. For the nineteen precedents, the authors found wide variances between the quantum and quality of evidence on each of the four factors, indicating that a lack of evidence on any single factor was not disqualifying in and of itself. The results of this study, therefore, show that FDA exercises extraordinarily more regulatory flexibility than either FDA's foundational statutes or even FDA' s most recent 2014 Expedited Programs Guidance explicitly express. Given recent legislative exhortations and the increasing promise of personalized medicine and translational sciences, the authors conclude that Subpart H should be further explored and utilized. The authors provide a detailed analysis of the orecedents established in the nineteen approvals.

Healthy public relations: the FDA's 1930s legislative campaign.

PubMed

Kay, G

2001-01-01

In this article, I argue that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is an oft-overlooked government agency that acts to preserve and secure the public's health. From its early years as an agency charged with enforcement of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act, the FDA not only protected the public's health but also made the public aware of its mission, using methods as diverse as displays at county fairs and at the 1933 Chicago World's Fair, radio programming, and active correspondence. The agency encouraged the public to protect itself, particularly in those arenas in which the FDA had no regulatory authority. In addition, it may have overstepped its boundaries when it actively solicited public support for a bill submitted to Congress in the early 1930s. In the dark days of the Great Depression, the FDA contended not only with limited resources and its own feelings of inadequacy in terms of what could and could not be done to protect the populace, but also with "guinea pig" books that horrified and angered many readers. By 1938, when the agency prevailed and the revisions to the 1906 Act passed Congress and were signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the FDA had done all that a responsible public health agency should do, and more.

21 CFR 1.379 - How long may FDA detain an article of food?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false How long may FDA detain an article of food? 1.379... Provisions § 1.379 How long may FDA detain an article of food? (a) FDA may detain an article of food for a... institute a seizure or injunction action. The authorized FDA representative may approve the additional 10...

21 CFR 1.379 - How long may FDA detain an article of food?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false How long may FDA detain an article of food? 1.379... Provisions § 1.379 How long may FDA detain an article of food? (a) FDA may detain an article of food for a... institute a seizure or injunction action. The authorized FDA representative may approve the additional 10...

21 CFR 1.379 - How long may FDA detain an article of food?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false How long may FDA detain an article of food? 1.379... Provisions § 1.379 How long may FDA detain an article of food? (a) FDA may detain an article of food for a... institute a seizure or injunction action. The authorized FDA representative may approve the additional 10...

21 CFR 1.379 - How long may FDA detain an article of food?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false How long may FDA detain an article of food? 1.379... Provisions § 1.379 How long may FDA detain an article of food? (a) FDA may detain an article of food for a... institute a seizure or injunction action. The authorized FDA representative may approve the additional 10...

21 CFR 1.379 - How long may FDA detain an article of food?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false How long may FDA detain an article of food? 1.379... Provisions § 1.379 How long may FDA detain an article of food? (a) FDA may detain an article of food for a... institute a seizure or injunction action. The authorized FDA representative may approve the additional 10...

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

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...

Regulatory perspectives and research activities at the FDA on the use of phantoms with in vivo diagnostic devices

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Agrawal, Anant; Gavrielides, Marios A.; Weininger, Sandy; Chakrabarti, Kish; Pfefer, Joshua

2008-02-01

For a number of years, phantoms have been used to optimize device parameters and validate performance in the primary medical imaging modalities (CT, MRI, PET/SPECT, ultrasound). Furthermore, the FDA under the Mammography Quality Standards Act (MQSA) requires image quality evaluation of mammography systems using FDA-approved phantoms. The oldest quantitative optical diagnostic technology, pulse oximetry, also benefits from the use of active phantoms known as patient simulators to validate certain performance characteristics under different clinically-relevant conditions. As such, guidance provided by the FDA to its staff and to industry on the contents of pre-market notification and approval submissions includes suggestions on how to incorporate the appropriate phantoms in establishing device effectiveness. Research at the FDA supports regulatory statements on the use of phantoms by investigating how phantoms can be designed, characterized, and utilized to determine critical device performance characteristics. These examples provide a model for how novel techniques in the rapidly growing field of optical diagnostics can use phantoms during pre- and post-market regulatory testing.

Of poops and parasites: unethical FDA overregulation.

PubMed

Young, Kenneth A

2014-01-01

Therapies born out of the Hygiene Hypothesis--such as helminthic therapy and fecal bacteriotherapy--provide a compelling example of the FDA's institutional blindness. Unlike the traditional pharmaceutical model of treatment, therapies based in the Hygiene Hypothesis purport to resolve or alleviate conditions by reintroducing organisms once thought to be wholly negative. While questions of negative effects and safety remain in the former, they are largely absent in the latter. Nonetheless, the FDA has chosen to regulate the use of both helminthic therapy and fecal bacteriotherapy. Such restriction of doctor-patient autonomy in the name of efficacy is costly and unethical.

ADHD medication use following FDA risk warnings.

PubMed

Barry, Colleen L; Martin, Andres; Busch, Susan H

2012-09-01

In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigated cardiac and psychiatric risks associated with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication use. To examine how disclosure of safety risks affected pediatric ADHD use, and to assess news media coverage of the issue to better understand trends in treatment patterns. We used the AHRQ's Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a nationally representative household panel survey, to calculate unadjusted rates of pediatric ADHD use from 2002 to 2008 overall and by parents' education. We examined whether children (ages 0 to 20) filled a prescription for any ADHD medication during the calendar year. Next, we used content analysis methods to analyze news coverage of the issue in 10 high-circulation newspapers, the 3 major television networks and a major cable news network in the U.S. We examined 6 measures capturing information conveyed on risk and benefits of ADHD medication use. No declines in medication use following FDA safety warnings overall or by parental education level were observed. News media coverage was relatively balanced in its portrayal of the risks and benefits of ADHD medication use by children. ADHD risk warnings were not associated with large declines in medication use, and balanced news coverage may have contributed to the treatment patterns observed. Self-reported surveys like the MEPS rely on the recall of respondents and may be subject to reporting bias. However, the validity of these data is supported by their consistency with other data on drug use from other sources. These findings are in direct contrast to the substantial declines in use observed after pediatric antidepressant risk warnings in the context of a news media environment that emphasized risks over benefits. Our findings are relevant to the ongoing discussion about improving the FDA's ability to monitor drug safety. Safety warnings occur amid ongoing concern that the agency has insufficient authority and

Stem-cell-derived products: an FDA update.

PubMed

Moos, Malcolm

2008-12-01

The therapeutic potential of products derived from stem cells of various types has prompted increasing research and development and public attention. Initiation of human clinical trials in the not-too-distant future is now a realistic possibility. It is, therefore, important to weigh the potential benefits against known, theoretical and totally unsuspected risks in light of current knowledge to ensure that subjects participating in these trials are afforded the most reasonable balance possible between potential risks and potential benefits. There are no apparent differences in fundamental, qualitative biological characteristics between stem-cell-derived products and other cellular therapies regulated by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Existing authorities can, therefore, be applied. Nevertheless, these products do have properties that require careful evaluation.

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.

A Critical Review of Methods to Evaluate the Impact of FDA Regulatory Actions

PubMed Central

Briesacher, Becky A.; Soumerai, Stephen B.; Zhang, Fang; Toh, Sengwee; Andrade, Susan E.; Wagner, Joann L.; Shoaibi, Azadeh; Gurwitz, Jerry H.

2013-01-01

Purpose To conduct a synthesis of the literature on methods to evaluate the impacts of FDA regulatory actions, and identify best practices for future evaluations. Methods We searched MEDLINE for manuscripts published between January 1948 and August 2011 that included terms related to FDA, regulatory actions, and empirical evaluation; the review additionally included FDA-identified literature. We used a modified Delphi method to identify preferred methodologies. We included studies with explicit methods to address threats to validity, and identified designs and analytic methods with strong internal validity that have been applied to other policy evaluations. Results We included 18 studies out of 243 abstracts and papers screened. Overall, analytic rigor in prior evaluations of FDA regulatory actions varied considerably; less than a quarter of studies (22%) included control groups. Only 56% assessed changes in the use of substitute products/services, and 11% examined patient health outcomes. Among studies meeting minimal criteria of rigor, 50% found no impact or weak/modest impacts of FDA actions and 33% detected unintended consequences. Among those studies finding significant intended effects of FDA actions, all cited the importance of intensive communication efforts. There are preferred methods with strong internal validity that have yet to be applied to evaluations of FDA regulatory actions. Conclusions Rigorous evaluations of the impact of FDA regulatory actions have been limited and infrequent. Several methods with strong internal validity are available to improve trustworthiness of future evaluations of FDA policies. PMID:23847020

The evolution of FDA policy on silicone breast implants: a case study of politics, bureaucracy, and business in the process of decision-making.

PubMed

Palley, H A

1995-01-01

The central issue facing federal regulation of breast implants is that while such devices are not functionally necessary or needed for survival, the side effects may be harmful and have not been proven unharmful. The Medical Device Amendments of 1976 appear to require such evidence prior to the FDA permitting the unrestricted marketing of these devices. However, only recently have such requirements been imposed by the FDA. The author examines the FDA's decision-making process, particularly as applied to silicone breast implants, and the factors that appears to have affected such decisions. In pursuing this study, the activities of a number of interest-group actors, as well as congressional responses and the role of federal bureaucratic actors, were examined. In 1992, the FDA established a regulatory protocol that effectively withdrew most silicone breast implants from the market for the purpose of breast augmentation and allows for the monitoring of the impact of new implants on women's health. This increase concern for determining the safety of breast implants is due to a number of factors, which are examined in this article.

45 CFR 162.510 - Full implementation requirements: Covered entities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... 45 Public Welfare 1 2013-10-01 2013-10-01 false Full implementation requirements: Covered entities. 162.510 Section 162.510 Public Welfare DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE DATA... Plans § 162.510 Full implementation requirements: Covered entities. (a) A covered entity must use an...

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...

FDA MAUDE data on complications with lasers, light sources, and energy-based devices.

PubMed

Tremaine, Anne Marie; Avram, Mathew M

2015-02-01

It is essential for physicians to be fully informed regarding adverse events and malfunctions associated with medical devices that occur in routine practice. There is limited information on this important issue in the medical literature, and it is mostly based on initial studies and case reports. More advanced knowledge regarding device adverse events is necessary to guide physicians towards providing safe treatments. The FDA requires that manufacturers and device users submit medical device reports (MDRs) for suspected injuries from device use or malfunction. The database of MDRs, entitled Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) enables the FDA to monitor device performance and identify potential safety issues. We employed the following search strategy to identify reported adverse events. We searched the MAUDE electronic database on the FDA website in December 2013: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm We collected all reported cases between 1991 and December 2013. The search terms utilized included a comprehensive list of device manufacturers, specific product names, and the wavelengths/technology of the devices used in the field of dermatology. Our search yielded 1257 MDRs. Forty-five MDRs were excluded due to insufficient data. The data is broken down into the adverse events observed, such as, but not limited to: blistering, burns, scarring, dyschromia, fat loss, and nerve palsy. The MDRs describe the adverse event and attempt to determine if it was related to device malfunction versus operator error. Radiofrequency devices, diode lasers, and intense pulsed light devices were the most commonly reported devices related to injuries. 1257 MDRs, from a myriad of devices used in dermatology, have been reported to the FDA as of December 2013. Despite the underreporting of adverse events, the MAUDE database is an untapped resource of post-market surveillance of medical devices. The database can offer additional

The nightmare of FDA clearance/approval to market: perception or reality?

PubMed

Tylenda, C A

1996-09-01

Over the last few years the Center for Device Evaluation and Research (CDRH) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received annually over 16 thousand submissions related to medical devices. Over 10,000 of these are major submissions which include applications to conduct clinical trials and applications to market medical devices for a specified indication for use. Each application is carefully considered. FDA personnel work closely with applicants to ensure that clinical trial design minimizes risk to the patients and maximizes benefit with respect to addressing the safety and effectiveness of the device being tested. Applicants are given every opportunity to provide additional information when necessary to assure that applications to market medical devices are complete. Applicants have the opportunity to meet with FDA staff prior to submitting applications in cases where the application is other than a straight forward, uncomplicated submission. In addition, FDA assists applicants through the development of guidance documents, which discuss the type of information that would be beneficial to include in a submission. The Division of Small Manufacturers Assistance at FDA is dedicated to helping interested persons understand the clearance/approval process. This paper will discuss the role of FDA in the regulation of medical devices, with an emphasis on the pathway to obtaining permission to market medical devices in the United States.

21 CFR 1.279 - When must prior notice be submitted to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? 1.279... Imported Food § 1.279 When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, you must submit the prior notice to FDA and the prior notice submission must be...

21 CFR 1.279 - When must prior notice be submitted to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? 1.279... Imported Food § 1.279 When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, you must submit the prior notice to FDA and the prior notice submission must be...

21 CFR 1.279 - When must prior notice be submitted to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? 1.279... Imported Food § 1.279 When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, you must submit the prior notice to FDA and the prior notice submission must be...

21 CFR 1.279 - When must prior notice be submitted to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? 1.279... Imported Food § 1.279 When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, you must submit the prior notice to FDA and the prior notice submission must be...

21 CFR 1.279 - When must prior notice be submitted to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? 1.279... Imported Food § 1.279 When must prior notice be submitted to FDA? (a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, you must submit the prior notice to FDA and the prior notice submission must be...

Revisiting financial conflicts of interest in FDA advisory committees.

PubMed

Pham-Kanter, Genevieve

2014-09-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Safety and Innovation Act has recently relaxed conflict-of-interest rules for FDA advisory committee members, but concerns remain about the influence of members' financial relationships on the FDA's drug approval process. Using a large newly available data set, this study carefully examined the relationship between the financial interests of FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) advisory committee members and whether members voted in a way favorable to these interests. The study used a data set of voting behavior and reported financial interests of 1,379 FDA advisory committee members who voted in CDER committee meetings that were convened during the 15-year period of 1997-2011. Data on 1,168 questions and 15,739 question-votes from 379 meetings were used in the analyses. Multivariable logit models were used to estimate the relationship between committee members' financial interests and their voting behavior. Individuals with financial interests solely in the sponsoring firm were more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor than members with no financial ties (OR = 1.49, p = 0.03). Members with interests in both the sponsoring firm and its competitors were no more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor than those with no financial ties to any potentially affected firm (OR = 1.16, p = 0.48). Members who served on advisory boards solely for the sponsor were significantly more likely to vote in favor of the sponsor (OR = 4.97, p = 0.005). There appears to be a pro-sponsor voting bias among advisory committee members who have exclusive financial relationships with the sponsoring firm but not among members who have nonexclusive financial relationships (ie, those with ties to both the sponsor and its competitors). These findings point to important heterogeneities in financial ties and suggest that policymakers will need to be nuanced in their management of financial relationships of FDA advisory committee members. �

FDA Approves Apalutamide for Prostate Cancer

Cancer.gov

Apalutamide (Erleada) is a hormone therapy that counteracts resistance to androgen deprivation therapy. Learn more about the FDA approval of apalutamide for men with castration-resistant nonmetastatic prostate cancer in this Cancer Currents blog post.

Evidentiary Support in Public Comments to the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products.

PubMed

Hemmerich, Natalie; Klein, Elizabeth G; Berman, Micah

2017-08-01

Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) were introduced into the US market in 2007, and until recently these devices were unregulated at the federal level. In 2014, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking asserting its intention to regulate ENDS and requesting public comments on numerous related issues, including potential limits on the sale of flavored ENDS. This article analyzes key comments submitted to the FDA on the issue of flavor regulation in ENDS and examines the weight and credibility of the evidence presented by both supporters and opponents of regulation. It also describes the final deeming rule, published in May 2016, and the FDA's response to the evidence submitted. This is the first study to examine public comments submitted to the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products, and it concludes that opponents of regulation were more likely to rely on sources that were not peer reviewed and that were affected by conflicts of interest. In light of these findings, the FDA and the research community should develop processes to carefully and critically analyze public comments submitted to the FDA on issues of tobacco regulation. Copyright © 2017 by Duke University Press.

FDA Approves First Immunotherapy for Lymphoma

Cancer.gov

The FDA has approved nivolumab (Opdivo®) for the treatment of patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma whose disease has relapsed or worsened after receiving an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation followed by brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris®)

MedWatch, the FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program

MedlinePlus

... Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program MedWatch: The FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program Share ... use. [Posted 06/01/2018] More What's New FDA Approved Safety Information DailyMed (National Library of Medicine) ...

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.

FDA Approves First Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine

Cancer.gov

Sipuleucel-T (Provenge) is a relatively nontoxic treatment option for men with hormone-resistant or castration-resistant prostate cancer. The FDA's approval of the vaccine represented the first proof of principle that immunotherapy can work in cancer.

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...

21 CFR 801.57 - Discontinuation of legacy FDA identification numbers assigned to devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Discontinuation of legacy FDA identification... Device Identification § 801.57 Discontinuation of legacy FDA identification numbers assigned to devices... been assigned an FDA labeler code to facilitate use of NHRIC or NDC numbers may continue to use that...

Ensuring the safe and effective FDA regulation of fecal microbiota transplantation

PubMed Central

Sachs, Rachel E.; Edelstein, Carolyn A.

2015-01-01

Scientists, policymakers, and medical professionals alike have become increasingly worried about the rise of antibiotic resistance, and the growing number of infections due to bacteria like Clostridium difficile, which cause a significant number of deaths and are imposing increasing costs on our health care system. However, in the last few years, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), the transplantation of stool from a healthy donor into the bowel of a patient, has emerged as a startlingly effective means to treat recurrent C. difficile infections. At present, the FDA is proposing to regulate FMT as a biologic drug. However, this proposed classification is both underregulatory and overregulatory. The FDA's primary goal is to ensure that patients have access to safe, effective treatments—and as such they should regulate some aspects of FMT more stringently than they propose to, and others less so. This essay will examine the nature of the regulatory challenges the FDA will face in deciding to regulate FMT as a biologic drug, and will then evaluate available policy alternatives for the FDA to pursue, ultimately concluding that the FDA ought to consider adopting a hybrid regulatory model as it has done in the case of cord blood. PMID:27774199

Awareness of the role of science in the FDA regulatory submission process: a survey of the TERMIS-Americas membership.

PubMed

Johnson, Peter C; Bertram, Tim A; Carty, Neal R; Hellman, Kiki B; Tawil, Bill J; Van Dyke, Mark

2014-06-01

The Industry Committee of the Tissue Engineering Regenerative Medicine International Society, Americas Chapter (TERMIS-AM) administered a survey to its membership in 2013 to assess the awareness of science requirements in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory process. One hundred forty-four members responded to the survey. Their occupational and geographical representation was representative of the TERMIS-AM membership as a whole. The survey elicited basic demographic information, the degree to which members were involved in tissue engineering technology development, and their plans for future involvement in such development. The survey then assessed the awareness of general FDA scientific practices as well as specific science requirements for regulatory submissions to the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and the Office of Combination Projects (OCP). The FDA-specific questions in the survey were culled from guidance documents posted on the FDA web site ( www.fda.gov ). One of the answer options was an opt-out clause that enabled survey respondents to claim a lack of sufficient awareness of the topic to answer the question. This enabled the stratification of respondents on the basis of confidence in the topic. Results indicate that across all occupational groups (academic, business, and government) that are represented in the TERMIS-AM membership, the awareness of FDA science requirements varies markedly. Those who performed best were for-profit company employees, consultants, and government employees; while students, professors, and respondents from outside the USA performed least well. Confidence in question topics was associated with increased correctness in responses across all groups, though the association between confidence and the ability to answer correctly was poorest among students and professors. Though 80% of

21 CFR 1.378 - What criteria does FDA use to order a detention?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? 1... General Provisions § 1.378 What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? An officer or qualified employee of FDA may order the detention of any article of food that is found during an inspection...

21 CFR 1.378 - What criteria does FDA use to order a detention?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? 1... General Provisions § 1.378 What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? An officer or qualified employee of FDA may order the detention of any article of food that is found during an inspection...

21 CFR 1.378 - What criteria does FDA use to order a detention?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? 1... General Provisions § 1.378 What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? An officer or qualified employee of FDA may order the detention of any article of food that is found during an inspection...

21 CFR 1.378 - What criteria does FDA use to order a detention?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? 1... General Provisions § 1.378 What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? An officer or qualified employee of FDA may order the detention of any article of food that is found during an inspection...

21 CFR 1.378 - What criteria does FDA use to order a detention?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? 1... General Provisions § 1.378 What criteria does FDA use to order a detention? An officer or qualified employee of FDA may order the detention of any article of food that is found during an inspection...

FDA-CDC Antimicrobial Resistance Isolate Bank: a Publicly Available Resource To Support Research, Development, and Regulatory Requirements.

PubMed

Lutgring, Joseph D; Machado, María-José; Benahmed, Faiza H; Conville, Patricia; Shawar, Ribhi M; Patel, Jean; Brown, Allison C

2018-02-01

The FDA-CDC Antimicrobial Resistance Isolate Bank was created in July 2015 as a publicly available resource to combat antimicrobial resistance. It is a curated repository of bacterial isolates with an assortment of clinically important resistance mechanisms that have been phenotypically and genotypically characterized. In the first 2 years of operation, the bank offered 14 panels comprising 496 unique isolates and had filled 486 orders from 394 institutions throughout the United States. New panels are being added. Copyright © 2018 American Society for Microbiology.

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

��± 16.2) and Obama (41.7 ± 11.1). Most regulatory letters released by FDA headquarters were related to marketing and advertising activities of pharmaceutical companies. The number of regulatory letters was highest during the second Clinton administration, diminished during the Bush administrations, and increased again during the Obama administration. A further assessment of the impact of changes in federal administration on the enforcement activities of the FDA is required.

"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.

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.

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...

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.

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

Analysis of lomustine drug content in FDA-approved and compounded lomustine capsules.

PubMed

KuKanich, Butch; Warner, Matt; Hahn, Kevin

2017-02-01

OBJECTIVE To determine the lomustine content (potency) in compounded and FDA-approved lomustine capsules. DESIGN Evaluation study. SAMPLE 2 formulations of lomustine capsules (low dose [7 to 11 mg] and high dose [40 to 48 mg]; 5 capsules/dose/source) from 3 compounders and from 1 manufacturer of FDA-approved capsules. PROCEDURES Lomustine content was measured by use of a validated high-pressure liquid chromatography method. An a priori acceptable range of 90% to 110% of the stated lomustine content was selected on the basis of US Pharmacopeia guidelines. RESULTS The measured amount of lomustine in all compounded capsules was less than the stated content (range, 59% to 95%) and was frequently outside the acceptable range (failure rate, 2/5 to 5/5). Coefficients of variation for lomustine content ranged from 4.1% to 16.7% for compounded low-dose capsules and from 1.1% to 10.8% for compounded high-dose capsules. The measured amount of lomustine in all FDA-approved capsules was slightly above the stated content (range, 104% to 110%) and consistently within the acceptable range. Coefficients of variation for lomustine content were 0.5% for low-dose and 2.3% for high-dose FDA-approved capsules. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Compounded lomustine frequently did not contain the stated content of active drug and had a wider range of lomustine content variability than did the FDA-approved product. The sample size was small, and larger studies are needed to confirm these findings; however, we recommend that compounded veterinary formulations of lomustine not be used when appropriate doses can be achieved with FDA-approved capsules or combinations of FDA-approved capsules.

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)

Could FDA approval of pre-exposure prophylaxis make a difference? A qualitative study of PrEP acceptability and FDA perceptions among men who have sex with men.

PubMed

Underhill, Kristen; Morrow, Kathleen M; Operario, Don; Mayer, Kenneth H

2014-02-01

The FDA has approved tenofovir-emtricitabine for use as HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis, but it is unknown how approval may affect PrEP acceptability among US men who have sex with men. We conducted 8 focus groups among 38 Rhode Island MSM, including 3 groups among 16 male sex workers and 5 groups among 22 men in the general MSM community. Participants reported wide-ranging beliefs regarding consequences and meanings of FDA approval. Some participants would not use PrEP without approval, while others perceived approval as irrelevant or less significant than other sources of information. Our results suggest that FDA approval sends a signal that directly shapes PrEP acceptability among some MSM, while indirect influences of approval may affect uptake by others. Efforts to educate MSM about PrEP can increase acceptability by incorporating information about FDA approval, and outreach strategies should consider how this information may factor into personal decisions about PrEP use.

Hypnotic Medications and Suicide: Risk, Mechanisms, Mitigation, and the FDA.

PubMed

McCall, W Vaughn; Benca, Ruth M; Rosenquist, Peter B; Riley, Mary Anne; McCloud, Laryssa; Newman, Jill C; Case, Doug; Rumble, Meredith; Krystal, Andrew D

2017-01-01

Insomnia is associated with increased risk for suicide. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has mandated that warnings regarding suicide be included in the prescribing information for hypnotic medications. The authors conducted a review of the evidence for and against the claim that hypnotics increase the risk of suicide. This review focused on modern, FDA-approved hypnotics, beginning with the introduction of benzodiazepines, limiting its findings to adults. PubMed and Web of Science were searched, crossing the terms "suicide" and "suicidal" with each of the modern FDA-approved hypnotics. The FDA web site was searched for postmarketing safety reviews, and the FDA was contacted with requests to provide detailed case reports for hypnotic-related suicide deaths reported through its Adverse Event Reporting System. Epidemiological studies show that hypnotics are associated with an increased risk for suicide. However, none of these studies adequately controlled for depression or other psychiatric disorders that may be linked with insomnia. Suicide deaths have been reported from single-agent hypnotic overdoses. A separate concern is that benzodiazepine receptor agonist hypnotics can cause parasomnias, which in rare cases may lead to suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior in persons who were not known to be suicidal. On the other hand, ongoing research is testing whether treatment of insomnia may reduce suicidality in adults with depression. The review findings indicate that hypnotic medications are associated with suicidal ideation. Future studies should be designed to assess whether increases in suicidality result from CNS impairments from a given hypnotic medication or whether such medication decreases suicidality because of improvements in insomnia.

Hypnotic medications and suicide: risk, mechanisms, mitigation, and the FDA

PubMed Central

McCall, W. Vaughn; Benca, Ruth M.; Rosenquist, Peter B.; Riley, Mary Anne; McCloud, Laryssa; Newman, Jill C.; Case, Doug; Rumble, Meredith; Krystal, Andrew D.

2016-01-01

Objective Insomnia is associated with increased risk for suicide. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has warnings regarding suicide in the prescribing information of hypnotics. We conducted a review of the evidence for and against hypnotics increasing the risk of suicide. Method This review focused on modern, FDA-approved hypnotics, beginning with the introduction of benzodiazepines, limiting its findings to adults. PubMed and Web of Science were searched, crossing the terms ‘suicide’ and ‘suicidal’ with each of the modern FDA-approved hypnotics. The FDA website was searched for post-marketing safety reviews, and the FDA was contacted to provide detailed case reports for hypnotic-related suicide deaths reported through its Adverse Event Report system. Results The epidemiological studies show that hypnotics are associated with increased risk for suicide. However, none of these studies adequately controlled for depression or other psychiatric disorders that may be linked with insomnia. Suicide deaths have been reported from single-agent hypnotic overdoses. A separate concern is that benzodiazepine receptor agonist hypnotics can cause parasomnias, which in rare cases may lead to suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior in persons who were not known to be previously suicidal. On the other hand, ongoing research is testing whether treatment of insomnia might reduce suicidality in depressed adults. Conclusions This review indicates hypnotic medications are associated with suicidal ideation. Future studies should be designed to assess both types of possible effects: 1) an increase in suicidality due to central nervous system impairments from a given hypnotic medication; and 2) a decrease in suicidality due to improving insomnia. PMID:27609243

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.

Evaluation of genotoxicity testing of FDA approved large molecule therapeutics.

PubMed

Sawant, Satin G; Fielden, Mark R; Black, Kurt A

2014-10-01

Large molecule therapeutics (MW>1000daltons) are not expected to enter the cell and thus have reduced potential to interact directly with DNA or related physiological processes. Genotoxicity studies are therefore not relevant and typically not required for large molecule therapeutic candidates. Regulatory guidance supports this approach; however there are examples of marketed large molecule therapeutics where sponsors have conducted genotoxicity studies. A retrospective analysis was performed on genotoxicity studies of United States FDA approved large molecule therapeutics since 1998 identified through the Drugs@FDA website. This information was used to provide a data-driven rationale for genotoxicity evaluations of large molecule therapeutics. Fifty-three of the 99 therapeutics identified were tested for genotoxic potential. None of the therapeutics tested showed a positive outcome in any study except the peptide glucagon (GlucaGen®) showing equivocal in vitro results, as stated in the product labeling. Scientific rationale and data from this review indicate that testing of a majority of large molecule modalities do not add value to risk assessment and support current regulatory guidance. Similarly, the data do not support testing of peptides containing only natural amino acids. Peptides containing non-natural amino acids and small molecules in conjugated products may need to be tested. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

75 FR 43107 - Revocation of Requirements for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-07-23

... Improvement Act of 2008 (``CPSIA'') requires the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (``CPSC'' or... CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509 [CPSC Docket No. CPSC-2010-0075] Revocation of Requirements for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-Full- Size Baby Cribs AGENCY: Consumer Product...

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.

Indoor tanning injuries: an evaluation of FDA adverse event reporting data.

PubMed

Dowdy, John C; Sayre, Robert M; Shepherd, James G

2009-08-01

In 1979 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) designated indoor tanning units would be regulated medical devices and that each must have an exposure timer. In 1985 FDA added a scheduled series of doses designed to allow tanning with little risk of concomitant sunburn. Subsequently FDA/CDRH maintained databases in which medical device associated injuries were reported. The databases, MAUDE and its predecessor MDR, are available online. While these records, in part, are not intended for evaluation of adverse event rates, analysis provides insight into the etiology of UV-related tanning injuries. We compiled 142 records reported for 1985-2006 including 22% noninjury malfunctions. Of the reported injuries approximately 50% resulted from UV exposure, an average of <1/year resulted in hospitalization. At least 36% of the UV-related injuries were attributable to various (user/operator) noncompliance with FDA sunlamp guidance policies. During 1985-1995 there were six times more UV injuries than 1996-2006, presumably reflecting cessation of much mandatory reporting in 1996. Injury reports declined steady from 1997 to 2006. FDA guidance appears most efficacious in injury prevention and we encourage its incorporation into the enforceable performance standard. We also advise that tanning industry professional training programs seek standardization/accreditation of their personnel certifications through recognized accreditation bodies such as ANSI or ISO/IEC.

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).

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 1.406 - How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false How will FDA handle classified information in an... Animal Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.406 How will FDA handle... disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with...

21 CFR 1.406 - How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false How will FDA handle classified information in an... Animal Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.406 How will FDA handle... disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with...

21 CFR 1.406 - How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false How will FDA handle classified information in an... Animal Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.406 How will FDA handle... disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with...

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 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 1.406 - How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false How will FDA handle classified information in an... Animal Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.406 How will FDA handle... disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with...

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 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...

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...

21 CFR 1.406 - How will FDA handle classified information in an informal hearing?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false How will FDA handle classified information in an... Animal Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.406 How will FDA handle... disclosure in the interest of national security (“classified information”), FDA will not provide you with...

US FDA review and regulation of preventive vaccines for infectious disease indications: impact of the FDA Amendments Act 2007.

PubMed

Gruber, Marion F

2011-07-01

Vaccines for prevention or treatment of infectious diseases are biological products that are regulated by the Office of Vaccines Research and Review in the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research of the US FDA. The legal framework for the regulation of vaccines derives primarily from Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act and from certain sections of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFD & C Act). The FDA Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA 2007) includes extensive modifications to the FFD & C Act. This article provides an overview of the review process for preventive vaccines and highlights applicable statutory provisions. In addition, this article will discuss changes in the pre-and post-licensure evaluation process for preventive and therapeutic infectious disease vaccines since implementation of the FDAAA 2007.

FDA Expands Approval of Venetoclax for CLL

Cancer.gov

FDA expanded the approval of venetoclax (Venclexta) for people with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) to include those whose cancer has progressed after previous treatment, regardless of whether their cancer cells have the deletion 17p gene alteration.

77 FR 14401 - Draft Guidance on Drug Safety Information-FDA's Communication to the Public; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-09

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2005-D-0339] Draft Guidance on Drug Safety Information--FDA's Communication to the Public; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

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.

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false How does FDA define the terms used in this part... § 803.3 How does FDA define the terms used in this part? Some of the terms we use in this part are..., repairs, or upgrades, for an estimated period of time. FDA, we, or us means the Food and Drug...

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 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...

Participatory surveillance of diabetes device safety: a social media-based complement to traditional FDA reporting.

PubMed

Mandl, Kenneth D; McNabb, Marion; Marks, Norman; Weitzman, Elissa R; Kelemen, Skyler; Eggleston, Emma M; Quinn, Maryanne

2014-01-01

Malfunctions or poor usability of devices measuring glucose or delivering insulin are reportable to the FDA. Manufacturers submit 99.9% of these reports. We test online social networks as a complementary source to traditional FDA reporting of device-related adverse events. Participatory surveillance of members of a non-profit online social network, TuDiabetes.org, from October 2011 to September 2012. Subjects were volunteers from a group within TuDiabetes, actively engaged online in participatory surveillance. They used the free TuAnalyze app, a privacy-preserving method to report detailed clinical information, available through the network. Network members were polled about finger-stick blood glucose monitors, continuous glucose monitors, and insulin delivery devices, including insulin pumps and insulin pens. Of 549 participants, 75 reported device-related adverse events, nearly half (48.0%) requiring intervention from another person to manage the event. Only three (4.0%) of these were reported by participants to the FDA. All TuAnalyze reports contained outcome information compared with 22% of reports to the FDA. Hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia were experienced by 48.0% and 49.3% of participants, respectively. Members of an online community readily engaged in participatory surveillance. While polling distributed online populations does not yield generalizable, denominator-based rates, this approach can characterize risk within online communities using a bidirectional communication channel that enables reach-back and intervention. Engagement of distributed communities in social networks is a viable complementary approach to traditional public health surveillance for adverse events related to medical devices. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Medical devices; radiology devices; reclassification of full-field digital mammography system. Final rule.

PubMed

2010-11-05

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the reclassification of the full-field digital mammography (FFDM) system from class III (premarket approval) to class II (special controls). The device type is intended to produce planar digital x-ray images of the entire breast; this generic type of device may include digital mammography acquisition software, full-field digital image receptor, acquisition workstation, automatic exposure control, image processing and reconstruction programs, patient and equipment supports, component parts, and accessories. The special control that will apply to the device is the guidance document entitled "Class II Special Controls Guidance Document: Full-Field Digital Mammography System." FDA is reclassifying the device into class II (special controls) because general controls along with special controls will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of the device. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing the availability of the guidance document that will serve as the special control for this device.

Medical Gas Containers and Closures; Current Good Manufacturing Practice Requirements. Final rule.

PubMed

2016-11-18

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is amending its current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) and labeling regulations regarding medical gases. FDA is requiring that portable cryogenic medical gas containers not manufactured with permanent gas use outlet connections have gas-specific use outlet connections that cannot be readily removed or replaced except by the manufacturer. FDA is also requiring that portable cryogenic medical gas containers and high-pressure medical gas cylinders meet certain labeling, naming, and color requirements. These requirements are intended to increase the likelihood that the contents of medical gas containers are accurately identified and reduce the likelihood of the wrong gas being connected to a gas supply system or container. FDA is also revising an existing regulation that conditionally exempts certain medical gases from certain otherwise-applicable labeling requirements in order to add oxygen and nitrogen to the list of gases subject to the exemption, and to remove cyclopropane and ethylene from the list.

45 CFR 73a.735-201 - Control activity employees formerly associated with organizations subject to FDA regulation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. 73a.735-201 Section 73a.735-201 Public Welfare Department... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. (a) For a period of 1 year after FDA appointment, or... employed in a regulated organization within 1 year before FDA employment shall not participate in any...

45 CFR 73a.735-201 - Control activity employees formerly associated with organizations subject to FDA regulation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. 73a.735-201 Section 73a.735-201 Public Welfare DEPARTMENT... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. (a) For a period of 1 year after FDA appointment, or... employed in a regulated organization within 1 year before FDA employment shall not participate in any...

45 CFR 73a.735-201 - Control activity employees formerly associated with organizations subject to FDA regulation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. 73a.735-201 Section 73a.735-201 Public Welfare DEPARTMENT... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. (a) For a period of 1 year after FDA appointment, or... employed in a regulated organization within 1 year before FDA employment shall not participate in any...

45 CFR 73a.735-201 - Control activity employees formerly associated with organizations subject to FDA regulation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. 73a.735-201 Section 73a.735-201 Public Welfare DEPARTMENT... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. (a) For a period of 1 year after FDA appointment, or... employed in a regulated organization within 1 year before FDA employment shall not participate in any...

45 CFR 73a.735-201 - Control activity employees formerly associated with organizations subject to FDA regulation.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. 73a.735-201 Section 73a.735-201 Public Welfare DEPARTMENT... with organizations subject to FDA regulation. (a) For a period of 1 year after FDA appointment, or... employed in a regulated organization within 1 year before FDA employment shall not participate in any...

Electrosurgical injuries during robot assisted surgery: insights from the FDA MAUDE database

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Fuller, Andrew; Vilos, George A.; Pautler, Stephen E.

2012-02-01

Introduction: The da Vinci surgical system requires the use of electrosurgical instruments. The re-use of such instruments creates the potential for stray electrical currents from capacitive coupling and/or insulation failure with subsequent injury. The morbidity of such injuries may negate many of the benefits of minimally invasive surgery. We sought to evaluate the rate and nature of electrosurgical injury (ESI) associated with this device. Methods: The Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database is administered by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and reports adverse events related to medical devices in the United States. We analyzed all incidents in the context of robotic surgery between January 2001 and June 2011 to identify those related to the use of electrosurgery. Results: In the past decade, a total of 605 reports have been submitted to the FDA with regard to adverse events related to the da Vinci robotic surgical platform. Of these, 24 (3.9%) were related to potential or actual ESI. Nine out of the 24 cases (37.5%) resulted in additional surgical intervention for repair. There were 6 bowel injuries of which only one was recognized and managed intra-operatively. The remainder required laparotomy between 5 and 8 days after the initial robotic procedure. Additionally, there were 3 skin burns. The remaining cases required conservative management or resulted in no harm. Conclusion: ESI in the context of robotic surgery is uncommon but remains under-recognized and under-reported. Surgeons performing robot assisted surgery should be aware that ESI can occur with robotic instruments and vigilance for intra- and post-operative complications is paramount.

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

....650 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Approval of New Drugs When Human Efficacy Studies Are Not Ethical or Feasible § 314.650 Termination of requirements. If FDA determines after...

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

....650 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Approval of New Drugs When Human Efficacy Studies Are Not Ethical or Feasible § 314.650 Termination of requirements. If FDA determines after...

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

....650 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Approval of New Drugs When Human Efficacy Studies Are Not Ethical or Feasible § 314.650 Termination of requirements. If FDA determines after...

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

....650 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Approval of New Drugs When Human Efficacy Studies Are Not Ethical or Feasible § 314.650 Termination of requirements. If FDA determines after...

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

....650 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Approval of New Drugs When Human Efficacy Studies Are Not Ethical or Feasible § 314.650 Termination of requirements. If FDA determines after...

The debate on FDA reform: a view from the U.S. Senate. Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Baker, R

1995-09-01

The recently released concept paper on Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reform from Republican Senator, Nancy Kassebaum, is reviewed. Senator Kassebaum chairs the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources that will influence the Senate's action on FDA reform. The paper outlines the Senator's priorities for Congressional legislation on FDA reform in the following areas: the FDA mission and its accountability; creation of a Performance Review Panel and Industry Advisory Council; approval and access of products for seriously ill patients; the FDA's responsibility for good manufacturing practices; establishment of an Ombudsman Office for resolving disputes; dissemination of information on unapproved uses of approved products; and approval standards for new drugs.

Characteristics of Clinical Studies Conducted Over the Total Product Life Cycle of High-Risk Therapeutic Medical Devices Receiving FDA Premarket Approval in 2010 and 2011.

PubMed

Rathi, Vinay K; Krumholz, Harlan M; Masoudi, Frederick A; Ross, Joseph S

2015-08-11

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves high-risk medical devices, those that support or sustain human life or present potential unreasonable risk to patients, via the Premarket Approval (PMA) pathway. The generation of clinical evidence to understand device safety and effectiveness is shifting from predominantly premarket to continual study throughout the total product life cycle. To characterize the clinical evidence generated for high-risk therapeutic devices over the total product life cycle. All clinical studies of high-risk therapeutic devices receiving initial market approval via the PMA pathway in 2010 and 2011 identified through ClinicalTrials.gov and publicly available FDA documents as of October 2014. Studies were characterized by type (pivotal, studies that served as the basis of FDA approval; FDA-required postapproval studies [PAS]; or manufacturer/investigator-initiated); premarket or postmarket; status (completed, ongoing, or terminated/unknown); and design features, including enrollment, comparator, and longest duration of primary effectiveness end point follow-up. In 2010 and 2011, 28 high-risk therapeutic devices received initial marketing approval via the PMA pathway. We identified 286 clinical studies of these devices: 82 (28.7%) premarket and 204 (71.3%) postmarket, among which there were 52 (18.2%) nonpivotal premarket studies, 30 (10.5%) pivotal premarket studies, 33 (11.5%) FDA-required PAS, and 171 (59.8%) manufacturer/investigator-initiated postmarket studies. Six of 33 (18.2%) PAS and 20 of 171 (11.7%) manufacturer/investigator-initiated postmarket studies were reported as completed. No postmarket studies were identified for 5 (17.9%) devices; 3 or fewer were identified for 13 (46.4%) devices overall. Median enrollment was 65 patients (interquartile range [IQR], 25-111), 241 patients (IQR, 147-415), 222 patients (IQR, 119-640), and 250 patients (IQR, 60-800) for nonpivotal premarket, pivotal, FDA-required PAS, and manufacturer

Public voices in pharmaceutical deliberations: negotiating "clinical benefit" in the FDA's Avastin Hearing.

PubMed

Teston, Christa B; Graham, S Scott; Baldwinson, Raquel; Li, Andria; Swift, Jessamyn

2014-06-01

This article offers a hybrid rhetorical-qualitative discourse analysis of the FDA's 2011 Avastin Hearing, which considered the revocation of the breast cancer indication for the popular cancer drug Avastin. We explore the multiplicity of stakeholders, the questions that motivated deliberations, and the kinds of evidence presented during the hearing. Pairing our findings with contemporary scholarship in rhetorical stasis theory, Mol's (2002) construct of multiple ontologies, and Callon, Lascoumes, and Barthe's (2011) "hybrid forums," we demonstrate that the FDA's deliberative procedures elides various sources of evidence and the potential multiplicity of definitions for "clinical benefit." Our findings suggest that while the FDA invited multiple stakeholders to offer testimony, there are ways that the FDA might have more meaningfully incorporated public voices in the deliberative process. We conclude with suggestions for how a true hybrid forum might be deployed.

FDA Regulation of Clinical Applications of CRISPR-CAS Gene-Editing Technology.

PubMed

Grant, Evita V

Scientists have repurposed an adaptive immune system of single cell organisms to create a new type of gene-editing tool: CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats)-Cas technology. Scientists in China have reported its use in the genome modification of non-viable human embryos. This has ignited a spirited debate about the moral, ethical, scientific, and social implications of human germline genome engineering. There have also been calls for regulations; however, FDA has yet to formally announce its oversight of clinical applications of CRISPR-Cas systems. This paper reviews FDA regulation of previously controversial biotechnology breakthroughs, recombinant DNA and human cloning. It then shows that FDA is well positioned to regulate CRISPR-Cas clinical applications, due to its legislative mandates, its existing regulatory frameworks for gene therapies and assisted reproductive technologies, and other considerations.

78 FR 36194 - Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: Investigational New Drug Applications for Minimally...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-17

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0490] Draft Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: Investigational New Drug Applications for Minimally... Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the...

Cigarette Graphic Warning Labels and Smoking Prevalence in Canada: A Critical Examination and Reformulation of the FDA Regulatory Impact Analysis

PubMed Central

Huang, Jidong; Chaloupka, Frank J.; Fong, Geoffrey T.

2014-01-01

Background The estimated effect of cigarette graphic warning labels (GWLs) on smoking rates is a key input to FDA's regulatory impact analysis (RIA), required by law as part of its rulemaking process. However, evidence on the impact of GWLs on smoking prevalence is scarce. Objective The goal of this paper is to critically analyze FDA's approach to estimating the impact of GWLs on smoking rates in its RIA, and to suggest a path forward to estimating the impact of the adoption of GWLs in Canada on Canadian national adult smoking prevalence. Methods A quasi-experimental methodology was employed to examine the impact of adoption of GWLs in Canada in 2000, using the U.S. as a control. Findings We found a statistically significant reduction in smoking rates after the adoption of GWLs in Canada in comparison to the U.S. Our analyses show that implementation of GWLs in Canada reduced smoking rates by 2.87 to 4.68 percentage points, a relative reduction of 12.1 to 19.6% — 33 to 53 times larger than FDA's estimates of a 0.088 percentage point reduction. We also demonstrated that FDA's estimate of the impact was flawed because it is highly sensitive to the changes in variable selection, model specification, and the time period analyzed. Conclusions Adopting GWLs on cigarette packages reduces smoking prevalence. Applying our analysis of the Canadian GWLs, we estimate that if the U.S. had adopted GWLs in 2012, the number of adult smokers in the U.S. would have decreased by 5.3 to 8.6 million in 2013. Our analysis demonstrates that FDA's approach to estimating the impact of GWLs on smoking rates is flawed. Rectifying these problems before this approach becomes the norm is critical for FDA's effective regulation of tobacco products. PMID:24218057

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...

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...

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

PubMed Central

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

2016-01-01

Objective 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). Materials and Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusion With easier and faster access to these datasets, consumers worldwide can learn more about FDA-regulated products. PMID:26644398

FDA regulations regarding iodine addition to foods and labeling of foods containing added iodine12

PubMed Central

Trumbo, Paula R

2016-01-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the addition of iodine to infant formulas, the iodization of salt, and the addition of salt and iodine to foods. The required amount of iodine in infant formulas is based on caloric content, and the label must provide the iodine content per 100 kcal. Cuprous iodide and potassium iodide may be added to table salt as a source of dietary iodine at a maximum amount of 0.01%; if added, the label must indicate that the salt is iodized. Table salt to which iodine has not been added must bear the statement, “This salt does not supply iodide, a necessary nutrient.” If a nutrient is to be appropriately added to a food for the purpose of correcting a dietary insufficiency, there should be sufficient scientific information available to demonstrate a nutritional deficiency and/or identify a public health problem. Furthermore, the population groups that would benefit from the proposed fortification should be identified. If iodine is added to a food, the percent Daily Value of iodine must be listed. There are no FDA regulations governing ingredient standards for dietary supplements. As a result, some dietary supplements include iodine and others do not. If a supplement contains iodine, the Supplement Facts label must list iodine as a nutrient ingredient. If iodine is not listed on the Supplement Facts label, then it has not been added. There are similarities between the FDA, which establishes US food regulations and policies, and the Codex Alimentarius (Codex), which develops international food standards and guidelines under the aegis of the FAO and the WHO. Both the FDA and Codex call for the labeling of table salt to indicate fortification with iodine, voluntary labeling of iodine on foods, and a Daily Value (called a Nutrient Reference Value by Codex) of 150 μg for iodine. PMID:27534626

FDA regulation of adult stem cell therapies as used in sports medicine.

PubMed

Chirba, Mary Ann; Sweetapple, Berkley; Hannon, Charles P; Anderson, John A

2015-02-01

In sports medicine, adult stem cells are the subject of great interest. Several uses of stem cells are under investigation including cartilage repair, meniscal regeneration, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and tendinopathy. Extensive clinical and basic science research is warranted as stem cell therapies become increasingly common in clinical practice. In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for regulating the use of stem cells through its "Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products" regulations. This report provides a brief overview of FDA regulation of adult stem cells. Several common clinical case scenarios are then presented that highlight how stem cells are currently being used in sports medicine and how current FDA regulations are likely to affect the physicians who use them. In the process, it explains how a variety of factors in sourcing and handling these cells, particularly the extent of cell manipulation, will affect what a physician can and cannot do without first obtaining the FDA's express approval. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

21 CFR 1.405 - When does FDA have to issue a decision on an appeal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false When does FDA have to issue a decision on an... Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.405 When does FDA have to issue a decision... final decision within the 5-calendar day period after the appeal is filed. If FDA either fails to...

21 CFR 1.405 - When does FDA have to issue a decision on an appeal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false When does FDA have to issue a decision on an... Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.405 When does FDA have to issue a decision... final decision within the 5-calendar day period after the appeal is filed. If FDA either fails to...

21 CFR 1.405 - When does FDA have to issue a decision on an appeal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false When does FDA have to issue a decision on an... Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.405 When does FDA have to issue a decision... final decision within the 5-calendar day period after the appeal is filed. If FDA either fails to...

21 CFR 1.405 - When does FDA have to issue a decision on an appeal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false When does FDA have to issue a decision on an... Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.405 When does FDA have to issue a decision... final decision within the 5-calendar day period after the appeal is filed. If FDA either fails to...

21 CFR 1.405 - When does FDA have to issue a decision on an appeal?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false When does FDA have to issue a decision on an... Consumption What Is the Appeal Process for A Detention Order? § 1.405 When does FDA have to issue a decision... final decision within the 5-calendar day period after the appeal is filed. If FDA either fails to...

NCI-FDA Interagency Oncology Task Force Workshop Provides Guidance for Analytical Validation of Protein-based Multiplex Assays | Office of Cancer Clinical Proteomics Research

Cancer.gov

An NCI-FDA Interagency Oncology Task Force (IOTF) Molecular Diagnostics Workshop was held on October 30, 2008 in Cambridge, MA, to discuss requirements for analytical validation of protein-based multiplex technologies in the context of its intended use. This workshop developed through NCI's Clinical Proteomic Technologies for Cancer initiative and the FDA focused on technology-specific analytical validation processes to be addressed prior to use in clinical settings. In making this workshop unique, a case study approach was used to discuss issues related to

FDA Expands Abiraterone Approval for Prostate Cancer

Cancer.gov

The FDA has expanded the approval of abiraterone (Zytiga) to treat men with metastatic prostate cancer. The agency approved abiraterone, in combination with prednisone, for men whose cancer that is responsive to hormone-blocking treatments (also known as castration-sensitive) and is at high risk of progressing.

NIEHS/FDA CLARITY-BPA research program update.

PubMed

Heindel, Jerrold J; Newbold, Retha R; Bucher, John R; Camacho, Luísa; Delclos, K Barry; Lewis, Sherry M; Vanlandingham, Michelle; Churchwell, Mona I; Twaddle, Nathan C; McLellen, Michelle; Chidambaram, Mani; Bryant, Matthew; Woodling, Kellie; Gamboa da Costa, Gonçalo; Ferguson, Sherry A; Flaws, Jodi; Howard, Paul C; Walker, Nigel J; Zoeller, R Thomas; Fostel, Jennifer; Favaro, Carolyn; Schug, Thaddeus T

2015-12-01

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical used in the production of numerous consumer products resulting in potential daily human exposure to this chemical. The FDA previously evaluated the body of BPA toxicology data and determined that BPA is safe at current exposure levels. Although consistent with the assessment of some other regulatory agencies around the world, this determination of BPA safety continues to be debated in scientific and popular publications, resulting in conflicting messages to the public. Thus, the National Toxicology Program (NTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) developed a consortium-based research program to link more effectively a variety of hypothesis-based research investigations and guideline-compliant safety testing with BPA. This collaboration is known as the Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on BPA Toxicity (CLARITY-BPA). This paper provides a detailed description of the conduct of the study and a midterm update on progress of the CLARITY-BPA research program. Published by Elsevier Inc.

NIEHS/FDA CLARITY-BPA research program update

PubMed Central

Heindel, Jerrold J.; Newbold, Retha R.; Bucher, John R.; Camacho, Luísa; Delclos, K. Barry; Lewis, Sherry M.; Vanlandingham, Michelle; Churchwell, Mona I.; Twaddle, Nathan C.; McLellen, Michelle; Chidambaram, Mani; Bryant, Matthew; Woodling, Kellie; Gamboa da Costa, Gonçalo; Ferguson, Sherry A.; Flaws, Jodi; Howard, Paul C.; Walker, Nigel J.; Zoeller, R. Thomas; Fostel, Jennifer; Favaro, Carolyn; Schug, Thaddeus T.

2016-01-01

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical used in the production of numerous consumer products resulting in potential daily human exposure to this chemical. The FDA previously evaluated the body of BPA toxicology data and determined that BPA is safe at current exposure levels. Although consistent with the assessment of some other regulatory agencies around the world, this determination of BPA safety continues to be debated in scientific and popular publications, resulting in conflicting messages to the public. Thus, the National Toxicology Program (NTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), and U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) developed a consortium-based research program to link more effectively a variety of hypothesis-based research investigations and guideline-compliant safety testing with BPA. This collaboration is known as the Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on BPA Toxicity (CLARITY-BPA). This paper provides a detailed description of the conduct of the study and a midterm update on progress of the CLARITY-BPA research program. PMID:26232693

TU-AB-204-00: CDRH/FDA Regulatory Processes and Device Science Activities

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

NONE

The responsibilities of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have increased since the inception of the Food and Drugs Act in 1906. Medical devices first came under comprehensive regulation with the passage of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In 1971 FDA also took on the responsibility for consumer protection against unnecessary exposure to radiation-emitting devices for home and occupational use. However it was not until 1976, under the Medical Device Regulation Act, that the FDA was responsible for the safety and effectiveness of medical devices. This session will be presented by the Division of Radiological Health (DRH) andmore » the Division of Imaging, Diagnostics, and Software Reliability (DIDSR) from the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at the FDA. The symposium will discuss on how we protect and promote public health with a focus on medical physics applications organized into four areas: pre-market device review, post-market surveillance, device compliance, current regulatory research efforts and partnerships with other organizations. The pre-market session will summarize the pathways FDA uses to regulate the investigational use and commercialization of diagnostic imaging and radiation therapy medical devices in the US, highlighting resources available to assist investigators and manufacturers. The post-market session will explain the post-market surveillance and compliance activities FDA performs to monitor the safety and effectiveness of devices on the market. The third session will describe research efforts that support the regulatory mission of the Agency. An overview of our regulatory research portfolio to advance our understanding of medical physics and imaging technologies and approaches to their evaluation will be discussed. Lastly, mechanisms that FDA uses to seek public input and promote collaborations with professional, government, and international organizations, such as AAPM, International Electrotechnical Commission

The FDA's role in medical device clinical studies of human subjects

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Saviola, James

2005-03-01

This paper provides an overview of the United States Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) role as a regulatory agency in medical device clinical studies involving human subjects. The FDA's regulations and responsibilities are explained and the device application process discussed. The specific medical device regulatory authorities are described as they apply to the development and clinical study of retinal visual prosthetic devices. The FDA medical device regulations regarding clinical studies of human subjects are intended to safeguard the rights and safety of subjects. The data gathered in pre-approval clinical studies provide a basis of valid scientific evidence in order to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a medical device. The importance of a working understanding of applicable medical device regulations from the beginning of the device development project is emphasized particularly for novel, complex products such as implantable visual prosthetic devices.

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.

FDA publishes checklist of Y2K high-risk devices.

PubMed

1999-09-01

Key points. The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has developed a list of types of medical devices that have the potential for the most serious consequences for patients should they fail because of Y2K-related problems. This list of computer-controlled potentially high-risk devices can provide a guide to health care facilities regarding the types of devices that should receive priority in their assessment and remediation of medical devices. The list may change as the FDA receives comments on the types of devices included in the list.

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.

21 CFR 1.383 - What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates... procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable food? If FDA initiates a... under this subpart, FDA will send the seizure recommendation to the Department of Justice (DOJ) within 4...

21 CFR 1.383 - What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates... procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable food? If FDA initiates a... under this subpart, FDA will send the seizure recommendation to the Department of Justice (DOJ) within 4...

21 CFR 1.383 - What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates... procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable food? If FDA initiates a... under this subpart, FDA will send the seizure recommendation to the Department of Justice (DOJ) within 4...

21 CFR 1.383 - What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates... procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable food? If FDA initiates a... under this subpart, FDA will send the seizure recommendation to the Department of Justice (DOJ) within 4...

21 CFR 1.383 - What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false What expedited procedures apply when FDA initiates... procedures apply when FDA initiates a seizure action against a detained perishable food? If FDA initiates a... under this subpart, FDA will send the seizure recommendation to the Department of Justice (DOJ) within 4...

76 FR 82115 - Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections: Full Fare Price Advertising Requirements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-30

...] RIN 2105-AD92 Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections: Full Fare Price Advertising Requirements AGENCY... amending the time period for compliance with the full fare and other advertising requirements in 14 CFR 399... advertising requirements from January 24, 2012, to January 26, 2012, to provide regulatory relief to...

FDA regulations regarding iodine addition to foods and labeling of foods containing added iodine.

PubMed

Trumbo, Paula R

2016-09-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the addition of iodine to infant formulas, the iodization of salt, and the addition of salt and iodine to foods. The required amount of iodine in infant formulas is based on caloric content, and the label must provide the iodine content per 100 kcal. Cuprous iodide and potassium iodide may be added to table salt as a source of dietary iodine at a maximum amount of 0.01%; if added, the label must indicate that the salt is iodized. Table salt to which iodine has not been added must bear the statement, "This salt does not supply iodide, a necessary nutrient." If a nutrient is to be appropriately added to a food for the purpose of correcting a dietary insufficiency, there should be sufficient scientific information available to demonstrate a nutritional deficiency and/or identify a public health problem. Furthermore, the population groups that would benefit from the proposed fortification should be identified. If iodine is added to a food, the percent Daily Value of iodine must be listed. There are no FDA regulations governing ingredient standards for dietary supplements. As a result, some dietary supplements include iodine and others do not. If a supplement contains iodine, the Supplement Facts label must list iodine as a nutrient ingredient. If iodine is not listed on the Supplement Facts label, then it has not been added. There are similarities between the FDA, which establishes US food regulations and policies, and the Codex Alimentarius (Codex), which develops international food standards and guidelines under the aegis of the FAO and the WHO. Both the FDA and Codex call for the labeling of table salt to indicate fortification with iodine, voluntary labeling of iodine on foods, and a Daily Value (called a Nutrient Reference Value by Codex) of 150 μg for iodine. © 2016 American Society for Nutrition.

21 CFR 99.305 - Exemption from the requirement to file a supplemental application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

..., BIOLOGICS, AND DEVICES FDA Action on Submissions, Requests, and Applications § 99.305 Exemption from the... exemption from the requirement of a supplemental application, FDA shall approve or deny the application. (1) If FDA does not act on the application for an exemption within the 60-day period, the application for...

21 CFR 99.305 - Exemption from the requirement to file a supplemental application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

..., BIOLOGICS, AND DEVICES FDA Action on Submissions, Requests, and Applications § 99.305 Exemption from the... exemption from the requirement of a supplemental application, FDA shall approve or deny the application. (1) If FDA does not act on the application for an exemption within the 60-day period, the application for...

21 CFR 99.305 - Exemption from the requirement to file a supplemental application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

..., BIOLOGICS, AND DEVICES FDA Action on Submissions, Requests, and Applications § 99.305 Exemption from the... exemption from the requirement of a supplemental application, FDA shall approve or deny the application. (1) If FDA does not act on the application for an exemption within the 60-day period, the application for...

21 CFR 99.305 - Exemption from the requirement to file a supplemental application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

..., BIOLOGICS, AND DEVICES FDA Action on Submissions, Requests, and Applications § 99.305 Exemption from the... exemption from the requirement of a supplemental application, FDA shall approve or deny the application. (1) If FDA does not act on the application for an exemption within the 60-day period, the application for...

FDA Escherichia coli Identification (FDA-ECID) Microarray: a Pangenome Molecular Toolbox for Serotyping, Virulence Profiling, Molecular Epidemiology, and Phylogeny

PubMed Central

Patel, Isha R.; Gangiredla, Jayanthi; Lacher, David W.; Mammel, Mark K.; Jackson, Scott A.; Lampel, Keith A.

2016-01-01

ABSTRACT Most Escherichia coli strains are nonpathogenic. However, for clinical diagnosis and food safety analysis, current identification methods for pathogenic E. coli either are time-consuming and/or provide limited information. Here, we utilized a custom DNA microarray with informative genetic features extracted from 368 sequence sets for rapid and high-throughput pathogen identification. The FDA Escherichia coli Identification (FDA-ECID) platform contains three sets of molecularly informative features that together stratify strain identification and relatedness. First, 53 known flagellin alleles, 103 alleles of wzx and wzy, and 5 alleles of wzm provide molecular serotyping utility. Second, 41,932 probe sets representing the pan-genome of E. coli provide strain-level gene content information. Third, approximately 125,000 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of available whole-genome sequences (WGS) were distilled to 9,984 SNPs capable of recapitulating the E. coli phylogeny. We analyzed 103 diverse E. coli strains with available WGS data, including those associated with past foodborne illnesses, to determine robustness and accuracy. The array was able to accurately identify the molecular O and H serotypes, potentially correcting serological failures and providing better resolution for H-nontypeable/nonmotile phenotypes. In addition, molecular risk assessment was possible with key virulence marker identifications. Epidemiologically, each strain had a unique comparative genomic fingerprint that was extended to an additional 507 food and clinical isolates. Finally, a 99.7% phylogenetic concordance was established between microarray analysis and WGS using SNP-level data for advanced genome typing. Our study demonstrates FDA-ECID as a powerful tool for epidemiology and molecular risk assessment with the capacity to profile the global landscape and diversity of E. coli. IMPORTANCE This study describes a robust, state-of-the-art platform developed from available

Single Cigarette Sales: State Differences in FDA Advertising and Labeling Violations, 2014, United States

PubMed Central

Lee, Joseph G. L.; Ranney, Leah M.; Goldstein, Adam O.

2016-01-01

Importance: Single cigarettes, which are sold without warning labels and often evade taxes, can serve as a gateway for youth smoking. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gives the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products, including prohibiting the sale of single cigarettes. To enforce these regulations, the FDA conducted over 335 661 inspections between 2010 and September 30, 2014, and allocated over $115 million toward state inspections contracts. Objective: To examine differences in single cigarette violations across states and determine if likely correlates of single cigarette sales predict single cigarette violations at the state level. Design: Cross-sectional study of publicly available FDA warning letters from January 1 to July 31, 2014. Setting: All 50 states and the District of Columbia. Participants: Tobacco retailer inspections conducted by FDA (n = 33 543). Exposure(s) for Observational Studies: State cigarette tax, youth smoking prevalence, poverty, and tobacco production. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): State proportion of FDA warning letters issued for single cigarette violations. Results: There are striking differences in the number of single cigarette violations found by state, with 38 states producing no warning letters for selling single cigarettes even as state policymakers developed legislation to address retailer sales of single cigarettes. The state proportion of warning letters issued for single cigarettes is not predicted by state cigarette tax, youth smoking, poverty, or tobacco production, P = .12. Conclusions and Relevance: Substantial, unexplained variation exists in violations of single cigarette sales among states. These data suggest the possibility of differences in implementation of FDA inspections and the need for stronger quality monitoring processes across states implementing FDA inspections. PMID:25744967

Single Cigarette Sales: State Differences in FDA Advertising and Labeling Violations, 2014, United States.

PubMed

Baker, Hannah M; Lee, Joseph G L; Ranney, Leah M; Goldstein, Adam O

2016-02-01

Single cigarettes, which are sold without warning labels and often evade taxes, can serve as a gateway for youth smoking. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 gives the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products, including prohibiting the sale of single cigarettes. To enforce these regulations, the FDA conducted over 335,661 inspections between 2010 and September 30, 2014, and allocated over $115 million toward state inspections contracts. To examine differences in single cigarette violations across states and determine if likely correlates of single cigarette sales predict single cigarette violations at the state level. Cross-sectional study of publicly available FDA warning letters from January 1 to July 31, 2014. All 50 states and the District of Columbia. Tobacco retailer inspections conducted by FDA (n = 33 543). State cigarette tax, youth smoking prevalence, poverty, and tobacco production. State proportion of FDA warning letters issued for single cigarette violations. There are striking differences in the number of single cigarette violations found by state, with 38 states producing no warning letters for selling single cigarettes even as state policymakers developed legislation to address retailer sales of single cigarettes. The state proportion of warning letters issued for single cigarettes is not predicted by state cigarette tax, youth smoking, poverty, or tobacco production, P = .12. Substantial, unexplained variation exists in violations of single cigarette sales among states. These data suggest the possibility of differences in implementation of FDA inspections and the need for stronger quality monitoring processes across states implementing FDA inspections. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

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...

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...

FDA Expands Approval of Brentuximab for Hodgkin Lymphoma

Cancer.gov

The FDA has expanded the approved uses of brentuximab (Adcetris) in people with Hodgkin lymphoma. As this Cancer Currents post explains, it can now be used in combination with three chemotherapy drugs as an initial treatment in patients with advanced disease.

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…

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...

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...

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.

PREFACE: Fractional Differentiation and its Applications (FDA08) Fractional Differentiation and its Applications (FDA08)

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Baleanu, Dumitru; Tenreiro Machado, J. A.

2009-10-01

The international workshop, Fractional Differentiation and its Applications (FDA08), held at Cankaya University, Ankara, Turkey on 5-7 November 2008, was the third in an ongoing series of conferences dedicated to exploring applications of fractional calculus in science, engineering, economics and finance. Fractional calculus, which deals with derivatives and integrals of any order, is now recognized as playing an important role in modeling multi-scale problems that span a wide range of time or length scales. Fractional calculus provides a natural link to the intermediate-order dynamics that often reflects the complexity of micro- and nanostructures through fractional-order differential equations. Unlike the more established techniques of mathematical physics, the methods of fractional differentiation are still under development; while it is true that the ideas of fractional calculus are as old as the classical integer-order differential operators, modern work is proceeding by both expanding the capabilities of this mathematical tool and by widening its range of applications. Hence, the interested reader will find papers here that focus on the underlying mathematics of fractional calculus, that extend fractional-order operators into new domains, and that apply well established methods to experimental and theoretical problems. The organizing committee invited presentations from experts representing the international community of scholars in fractional calculus and welcomed contributions from the growing number of researchers who are applying fractional differentiation to complex technical problems. The selection of papers in this topical issue of Physica Scripta reflects the success of the FDA08 workshop, with the emergence of a variety of novel areas of application. With these ideas in mind, the guest editors would like to honor the many distinguished scientists that have promoted the development of fractional calculus and, in particular, Professor George M

FDA Bacteriological Analytical Manual, Chapter 10, 2003: Listeria monocytogenes

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

FDA Bacteriological Analytical Manual, Chapter 10 describes procedures for analysis of food samples and may be adapted for assessment of solid, particulate, aerosol, liquid and water samples containing Listeria monocytogenes.

2005 Donor Eligibility Requirements: Unintended Consequences for Stem Cell Development.

PubMed

Couture, Larry A; Carpenter, Melissa K

2015-10-01

Several human embryonic stem cell (hESC)-derived cell therapeutics have entered clinical testing and more are in various stages of preclinical development. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates these products under existing regulations and has stated that these products do not constitute a new class of biologic. However, as human tissue, hESCs are subject to regulations that were developed before hESCs were first described. The regulations have not been revised since 2005, well before the first hESC-derived product entered clinical studies. The current regulations require donors of hESCs to be tested in the same manner as donors of tissues intended for transplantation. However, because hESC-derived cell products are more than minimally manipulated, they are also subject to the same end-of-production release testing as most other biologic agents. In effect, this makes hESC products subject to redundant testing. No other biologic is subject to a similar testing requirement. Furthermore, the regulations that require donor testing are specifically applicable to hESC cells harvested from donors after a date in 2005. It is unclear which regulations cover hESCs harvested before 2005. Ambiguity in the guidelines and redundant testing requirements have unintentionally created a burdensome regulatory paradigm for these products and reluctance on the part of developers to invest in these promising therapeutics. We propose a simple solution that would address FDA safety concerns, eliminate regulatory uncertainty and risk, and provide flexibility for the FDA in the regulation of hESC-derived cell therapies. Regulatory ambiguity concerning donor eligibility screening and testing requirements for human embryonic stem cell lines, in particular those lines created before 2005, are causing significant concern for drug developers. Technically, most of these lines fail to meet eligibility under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules for product licensure, and

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

What FDA Learned About Dark Chocolate and Milk Allergies

MedlinePlus

... the issues identified in the study. Further, allergen contamination is included in the preventive and risk-based controls mandated by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). Under the proposed Preventive ...

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

No sisyphean task: how the FDA can regulate electronic cigarettes.

PubMed

Paradise, Jordan

2013-01-01

The adverse effects of smoking have fostered a natural market for smoking cessation and smoking reduction products. Smokers attempting to quit or reduce consumption have tried everything: "low" or "light" cigarettes; nicotine-infused chewing gum, lozenges, and lollipops; dermal patches; and even hypnosis. The latest craze in the quest to find a safer source of nicotine is the electronic cigarette. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have swept the market, reaching a rapidly expanding international consumer base. Boasting nicotine delivery and the tactile feel of a traditional cigarette without the dozens of other chemical constituents that contribute to carcinogenicity, e-cigarettes are often portrayed as less risky, as a smoking reduction or even a complete smoking cessation product, and perhaps most troubling for its appeal to youth, as a flavorful, trendy, and convenient accessory. The sensationalism associated with e-cigarettes has spurred outcry from health and medical professional groups, as well as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), because of the unknown effects on public health. Inhabiting a realm of products deemed "tobacco products" under recent 2009 legislation, e-cigarettes pose new challenges to FDA regulation because of their novel method of nicotine delivery, various mechanical and electrical parts, and nearly nonexistent safety data. Consumer use, marketing and promotional claims, and technological characteristics of e-cigarettes have also raised decades old questions of when the FDA can assert authority over products as drugs or medical devices. Recent case law restricting FDA enforcement efforts against e-cigarettes further confounds the distinction among drugs and medical devices, emerging e-cigarette products, and traditional tobacco products such as cigarettes, cigars, and smokeless tobacco. This Article investigates the e-cigarette phenomenon in the wake of the recently enacted Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009

Requirements for blood and blood components intended for transfusion or for further manufacturing use. Final rule.

PubMed

2015-05-22

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the regulations applicable to blood and blood components, including Source Plasma, to make the donor eligibility and testing requirements more consistent with current practices in the blood industry, to more closely align the regulations with current FDA recommendations, and to provide flexibility to accommodate advancing technology. In order to better assure the safety of the nation's blood supply and to help protect donor health, FDA is revising the requirements for blood establishments to test donors for infectious disease, and to determine that donors are eligible to donate and that donations are suitable for transfusion or further manufacture. FDA is also requiring establishments to evaluate donors for factors that may adversely affect the safety, purity, and potency of blood and blood components or the health of a donor during the donation process. Accordingly, these regulations establish requirements for donor education, donor history, and donor testing. These regulations also implement a flexible framework to help both FDA and industry to more effectively respond to new or emerging infectious agents that may affect blood product safety.

Implementing the FDA performance standard on electrode lead wires and patient cables in hospitals.

PubMed

Tsitlik, J E; Rose, D C; Baumann, R C

2000-01-01

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Performance Standard on Electrode Lead Wires and Patient Cables became mandatory for all relevant devices on May 9, 2000. The standard requires that any lead wire or patient cable that has contact, temporary or permanent, with a patient, should not allow the connection of the patient to the earth or possibly hazardous voltages. This article advises those hospitals and other healthcare facilities that have not completed the upgrades of wires and cables on how to complete this task.

The Role of Adverse Event Reporting in the FDA Response to a Multistate Outbreak of Liver Disease Associated with a Dietary Supplement

PubMed Central

DeBeck, Heidi J.; LeBlanc, Pamela; Mogen, Kathryn M.; Wolpert, Beverly J.; Sabo, Jonathan L.; Salter, Monique; Seelman, Sharon L.; Lance, Susan E.; Monahan, Caitlin; Steigman, David S.; Gensheimer, Kathleen

2015-01-01

Objective Liver disease is a potential complication from using dietary supplements. This study investigated an outbreak of non-viral liver disease associated with the use of OxyELITE ProTM, a dietary supplement used for weight loss and/or muscle building. Methods Illness details were ascertained from MedWatch reports submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) describing consumers who ingested OxyELITE Pro alone or in combination with other dietary supplements. FDA's Forensic Chemistry Center analyzed samples of OxyELITE Pro. Results From February 2012 to February 2014, FDA received 114 reports of adverse events of all kinds involving consumers who ingested OxyELITE Pro. The onset of illness for the first report was December 2010 and for the last report was January 2014. Thirty-three states, two foreign nations, and Puerto Rico submitted reports. Fifty-five of the reports (48%) described liver disease in the absence of viral infection, gallbladder disease, autoimmune disease, or other known causes of liver damage. A total of 33 (60%) of these patients were hospitalized, and three underwent liver transplantation. In early 2013, OxyELITE Pro products entered the market with a formulation distinct from products sold previously. The new formulation replaced 1,3-dimethylamylamine with aegeline. However, the manufacturer failed to submit to FDA a required “new dietary ingredient” notice for the use of aegeline in OxyELITE Pro products. Laboratory analysis identified no drugs, poisons, pharmaceuticals, toxic metals, usnic acid, N-Nitroso-fenfluramine, pyrrolizidine alkaloids, aristocholic acid, or phenethylamines in the products. Conclusions Vigilant surveillance is required for adverse events linked to the use of dietary supplements. PMID:26327730

FDA Benchmark Medical Device Flow Models for CFD Validation.

PubMed

Malinauskas, Richard A; Hariharan, Prasanna; Day, Steven W; Herbertson, Luke H; Buesen, Martin; Steinseifer, Ulrich; Aycock, Kenneth I; Good, Bryan C; Deutsch, Steven; Manning, Keefe B; Craven, Brent A

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is increasingly being used to develop blood-contacting medical devices. However, the lack of standardized methods for validating CFD simulations and blood damage predictions limits its use in the safety evaluation of devices. Through a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiative, two benchmark models of typical device flow geometries (nozzle and centrifugal blood pump) were tested in multiple laboratories to provide experimental velocities, pressures, and hemolysis data to support CFD validation. In addition, computational simulations were performed by more than 20 independent groups to assess current CFD techniques. The primary goal of this article is to summarize the FDA initiative and to report recent findings from the benchmark blood pump model study. Discrepancies between CFD predicted velocities and those measured using particle image velocimetry most often occurred in regions of flow separation (e.g., downstream of the nozzle throat, and in the pump exit diffuser). For the six pump test conditions, 57% of the CFD predictions of pressure head were within one standard deviation of the mean measured values. Notably, only 37% of all CFD submissions contained hemolysis predictions. This project aided in the development of an FDA Guidance Document on factors to consider when reporting computational studies in medical device regulatory submissions. There is an accompanying podcast available for this article. Please visit the journal's Web site (www.asaiojournal.com) to listen.

Reported infections after human tissue transplantation before and after new Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, United States, 2001 through June, 2010.

PubMed

Mallick, Tarun K; Mosquera, Alexis; Zinderman, Craig E; St Martin, Laura; Wise, Robert P

2012-06-01

Processors distributed about 1.5 million human tissue allografts in the U.S. in 2007. The potential for transmitting infections through allografts concerns clinicians and patients. In 2005, FDA implemented Current Good Tissue Practice (CGTP) rules requiring tissue establishments to report to FDA certain serious infections after allograft transplantations. We describe infection reports following tissue transplants received by FDA from 2005 through June, 2010, and compare reporting before and after implementation of CGTP rules. We identified reports received by FDA from January 2001 through June, 2010, for infections in human tissue recipients, examining the reports by tissue type, organism, time to onset, severity, and reporter characteristics. Among 562 reports, 83 (20.8/year) were received from 2001-2004, before the CGTP rules, 43 in the 2005 transition year, and 436 (96.9/year) from 2006 through June, 2010, after the rules. Tissue processors accounted for 84.2% of reports submitted after the rules, compared to 26.5% previously. Bacterial infections were the most commonly reported organisms before (64.6%) and after (62.2%) the new rules. Afterward, 2.5% (11) of reports described deaths, and 33.7% (147) involved hospitalizations. Before the rules, 13% (11) described deaths, and another 72% involved hospitalizations. Reports received by the FDA quadrupled since 2005, suggesting that CGTP regulations have contributed to increased reporting and improved tissue safety surveillance. However, these data do not confirm that the reported infections were caused by suspect tissues; most reports may represent routine post-surgical infections not actually due to allografts.

Nods for Atezolizumab and Nivolumab from FDA.

PubMed

2016-08-01

The FDA has conditionally approved atezolizumab, the first PD-L1 inhibitor, for metastatic urothelial carcinoma, along with a companion diagnostic, the Ventana PD-L1 (SP142) assay. The agency has also expanded nivolumab's indications to include classical Hodgkin lymphoma, making this PD-1 inhibitor the first to be approved for a hematologic malignancy. ©2016 American Association for Cancer Research.

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.

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

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

21 CFR 170.105 - The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 3 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... (CONTINUED) FOOD ADDITIVES Premarket Notifications § 170.105 The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... data or other information available to FDA, including data not submitted by the manufacturer or...

"Bringing a Butter Knife to a Gun Fight"? Salience, Disclosure, and FDA's Differing Approaches to the Tobacco Use and Obesity Epidemics.

PubMed

Weimholt, Josef

2015-01-01

One might expect--given the vastly different look, feel, and function of the ubiquitous (and innocuous) Nutrition Facts panel and the "inflammatory" graphic warning labels for cigarettes--that the statutes establishing such disclosure requirements would exhibit similar disparities. In fact, the relevant provisions of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 and the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009 are. quite analogous. Like other mandated disclosures, the nutrition label and the cigarette. graphic warnings seek to simultaneously inform and influence consumer decisions. Both statutes grant FDA considerable discretion in.the implementation of the labeling requirements, generally allowing the agency to alter the format and content of the labels as necessary to promote the statutory goals. Thus, the differences in the nutrition and cigarette warning labels are not the product of the statutory schemes alone; rather, they reflect important differences in FDA's interpretation and prioritization of the dual regulatory goals, and in the agency's implicit or explicit assumptions about human behavior.

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...

21 CFR 170.105 - The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 3 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food contact substance (FCN) is no longer effective. (a) If data or other information available to FDA, including data...

21 CFR 170.105 - The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 3 2010-04-01 2009-04-01 true The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food contact substance (FCN) is no longer effective. (a) If data or other information available to FDA, including data...

21 CFR 170.105 - The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 3 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food contact substance (FCN) is no longer effective. (a) If data or other information available to FDA, including data...

21 CFR 170.105 - The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 3 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's... and Drug Administration's (FDA's) determination that a premarket notification for a food contact substance (FCN) is no longer effective. (a) If data or other information available to FDA, including data...

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.

Price, performance, and the FDA approval process: the example of home HIV testing.

PubMed

Paltiel, A David; Pollack, Harold A

2010-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering approval of an over-the-counter, rapid HIV test for home use. To support its decision, the FDA seeks evidence of the test's performance. It has asked the manufacturer to conduct field studies of the test's sensitivity and specificity when employed by untrained users. In this article, the authors argue that additional information should be sought to evaluate the prevalence of undetected HIV in the end-user The analytic framework produces the elementary but counterintuitive finding that the performance of the home HIV test- measured in terms of its ability to correctly detect the presence and absence of HIV infection among the people who purchase it-depends critically on the manufacturer's retail price. This finding has profound implications for the FDA's approval process.

Significance and implications of FDA approval of pembrolizumab for biomarker-defined disease.

PubMed

Boyiadzis, Michael M; Kirkwood, John M; Marshall, John L; Pritchard, Colin C; Azad, Nilofer S; Gulley, James L

2018-05-14

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved pembrolizumab, an anti- programmed cell death protein 1 cancer immunotherapeutic, for use in advanced solid tumors in patients with the microsatellite-high/DNA mismatch repair-deficient biomarker. This is the first example of a tissue-agnostic FDA approval of a treatment based on a patient's tumor biomarker status, rather than on tumor histology. Here we discuss key issues and implications arising from the biomarker-based disease classification implied by this historic approval.

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...

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...

RU 486, the FDA and free enterprise.

PubMed

Buc, N L

1992-01-01

The legal question whether RU-486 can meet the standards for US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for a drug indicated for abortion can be answered in the affirmative. Under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, efficacy must be demonstrated by evidence consisting of adequate and well-controlled investigations to show that a drug is safe and effective for its intended use. The FDA will approve it if on the basis of the clinical trials it could be concluded that the drug will have the effect it purports as prescribed in the labeling, and if the drug is safe. In congressional hearings and in the newspapers the so-called import alert issued by the FDA to prevent the importing of RU-486 under certain circumstances has been publicized. The import alert is no bar to conducting clinical studies in the US under an investigational new drug application (IND) nor is the import alert a bar to the filing and the pursuit of a new drug application (NDA) to allow marketing in the US. The import alert is no bar to anything except importation without an IND or NDA. The real problem is that there is no seller of RU-486 in the US and no sponsor of an NDA offering clinical evidence of safety and efficacy as well as the ability to manufacture the drug and the necessary prostaglandins properly. In additions to abortion, other uses of RU-486 include contraception, breast cancer, and Cushing syndrome. Some limited research could be done under INDs with small supplies of the drug obtained elsewhere on the world market. There are only 2 solutions to this problem. One is that Roussel must change its mind or have its mind changed as the example of the AIDS community showed, which has managed to induce the development of drugs that were impossible 8 or 10 years ago. The other solution is to found a pharmaceutical company that could induce competition for manufacturing RU-486.

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.

Some Non-FDA Approved Uses for Neuromodulation: A Review of the Evidence.

PubMed

Lee, Samuel; Abd-Elsayed, Alaa

2016-09-01

Neuromodulation, including spinal cord stimulation and peripheral nerve field stimulation, has been used with success in treating several painful conditions. The FDA approved the use of neuromodulation for a few indications. We review evidence for neuromodulation in treating some important painful conditions that are not currently FDA approved. This review included an online web search for only clinical trials testing the efficacy of neuromodulation in treating coronary artery disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), headache, and peripheral field stimulation. Our systematic literature search found 10, 6, and 3 controlled studies relating to coronary artery disease, PVD, and headache, respectively. Our review also included 5 noncontrolled studies relating to peripheral field stimulation, as no controlled studies had been completed. This review article shows compelling evidence based on clinical trials that neuromodulation can be of benefit for patients with serious painful conditions that are not currently approved by the FDA. © 2015 World Institute of Pain.

34 CFR 75.511 - Waiver of requirement for a full-time project director.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

... PROGRAMS What Conditions Must Be Met by a Grantee? Project Staff § 75.511 Waiver of requirement for a full... Secretary may waive that requirement under the following conditions: (1) The project will not be adversely... 34 Education 1 2010-07-01 2010-07-01 false Waiver of requirement for a full-time project director...

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

ADHD Medication Use Following FDA Risk Warnings

PubMed Central

Barry, Colleen L.; Martin, Andres; Busch, Susan H.

2013-01-01

Background In 2006, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) investigated cardiac and psychiatric risks associated with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication use. Aims of the Study To examine how disclosure of safety risks affected pediatric ADHD use, and to assess news media coverage of the issue to better understand trends in treatment patterns. Methods We used the AHRQ’s Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), a nationally representative household panel survey, to calculate unadjusted rates of pediatric ADHD use from 2002 to 2008 overall and by parents’ education. We examined whether children (ages 0 to 20) filled a prescription for any ADHD medication during the calendar year. Next, we used content analysis methods to analyze news coverage of the issue in 10 high-circulation newspapers, the 3 major television networks and a major cable news network in the U.S. We examined 6 measures capturing information conveyed on risk and benefits of ADHD medication use. Results No declines in medication use following FDA safety warnings overall or by parental education level were observed. News media coverage was relatively balanced in its portrayal of the risks and benefits of ADHD medication use by children. Discussion ADHD risk warnings were not associated with large declines in medication use, and balanced news coverage may have contributed to the treatment patterns observed. Self-reported surveys like the MEPS rely on the recall of respondents and may be subject to reporting bias. However, the validity of these data is supported by their consistency with other data on drug use from other sources. Implications for Health Care Provision and Use These findings are in direct contrast to the substantial declines in use observed after pediatric antidepressant risk warnings in the context of a news media environment that emphasized risks over benefits. Implications for Health Policies Our findings are relevant to the ongoing discussion about

Structure-activity relationship for FDA approved drugs as inhibitors of the human sodium taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide (NTCP).

PubMed

Dong, Zhongqi; Ekins, Sean; Polli, James E

2013-03-04

The hepatic bile acid uptake transporter sodium taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide (NTCP) is less well characterized than its ileal paralog, the apical sodium dependent bile acid transporter (ASBT), in terms of drug inhibition requirements. The objectives of this study were (a) to identify FDA approved drugs that inhibit human NTCP, (b) to develop pharmacophore and Bayesian computational models for NTCP inhibition, and (c) to compare NTCP and ASBT transport inhibition requirements. A series of NTCP inhibition studies were performed using FDA approved drugs, in concert with iterative computational model development. Screening studies identified 27 drugs as novel NTCP inhibitors, including irbesartan (Ki = 11.9 μM) and ezetimibe (Ki = 25.0 μM). The common feature pharmacophore indicated that two hydrophobes and one hydrogen bond acceptor were important for inhibition of NTCP. From 72 drugs screened in vitro, a total of 31 drugs inhibited NTCP, while 51 drugs (i.e., more than half) inhibited ASBT. Hence, while there was inhibitor overlap, ASBT unexpectedly was more permissive to drug inhibition than was NTCP, and this may be related to NTCP possessing fewer pharmacophore features. Findings reflected that a combination of computational and in vitro approaches enriched the understanding of these poorly characterized transporters and yielded additional chemical probes for possible drug-transporter interaction determinations.

Blood donation, deferral, and discrimination: FDA donor deferral policy for men who have sex with men.

PubMed

Galarneau, Charlene

2010-02-01

U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy prohibits blood donation from men who have had sex with men (MSM) even one time since 1977. Growing moral criticism claims that this policy is discriminatory, a claim rejected by the FDA. An overview of U.S. blood donation, recent donor deferral policy, and the conventional ethical debate introduce the need for a different approach to analyzing discrimination claims. I draw on an institutional understanding of injustice to discern and describe five features of the MSM policy and its FDA context that contribute to its discriminatory effect. I note significant similarities in the 1980s policy of deferring Haitians, suggesting an historical pattern of discrimination in FDA deferral policy. Finally, I point to changes needed to move toward a nondiscriminatory deferral policy.

Trials of transvaginal mesh devices for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic database review of the US FDA approval process.

PubMed

Heneghan, Carl J; Goldacre, Ben; Onakpoya, Igho; Aronson, Jeffrey K; Jefferson, Tom; Pluddemann, Annette; Mahtani, Kamal R

2017-12-06

Transvaginal mesh devices are approved in the USA by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), through the 510(k) system. However, there is uncertainty about the benefit to harm balance of mesh approved for pelvic organ prolapse. We, therefore, assessed the evidence at the time of approval for transvaginal mesh products and the impact of safety studies the FDA mandated in 2012 because of emerging harms. We used FDA databases to determine the evidence for approval of transvaginal mesh. To create a 'family tree' of device equivalence, we used the 510(k) regulatory approval of the 1985 Mersilene Mesh (Ethicon) and the 1996 ProteGen Sling (Boston Scientific), searched for all subsequently related device approvals, and for the first published randomised trial evidence. We assessed compliance with all FDA 522 orders issued in 2012 requiring postmarketing surveillance studies. We found 61 devices whose approval ultimately relied on claimed equivalence to the Mersilene Mesh and the ProteGen Sling. We found no clinical trials evidence for these 61 devices at the time of approval. Publication of randomised clinical trials occurred at a median of 5 years after device approval (range 1-14 years). Analysis of 119 FDA 522 orders revealed that in 79 (66%) the manufacturer ceased market distribution of the device, and in 26 (22%) the manufacturer had changed the indication. Only seven studies (six cohorts and new randomised controlled trial) covering 11 orders were recruiting participants (none had reported outcomes). Transvaginal mesh products for pelvic organ prolapse have been approved on the basis of weak evidence over the last 20 years. Devices have inherited approval status from a few products. A publicly accessible registry of licensed invasive devices, with details of marketing status and linked evidence, should be created and maintained at the time of approval. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights

Required warnings for cigarette packages and advertisements. Final rule.

PubMed

2011-06-22

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its regulations to add a new requirement for the display of health warnings on cigarette packages and in cigarette advertisements. This rule implements a provision of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) that requires FDA to issue regulations requiring color graphics, depicting the negative health consequences of smoking, to accompany the nine new textual warning statements required under the Tobacco Control Act. The Tobacco Control Act amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) to require each cigarette package and advertisement to bear one of nine new textual warning statements. This final rule specifies the color graphic images that must accompany each of the nine new textual warning statements.

Neodymium: YAG lasers. An FDA report.

PubMed

Stark, W J; Worthen, D; Holladay, J T; Murray, G

1985-02-01

Analysis of data from four neodymium:YAG laser manufacturers submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on over 17,000 cases indicate the procedure is safe and effective for cutting opaque posterior lens capsules. A successful opening in the pupillary membrane was achieved in 98% of the cases, and vision improved in 84% of the cases. Clinically significant risks include: a rise in intraocular pressure two to four hours after treatment, damage to the intraocular lens, and rupture of the anterior hyaloid face.

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.

Biomarkers of Tobacco Exposure: Summary of an FDA-sponsored Public Workshop

PubMed Central

Chang, Cindy M.; Edwards, Selvin H.; Arab, Aarthi; Del Valle-Pinero, Arseima Y.; Yang, Ling; Hatsukami, Dorothy K.

2016-01-01

Since 2009, the United States (U.S.) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) has had the authority to regulate the manufacturing, distribution, and marketing of tobacco products in order to reduce the death and disease caused by tobacco use. Biomarkers of exposure pertain to actual human exposure to chemicals arising from tobacco use and could play an important role across a number of FDA regulatory activities, including assessing new and modified risk tobacco products and identifying and evaluating potential product standards. On August 3–4, 2015, FDA/CTP hosted a public workshop focused on biomarkers of exposure with participants from government, industry, academia, and other organizations. The workshop was divided into four sessions focused on: 1) approaches to evaluating and selecting biomarkers; 2) biomarkers of exposure and relationship to disease risk; 3) currently-used biomarkers of exposure and biomarkers in development; and 4) biomarkers of exposure and the assessment of smokeless tobacco and electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). This paper synthesizes the main findings from the workshop and highlights research areas that could further strengthen the science around biomarkers of exposure and help determine their application in tobacco product regulation. PMID:28151705

We really need to talk: adapting FDA processes to rapid change.

PubMed

Lykken, Sara

2013-01-01

The rapidly evolving realm of modern commerce strains traditional regulatory paradigms. This paper traces the historical evolution of FDA crisis-response regulation and provides examples of ways in which the definitions and procedures resulting from that past continue to be challenged by new products as market entrants, some in good faith and others not, take actions that create disconnects between actual product and marketing controls and those that consumers might expect. The paper then explores some of the techniques used by other federal agencies that have faced similar challenges in environments characterized by rapid innovation, and draws from this analysis suggestions for improvement of the FDA's warning letter system.

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.

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

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.

21 CFR 320.30 - Inquiries regarding bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. 320.30 Section 320.30... requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. (a) The Commissioner of Food and... for the study to FDA for review prior to the initiation of the study. (b) FDA may review a proposed...

21 CFR 320.30 - Inquiries regarding bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. 320.30 Section 320.30... requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. (a) The Commissioner of Food and... for the study to FDA for review prior to the initiation of the study. (b) FDA may review a proposed...

21 CFR 320.30 - Inquiries regarding bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. 320.30 Section 320.30... requirements and review of protocols by the Food and Drug Administration. (a) The Commissioner of Food and... for the study to FDA for review prior to the initiation of the study. (b) FDA may review a proposed...

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

Accounting for heterogeneous treatment effects in the FDA approval process.

PubMed

Malani, Anup; Bembom, Oliver; van der Laan, Mark

2012-01-01

The FDA employs an average-patient standard when reviewing drugs: it approves a drug only if is safe and effective for the average patient in a clinical trial. It is common, however, for patients to respond differently to a drug. Therefore, the average-patient standard can reject a drug that benefits certain patient subgroups (false negatives) and even approve a drug that harms other patient subgroups (false positives). These errors increase the cost of drug development - and thus health care - by wasting research on unproductive or unapproved drugs. The reason why the FDA sticks with an average patient standard is concern about opportunism by drug companies. With enough data dredging, a drug company can always find some subgroup of patients that appears to benefit from its drug, even if the subgroup truly does not. In this paper we offer alternatives to the average patient standard that reduce the risk of false negatives without increasing false positives from drug company opportunism. These proposals combine changes to institutional design - evaluation of trial data by an independent auditor - with statistical tools to reinforce the new institutional design - specifically, to ensure the auditor is truly independent of drug companies. We illustrate our proposals by applying them to the results of a recent clinical trial of a cancer drug (motexafin gadolinium). Our analysis suggests that the FDA may have made a mistake in rejecting that drug.

Turning point or tipping point: new FDA draft guidances and the future of DTC advertising.

PubMed

Pitts, Peter J

2004-01-01

According to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) research, direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug ads are not as empowering as they were even three years ago. How will the FDA's new draft guidances reverse this trend and affect the future of DTC advertising? Will they be a turning point, resulting in pharmaceutical companies' embracing an educational public health imperative, or a tipping point with politicians and the public zeroing in on aggressively targeted DTC ads as the postimportation pharmaceutical bête noire? The FDA believes that its new guidances strengthen the strategic argument that a better-informed consumer lays the groundwork for a better potential customer.

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.

Extending FDA guidance to include consumer medication information (CMI) delivery on mobile devices.

PubMed

Sage, Adam; Blalock, Susan J; Carpenter, Delesha

This paper describes the current state of consumer-focused mobile health application use and the current U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on the distribution of consumer medication information (CMI), and discusses recommendations and considerations for the FDA to expand CMI guidance to include CMI in mobile applications. Smartphone-based health interventions have been linked to increased medication adherence and improved health outcomes. Trends in smartphone ownership present opportunities to more effectively communicate and disseminate medication information; however, current FDA guidance for CMI does not outline how to effectively communicate CMI on a mobile platform, particularly in regards to user-centered design and information sourcing. As evidence supporting the potential effectiveness of mobile communication in health care continues to increase, CMI developers, regulating entities, and researchers should take note. Although mobile-based CMI offers an innovative mechanism to deliver medication information, caution should be exercised. Specifically, considerations for developing mobile CMI include consumers' digital literacy, user experience (e.g., usability), and the quality and accuracy of new widely used sources of information (e.g., crowd-sourced reviews and ratings). Recommended changes to FDA guidance for CMI include altering the language about scientific accuracy to address more novel methods of information gathering (e.g., anecdotal experiences and Google Consumer Surveys) and including guidance for usability testing of mobile health applications. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

76 FR 36627 - Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-22

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its regulations to add a new requirement for the display of health warnings on cigarette packages and in cigarette advertisements. This rule implements a provision of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) that requires FDA to issue regulations requiring color graphics, depicting the negative health consequences of smoking, to accompany the nine new textual warning statements required under the Tobacco Control Act. The Tobacco Control Act amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) to require each cigarette package and advertisement to bear one of nine new textual warning statements. This final rule specifies the color graphic images that must accompany each of the nine new textual warning statements.

Structure Activity Relationship for FDA Approved Drugs as Inhibitors of the Human Sodium Taurocholate Co-transporting Polypeptide (NTCP)

PubMed Central

Dong, Zhongqi; Ekins, Sean; Polli, James E.

2013-01-01

The hepatic bile acid uptake transporter Sodium Taurocholate Cotransporting Polypeptide (NTCP) is less well characterized than its ileal paralog, the Apical Sodium Dependent Bile Acid Transporter (ASBT), in terms of drug inhibition requirements. The objectives of this study were a) to identify FDA approved drugs that inhibit human NTCP, b) to develop pharmacophore and Bayesian computational models for NTCP inhibition, and c) to compare NTCP and ASBT transport inhibition requirements. A series of NTCP inhibition studies were performed using FDA approved drugs, in concert with iterative computational model development. Screening studies identified 27 drugs as novel NTCP inhibitors, including irbesartan (Ki =11.9 μM) and ezetimibe (Ki = 25.0 μM). The common feature pharmacophore indicated that two hydrophobes and one hydrogen bond acceptor were important for inhibition of NTCP. From 72 drugs screened in vitro, a total of 31 drugs inhibited NTCP, while 51 drugs (i.e. more than half) inhibited ASBT. Hence, while there was inhibitor overlap, ASBT unexpectedly was more permissive to drug inhibition than was NTCP, and this may be related to NTCP’s possessing fewer pharmacophore features. Findings reflected that a combination of computational and in vitro approaches enriched the understanding of these poorly characterized transporters and yielded additional chemical probes for possible drug-transporter interaction determinations. PMID:23339484

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.

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.

75 FR 81788 - Revocation of Requirements for Full-Size Baby Cribs and Non-Full-Size Baby Cribs

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-28

... rule. SUMMARY: Section 104(b) of the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (``CPSIA... the CPSC revoking the regulations pertaining to cribs? The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of... CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION 16 CFR Parts 1508 and 1509 Revocation of Requirements for Full...

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.

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.

Gaze Stabilization During Locomotion Requires Full Body Coordination

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Mulavara, A. P.; Miller, C. A.; Houser, J.; Richards, J. T.; Bloomberg, J. J.

2001-01-01

Maintaining gaze stabilization during locomotion places substantial demands on multiple sensorimotor subsystems for precise coordination. Gaze stabilization during locomotion requires eye-head-trunk coordination (Bloomberg, et al., 1997) as well as the regulation of energy flow or shock-wave transmission through the body at high impact phases with the support surface (McDonald, et al., 1997). Allowing these excessive transmissions of energy to reach the head may compromise gaze stability. Impairments in these mechanisms may lead to the oscillopsia and decreased dynamic visual acuity seen in crewmembers returning from short and long duration spaceflight, as well as in patients with vestibular disorders (Hillman, et al., 1999). Thus, we hypothesize that stabilized gaze during locomotion results from full-body coordination of the eye-head-trunk system combined with the lower limb apparatus. The goal of this study was to determine how multiple, interdependent full- body sensorimotor subsystems aiding gaze stabilization during locomotion are functionally coordinated, and how they adaptively respond to spaceffight.

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...

Three Drugs Approved for Urothelial Carcinoma by FDA.

PubMed

2017-07-01

The FDA has approved one PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor, pembrolizumab, and two PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors, avelumab and durvalumab, to treat metastatic urothelial carcinoma in patients whose disease continues to progress despite platinum-based chemotherapy. This brings the total number of checkpoint inhibitors for the disease to five, prompting questions about how best to use them. ©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.

Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

PubMed

Ahuja, Vishal; Sohn, Min-Woong; Birge, John R; Syverson, Chad; Budiman-Mak, Elly; Emanuele, Nicholas; Cooper, Jennifer M; Huang, Elbert S

2015-12-01

Geographic variation in the use of prescription drugs, particularly those deemed harmful by the FDA, may lead to variation in patient exposure to adverse drug events. One such drug is the glucose-lowering drug rosiglitazone, for which the FDA issued a safety alert on May 21, 2007, following the publication of a meta-analysis that suggested a 43% increase in the risk of myocardial infarction with the use of rosiglitazone. This alert was followed by a black box warning on August 14, 2007, that was updated 3 months later. While large declines have been documented in rosiglitazone use in clinical practice, little is known about how the use of rosiglitazone and other glucose-lowering drugs varied within the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), surrounding the FDA alerts. Understanding this variation within integrated health care systems is essential to formulating policies that enhance patient protection and quality of care. To document variation in the use of rosiglitazone and other glucose- lowering drugs across 21 Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs). We conducted a retrospective analysis of drug use patterns for all major diabetes drugs in a national cohort of 550,550 veterans with diabetes from 2003 to 2008. This included the time periods when rosiglitazone was added to (November 2003) and removed from (October 2007) the VA national formulary (VANF). We employed multivariable logistic regression models to statistically estimate the association between a patient's location and the patient's odds of using rosiglitazone. Aggregate rosiglitazone use increased monotonically from 7.7%, in the quarter it was added to the VANF (November 4, 2003), to a peak of 15.3% in the quarter when the FDA issued the safety alert. Rosiglitazone use decreased sharply afterwards, reaching 3.4% by the end of the study period (September 30, 2008). The use of pioglitazone, another glucose-lowering drug in the same class as rosiglitazone, was low when the FDA issued the safety alert

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.

75 FR 69523 - Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-12

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend its regulations to add a new requirement for the display of health warnings on cigarette packages and in cigarette advertisements. The proposed rule would implement a provision of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) that requires FDA to issue regulations requiring color graphics depicting the negative health consequences of smoking to accompany the nine new textual warning statements that will be required under the Tobacco Control Act. The Tobacco Control Act amends the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) to require each cigarette package and advertisement to bear one of nine new textual warning statements. This proposed rule, once finalized, would specify the color graphics that must accompany each of the nine new textual warning statements.

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS General Provisions § 56.104 Exemptions from IRB requirement. The following categories of clinical investigations are exempt from the requirements of this part for IRB review: (a) Any investigation which commenced before July 27, 1981 and was subject to requirements for IRB review under FDA...

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS General Provisions § 56.104 Exemptions from IRB requirement. The following categories of clinical investigations are exempt from the requirements of this part for IRB review: (a) Any investigation which commenced before July 27, 1981 and was subject to requirements for IRB review under FDA...

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS General Provisions § 56.104 Exemptions from IRB requirement. The following categories of clinical investigations are exempt from the requirements of this part for IRB review: (a) Any investigation which commenced before July 27, 1981 and was subject to requirements for IRB review under FDA...

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARDS General Provisions § 56.104 Exemptions from IRB requirement. The following categories of clinical investigations are exempt from the requirements of this part for IRB review: (a) Any investigation which commenced before July 27, 1981 and was subject to requirements for IRB review under FDA...

The requirements for a new full scale subsonic wind tunnel

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Kelly, M. W.; Mckinney, M. O.; Luidens, R. W.

1972-01-01

Justification and requirements are presented for a large subsonic wind tunnel capable of testing full scale aircraft, rotor systems, and advanced V/STOL propulsion systems. The design considerations and constraints for such a facility are reviewed, and the trades between facility test capability and costs are discussed.

Characteristics of rare disease marketing applications associated with FDA product approvals 2006-2010.

PubMed

Pariser, Anne R; Slack, Daniel J; Bauer, Larry J; Warner, Catherine A; Tracy, LaRee A

2012-08-01

New drug and biologic product marketing applications submitted to FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) between 2006 and 2010 were analyzed to identify rare disease application characteristics associated with higher approval rates. The results show that approval rates were similar for rare and common disease applications. Larger company size, prior regulatory experience and priority review designation were associated with higher approval rates. The study findings show that rare disease product development is feasible, and increased interactions between product developers and FDA in early investigational phases can facilitate product development. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

... history, in accordance with §§ 1702.8 through 1702.14, (b) As used in this regulation, “reasonably... toxicological literature; and information required by the FDA for an Investigational Exemption for a New Drug...

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

... history, in accordance with §§ 1702.8 through 1702.14, (b) As used in this regulation, “reasonably... toxicological literature; and information required by the FDA for an Investigational Exemption for a New Drug...

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

... history, in accordance with §§ 1702.8 through 1702.14, (b) As used in this regulation, “reasonably... toxicological literature; and information required by the FDA for an Investigational Exemption for a New Drug...

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/

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

FDA: polyurethane condom carries "extremely misleading" label. Federal agency allows distribution for public health's sake.

PubMed

1995-02-01

The labeling of the Avanti polyurethane condom selling in 10 Western states makes misleading claims about protection from pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) according to officials at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Avanti is sold in a foil package printed with the claim that it is effective against pregnancy, HIV, and STDs. However, polyurethane condoms have not undergone clinical efficacy testing for contraception or STDs, according to officials. The manufacturer of the condom refuted this allegation, stating that latex condoms have the same claims on them. In early 1995 the FDA met with the manufacturer and other companies developing plastic condoms, and concluded that these condoms could not make such claims, nor any claims about slippage and breakage rates. Despite warnings in 1993 to the manufacturer of Avanti about labeling restrictions, the company printed pregnancy and STD efficacy claims on the boxes and individual packages. The FDA later worked out a compromise with the firm in which only the boxes had to be reprinted with the generic label. The FDA had to weigh the risk of the public health cost of delaying sale of the condom, which is the first impermeable condom proven safe for people with latex allergies. In 1991 the FDA was defining standards for clinical testing and labeling of polyurethane condoms under congressional mandate, but the manufacturer of Avanti began mass production based on a preliminary approval determining that the condom was equivalent to latex condoms already on the market. 7000 Avanti condoms were subsequently tested in five countries, but these user tests did not compare Avanti to latex condoms and did not test for pregnancy and STD protection. Test results submitted to the FDA by the company indicated that, although Avanti is more than 1/3 less elastic than latex condoms, it did not break more frequently in an in-use study involving 187 couples.

FDA actions against misleading or unsubstantiated economic and quality-of-life promotional claims: an analysis of warning letters and notices of violation.

PubMed

Stewart, Kate A; Neumann, Peter J

2002-01-01

The objective of this study was to understand the types of economic and quality-of-life promotional claims the FDA considers false or misleading. Publicly available FDA letters (n = 569) sent to pharmaceutical companies from 1997 through 2001 for inappropriate promotional claims were reviewed. A standard data collection form was developed, including six categories for economic violations and three for QOL violations. For QOL, only letters with explicit violations for false or misleading claims using the words "quality of life" or patient "well-being" were considered. Other information collected included type of regulatory letter and media in which violations were found. Twenty-eight (4.9%) letters cited false and/or misleading economic claims. The most common economic violation was "unsupported comparative claim of effectiveness, safety, or interchangeability" (n = 14). Twenty-eight (4.9%) letters cited QOL violations, of which four contained both economic and QOL violations. The most common QOL violation was "lack of substantial evidence for QOL claims" (n = 15). None of the FDA letters used the term "patient reported outcomes." Violations were found most frequently in brochure and Web site-based promotions. The body of evidence that is emerging illustrates how the FDA is regulating promotional material containing misleading or unsubstantiated economic and QOL claims. However, knowing what constitutes an appropriate claim remains challenging because there are no formal guidelines describing what constitutes a violation, nor what level of substantiating evidence is required. More guidance may be needed to ensure appropriate use of these claims in drug promotions.

21 CFR 54.4 - Certification and disclosure requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE BY CLINICAL INVESTIGATORS § 54.4 Certification and disclosure requirements. For purposes of this part, an applicant must submit a list of all clinical investigators who conducted covered clinical studies to determine whether the applicant's product meets FDA's marketing requirements...

Exceptions or alternatives to labeling requirements for products held by the Strategic National Stockpile. Final rule.

PubMed

2012-02-06

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is adopting as a final rule, without change, the interim final rule that issued regulations permitting FDA Center Directors to grant exceptions or alternatives to certain regulatory labeling requirements applicable to human drugs, biological products, or medical devices that are or will be included in the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS). FDA is taking this action to complete the rulemaking initiated with the interim final rule.

FDA approval of cardiac implantable electronic devices via original and supplement premarket approval pathways, 1979-2012.

PubMed

Rome, Benjamin N; Kramer, Daniel B; Kesselheim, Aaron S

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates high-risk medical devices such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, via the premarket approval (PMA) process, during which manufacturers submit clinical data demonstrating safety and effectiveness. Subsequent changes to approved high-risk devices are implemented via "supplements," which may not require additional clinical testing. To characterize the prevalence and characteristics of changes to CIEDs made through the PMA supplement process. Using the FDA's PMA database, we reviewed all CIEDs approved as original PMAs or supplements from 1979 through 2012. For each supplement, we collected the date approved, type of supplement (panel-track, 180-day, real-time, special, and 30-day notice), and the nature of the changes. We calculated the number of supplements approved per PMA and analyzed trends relating to different supplement regulatory categories over time. For supplements approved via the 180-day regulatory pathway, which often involve significant design changes, from 2010-2012, we identified how often additional clinical data were collected. From 1979-2012, the FDA approved 77 original and 5829 supplement PMA applications for CIEDs, with a median of 50 supplements per original PMA (interquartile range [IQR], 23-87). Excluding manufacturing changes that do not alter device design, the number of supplements approved each year was stable around a mean (SD) of 2.6 (0.9) supplements per PMA per year. Premarket approvals remained active via successive supplements over a median period of 15 years (IQR, 8-20), and 79% of the 77 original PMAs approved during our study period were the subject of at least 1 supplement in 2012. Thirty-seven percent of approved supplements involved a change to the device's design. Among 180-day supplements approved from 2010-2012, 23% (15/64) included new clinical data

21 CFR 900.11 - Requirements for certification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

....11 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) MAMMOGRAPHY QUALITY STANDARDS ACT MAMMOGRAPHY Quality Standards and Certification § 900.11 Requirements for... FDA, facilities are required to meet the quality standards in § 900.12 and to be accredited by an...

The FDA role in contact lens development and safety.

PubMed

Lippman, R E

1990-01-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) exercises a multifaceted role in fulfilling its mission of enforcing the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (Act), functioning not only as industry regulator and consumer protector, but also as scientific advisor and consumer educator regarding medical devices, drugs, foods, cosmetics, and veterinary medicine. Medical devices are regulated within the Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Contact lenses are regulated under the authority of the medical device amendments. The Center is responsible for promulgating regulations, publishing guidelines, and developing written guidance in enforcing the Act, and also for guiding manufacturers of medical devices in safe and effective product development. Other components deal with the compliance of manufacturers with the marketing of medical devices within the meaning of the Act, and through labeling requirements of the Act and consumer education and informational activities. As for contact lenses, the process of updating product development regulations and guidelines is an ongoing activity. The most recent version of the Contact Lens Guideline Document, issued in April 1988, contains two major revisions involving preclinical and clinical testing. The first redefines plastics into one materials category, thus reducing testing requirements with respect to animal toxicology studies and other preclinical areas. The second revision restricts clinical testing requirements to allow confirmatory trials in applications for new daily wear lenses. The intention was to maintain the ability of studies to detect major material or design flaws in lenses, thus boosting confidence in their performance while eliminating unnecessary trials.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

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

Nanotechnology Laboratory Continues Partnership with FDA and National Institute of Standards and Technology | Poster

Cancer.gov

The NCI-funded Nanotechnology Characterization Laboratory (NCL)—a leader in evaluating promising nanomedicines to fight cancer—recently renewed its collaboration with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to continue its groundbreaking work on characterizing nanomedicines and moving them toward the clinic. In partnership with NIST and the FDA, NCL has laid a solid, scientific foundation for using the power of nanotechnology to increase the potency and target the delivery

76 FR 13643 - FDA Food Safety Modernization Act: Title III-A New Paradigm for Importers; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-14

... Act: Title III--A New Paradigm for Importers; Public Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS... announcing a public meeting entitled ``FDA Food Safety Modernization Act: Title III--A New Paradigm for.... In particular, title III of FSMA significantly enhances FDA's authority for oversight of the millions...

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

Dose Uniformity of Scored and Unscored Tablets: Application of the FDA Tablet Scoring Guidance for Industry.

PubMed

Ciavarella, Anthony B; Khan, Mansoor A; Gupta, Abhay; Faustino, Patrick J

This U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) laboratory study examines the impact of tablet splitting, the effect of tablet splitters, and the presence of a tablet score on the dose uniformity of two model drugs. Whole tablets were purchased from five manufacturers for amlodipine and six for gabapentin. Two splitters were used for each drug product, and the gabapentin tablets were also split by hand. Whole and split amlodipine tablets were tested for content uniformity following the general chapter of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Uniformity of Dosage Units <905>, which is a requirement of the new FDA Guidance for Industry on tablet scoring. The USP weight variation method was used for gabapentin split tablets based on the recommendation of the guidance. All whole tablets met the USP acceptance criteria for the Uniformity of Dosage Units. Variation in whole tablet content ranged from 0.5 to 2.1 standard deviation (SD) of the percent label claim. Splitting the unscored amlodipine tablets resulted in a significant increase in dose variability of 6.5-25.4 SD when compared to whole tablets. Split tablets from all amlodipine drug products did not meet the USP acceptance criteria for content uniformity. Variation in the weight for gabapentin split tablets was greater than the whole tablets, ranging from 1.3 to 9.3 SD. All fully scored gabapentin products met the USP acceptance criteria for weight variation. Size, shape, and the presence or absence of a tablet score can affect the content uniformity and weight variation of amlodipine and gabapentin tablets. Tablet splitting produced higher variability. Differences in dose variability and fragmentation were observed between tablet splitters and hand splitting. These results are consistent with the FDA's concerns that tablet splitting can have an effect on the amount of drug present in a split tablet and available for absorption. Tablet splitting has become a very common practice in the United States and throughout

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- ...

FDA-approved medications that impair human spermatogenesis.

PubMed

Ding, Jiayi; Shang, Xuejun; Zhang, Zhanhu; Jing, Hua; Shao, Jun; Fei, Qianqian; Rayburn, Elizabeth R; Li, Haibo

2017-02-07

We herein provide an overview of the single-ingredient U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs that affect human spermatogenesis, potentially resulting in a negative impact on male fertility. To provide this information, we performed an in-depth search of DailyMed, the official website for FDA-approved drug labels. Not surprisingly, hormone-based agents were found to be the drugs most likely to affect human spermatogenesis. The next category of drugs most likely to have effects on spermatogenesis was the antineoplastic agents. Interestingly, the DailyMed labels indicated that several anti-inflammatory drugs affect spermatogenesis, which is not supported by the peer-reviewed literature. Overall, there were a total of 65 labels for drugs of various classes that showed that they have the potential to affect human sperm production and maturation. We identified several drugs indicated to be spermatotoxic in the drug labels that were not reported in the peer-reviewed literature. However, the details about the effects of these drugs on human spermatogenesis are largely lacking, the mechanisms are often unknown, and the clinical impact of many of the findings is currently unclear. Therefore, additional work is needed at both the basic research level and during clinical trials and post-marketing surveillance to fill the gaps in the current knowledge. The present findings will be of interest to physicians and pharmacists, researchers, and those involved in drug development and health care policy.

Industry funding of the FDA: effects of PDUFA on approval times and withdrawal rates.

PubMed

Berndt, Ernst R; Gottschalk, Adrian H B; Philipson, Tomas J; Strobeck, Matthew W

2005-07-01

The development of new therapies is a crucial component of efforts to improve healthcare. Because drug development and FDA regulatory review have historically been lengthy and costly processes, the US Congress passed a series of legislative acts, beginning in 1992, known collectively as the Prescription Drug User Fee Acts (PDUFA), which sought to expedite the FDA drug-review process. Here, we review data on drug approvals and drug-approval times, both as a whole and by therapeutic class, which demonstrate that implementation of the PDUFAs led to substantial incremental reductions in approval times beyond what would have been observed in the absence of these legislative acts. In addition, our preliminary examination of the trends in the number of new molecular entity withdrawals, frequently used as a proxy to assess the FDA's safety record, suggests that the proportion of approvals ultimately leading to safety withdrawals prior to PDUFA and during PDUFA I and II were not statistically different.

Dose uniformity of scored and unscored tablets: Application of the FDA Tablet Scoring Guidance for Industry.

PubMed

Ciavarella, Anthony; Khan, Mansoor; Gupta, Abhay; Faustino, Patrick

2016-06-20

This FDA laboratory study examines the impact of tablet splitting, the effect of tablet splitters, and the presence of a tablet score on the dose uniformity of two model drugs. Whole tablets were purchased from five manufacturers for amlodipine and six for gabapentin. Two splitters were used for each drug product and the gabapentin tablets were also split by hand. Whole and split amlodipine tablets were tested for content uniformity following the general chapter of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Uniformity of Dosage Units <905>, which is a requirement of the new FDA Guidance for Industry on tablet scoring. The USP weight variation method was used for gabapentin split tablets based on the recommendation of the guidance. All whole tablets met the USP acceptance criteria for the Uniformity of Dosage Units. Variation in whole tablet content ranged from 0.5-2.1 standard deviation (SD) of the % label claim. Splitting the unscored amlodipine tablets resulted in a significant increase in dose variability of 6.5-25.4 SD when compared to whole tablets. Split tablets from all amlodipine drug products did not meet the USP acceptance criteria for content uniformity. Variation in the weight for gabapentin split tablets was greater than the whole tablets, ranging from 1.3-9.3 SD. All fully scored gabapentin products met the USP acceptance criteria for weight variation. Size, shape, and the presence or absence of a tablet score can affect the content uniformity and weight variation of amlodipine and gabapentin tablets. Tablet splitting produced higher variability. Differences in dose variability and fragmentation were observed between tablet splitters and hand splitting. These results are consistent with the FDA's concerns that tablet splitting "can affect how much drug is present in the split tablet and available for absorption" as stated in the guidance (1). Copyright © 2016, Parenteral Drug Association.

FDA, CE mark or something else?-Thinking fast and slow.

PubMed

Mishra, Sundeep

There is a robust debate going on among the Medical Device stake-holders whether FDA is better or CE mark or something else. Currently process of obtaining an FDA approval is bogged down by ever-increasing unpredictability, inconsistency, prolonged time, and huge expense but CE mark has its own problems. Historically, the Japanese review process has tended to be the slowest among the big three but recently with the introduction of accelerated review process there has been a significant progress. While the goal of an innovator/manufacturer is to develop, manufacture and market a medical device that addresses an unmet clinical need, the requisite regulatory approval process can be very confusing. Not only there is a whole lot of jargon tossed around by regulatory affair professionals: "substantial equivalence," "PMDA," "CE mark," "Notified body," "510K" and "PMA" but the actual approval process can also be very tardy, inconsistent and expensive. Copyright © 2016 Cardiological Society of India. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A fresh perspective on comparing the FDA and the CHMP/EMA: approval of antineoplastic tyrosine kinase inhibitors

PubMed Central

Shah, Rashmi R; Roberts, Samantha A; Shah, Devron R

2013-01-01

We compared and determined the reasons for any differences in the review and approval times of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European EMA/CHMP. Applications for these novel cancer drugs were submitted to them within a mean of 31.2 days of each other, providing a fair basis for comparison. The FDA had granted priority review to 12 TKIs but the EMA/CHMP did not grant the equivalent accelerated assessment to any. The FDA granted accelerated approvals to six (38%) and CHMP granted (the equivalent) conditional approvals to four (29%) of these agents. On average, the review and approval times were 205.3 days in the US compared with 409.6 days in the European Union (EU). The active review times, however, were comparable (225.4 days in the EU and 205.3 days in the US). Since oncology drug development lasts about 7 years, the 20 days difference in review times between the two agencies is inconsequential. Clock stops during review and the time required to issue an approval had added the extra 184.2 days to review time in the EU. We suggest possible solutions to expedite the EU review and approval processes. However, post-marketing emergence of adverse efficacy and safety data on gefitinib and lapatinib, respectively, indicate potential risks of expedited approvals. We challenge the widely prevalent myth that early approval translates into early access or beneficial impact on public health. Both the agencies collaborate closely but conduct independent assessments and make decisions based on distinct legislation, procedures, precedents and societal expectations. PMID:23362829

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.

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

Impact of FDA Actions, DTCA, and Public Information on the Market for Pain Medication.

PubMed

Bradford, W David; Kleit, Andrew N

2015-07-01

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most important classes of prescription drugs used by primary care physicians to manage pain. The NSAID class of products has a somewhat controversial history, around which a complex regulatory and informational environment has developed. This history includes a boxed warning mandated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for all NSAIDs in 2005. We investigate the impact that various information shocks have had on the use of prescription medications for pain in primary care in the USA. We accomplish this by extracting data on nearly 600,000 patients from a unique nationwide electronic medical record database and estimate the probability of any active prescription for the four types of pain medications as a function of FDA actions, advertising, media coverage, and patient characteristics. We find that even after accounting for multiple sources of information, the FDA label changes and boxed warnings had a significant effect on pain medication prescribing. The boxed warning did not have the same impact on the use of all NSAID inhibitors. We find that the boxed warning reduced the use of NSAID COX-2 inhibitor use, which was the focus of much of the press attention. In contrast, however, the warning actually increased the use of non-COX-2 NSAID inhibitors. Thus, the efficacy of the FDA's black box warning is clearly mixed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Evaluation of radiation exposure from diagnostic radiology examination; availability of final recommendations--FDA. Notice.

PubMed

1986-02-19

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a document entitled "Recommendations for Evaluation of Radiation Exposure from Diagnostic Radiology Examinations". The recommendations, prepared by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), encourage diagnostic radiology facilities to take voluntary action to: Become aware of the radiation levels experienced by patients undergoing the projections commonly given in the facility; compare their radiation levels to generally accepted levels for these projections; and bring the exposures back into line if their levels fall consistently outside these generally accepted levels.

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.

From bench to FDA to bedside: US regulatory trends for new stem cell therapies.

PubMed

Knoepfler, Paul S

2015-03-01

The phrase "bench-to-bedside" is commonly used to describe the translation of basic discoveries such as those on stem cells to the clinic for therapeutic use in human patients. However, there is a key intermediate step in between the bench and the bedside involving governmental regulatory oversight such as by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States (US). Thus, it might be more accurate in most cases to describe the stem cell biological drug development process in this way: from bench to FDA to bedside. The intermediate development and regulatory stage for stem cell-based biological drugs is a multifactorial, continually evolving part of the process of developing a biological drug such as a stem cell-based regenerative medicine product. In some situations, stem cell-related products may not be classified as biological drugs in which case the FDA plays a relatively minor role. However, this middle stage is generally a major element of the process and is often colloquially referred to in an ominous way as "The Valley of Death". This moniker seems appropriate because it is at this point, and in particular in the work that ensues after Phase 1, clinical trials that most drug product development is terminated, often due to lack of funding, diseases being refractory to treatment, or regulatory issues. Not surprisingly, workarounds to deal with or entirely avoid this difficult stage of the process are evolving both inside and outside the domains of official regulatory authorities. In some cases these efforts involve the FDA invoking new mechanisms of accelerating the bench to beside process, but in other cases these new pathways bypass the FDA in part or entirely. Together these rapidly changing stem cell product development and regulatory pathways raise many scientific, ethical, and medical questions. These emerging trends and their potential consequences are reviewed here. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

16 CFR § 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

... history, in accordance with §§ 1702.8 through 1702.14, (b) As used in this regulation, “reasonably... toxicological literature; and information required by the FDA for an Investigational Exemption for a New Drug...

US definitions, current use, and FDA stance on use of platelet-rich plasma in sports medicine.

PubMed

Beitzel, Knut; Allen, Donald; Apostolakos, John; Russell, Ryan P; McCarthy, Mary Beth; Gallo, Gregory J; Cote, Mark P; Mazzocca, Augustus D

2015-02-01

With increased utilization of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), it is important for clinicians to understand the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory role and stance on PRP. Blood products such as PRP fall under the prevue of FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). CBER is responsible for regulating human cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products. The regulatory process for these products is described in the FDA's 21 CFR 1271 of the Code of Regulations. Under these regulations, certain products including blood products such as PRP are exempt and therefore do not follow the FDA's traditional regulatory pathway that includes animal studies and clinical trials. The 510(k) application is the pathway used to bring PRP preparation systems to the market. The 510(k) application allows devices that are "substantially equivalent" to a currently marketed device to come to the market. There are numerous PRP preparation systems on the market today with FDA clearance; however, nearly all of these systems have 510(k) clearance for producing platelet-rich preparations intended to be used to mix with bone graft materials to enhance bone graft handling properties in orthopedic practices. The use of PRP outside this setting, for example, an office injection, would be considered "off label." Clinicians are free to use a product off-label as long as certain responsibilities are met. Per CBER, when the intent is the practice of medicine, clinicians "have the responsibility to be well informed about the product, to base its use on firm scientific rationale and on sound medical evidence, and to maintain records of the product's use and effects." Finally, despite PRP being exempted, the language in 21 CFR 1271 has caused some recent concern over activated PRP; however to date, the FDA has not attempted to regulate activated PRP. Clinicians using activated PRP should be mindful of these concerns and continued to stay informed. Thieme

Direct-to-Consumer Broadcast Advertisements for Pharmaceuticals: Off-Label Promotion and Adherence to FDA Guidelines.

PubMed

Klara, Kristina; Kim, Jeanie; Ross, Joseph S

2018-05-01

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertisements for prescription drugs in the United States are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Off-label promotion, or the advertisement of a drug for an indication not approved by the FDA, is prohibited. Our objective was to examine the presence of off-label promotion in broadcast DTC ads and to assess their adherence to FDA guidelines mandating fair balance in presentation of risks and benefits and prohibiting misleading advertisement claims. All English-language broadcast DTC ads for prescription drugs that aired in the United States from January 2015 to July 2016 were obtained from AdPharm, an online collection of healthcare advertisements. Ad length was measured and adherence to FDA guidelines was assessed for several categories: key regulatory items, indicators of false or misleading ads, and indicators of fair balance in presentation of risks and benefits. Our sample included 97 unique DTC ads, representing 60 unique drugs and 67 unique drug-indication combinations. No ads described drug risks quantitatively, whereas drug efficacy was presented quantitatively in 25 (26%) ads. Thirteen (13%) ads, all for diabetes medications, suggested off-label uses for weight loss and blood pressure reduction. The most commonly advertised drugs were indicated for the treatment of inflammatory conditions (n = 12; 18%), diabetes or diabetic neuropathy (n = 11; 16%), bowel or bladder dysfunction (n = 6; 9%), and infections or allergic reaction (n = 6; 9%). More than three-quarters (n = 51; 76%) advertised drugs to treat chronic conditions. Few broadcast DTC ads were fully compliant with FDA guidelines. The overall quality of information provided in ads was low, and suggestions of off-label promotion were common for diabetes medications. The impact of current DTC ads and off-label marketing on patient and prescriber decisions merits further scrutiny.

America, you are digging your grave with your spoon--should the FDA tell you that on food labels?

PubMed

Card, Melissa M

2013-01-01

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Admin. discussed whether the FDA's promulgation of graphic images violated tobacco companies' First Amendment rights. While the tobacco companies contested the graphic images, the tobacco companies did not contest the promulgation of nine textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes. This uncontested mandate opens a door for the FDA to further expand its regulatory scheme. If the FDA can mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of cigarettes, can the FDA mandate textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar to combat the obesity crisis? This Article presents three textual statements about the adverse effects of sugar, to define the line between acceptable and unacceptable forms of compelled commercial speech under Central Hudson. Establishing this line ensures that the commercial speech doctrine does not deny the FDA from its authority to provide consumers with accurate information. While three textual statements are presented, this Article advocates that one of the textual statements is likely to serve as the best solution to the obesity crisis. The chosen textual statement serves as an effective solution because it presents meaningful information to the consumers enabling consumers to make healthful decisions about their food and encourages manufacturers to modify their products.

76 FR 41434 - Removal of Certain Requirements Related to the Prescription Drug Marketing Act; Opportunity for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-14

.... FDA-2011-N-0446] Removal of Certain Requirements Related to the Prescription Drug Marketing Act... Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to remove a section of the Prescription Drug Marketing... prescription drug marketing and distribution. The primary purpose of the PDMA was to increase safeguards to...

Heparin crisis 2008: a tipping point for increased FDA enforcement in the pharma sector?

PubMed

Rosania, Larry

2010-01-01

Against a backdrop of steady deregulation, the pharmaceutical industry is increasingly outsourcing manufacturing, resulting in decentralized control of the global supply chain. Established products such as heparin have been held to outdated analytical standards. Ten million Americans receive heparin every year; Baxter International accounts for half of this market. In 2008, contamination of Baxter's heparin--sourced in China--resulted in about 350 adverse events and 150 deaths in the United States. In future, increasingly stringent FDA inspections and enforcement are expected for imported drugs and ingredients. More regional FDA offices will be set up overseas. FDA funding will likely be supplemented in future by user fees charged to importers. For newer products, companies will face pressure to adopt Quality by Design, with solid control of the global supply chain and a proactive focus on GMP. Older products will be held to modern standards. Long-term, imports of drugs and ingredients from developing markets will continue. This makes sense to companies from an economic standpoint, but protections will be essential to ensure that it is also justifiable from a public health perspective.

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.

Application of FDA-Approved Memantine and Newer NitroMemantine Derivatives to Treat Neurological Manifestations in Rodent Models of Tuberous Sclerosis Complex

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-06-01

AWARD NUMBER: W81XWH-13-1-0053 TITLE: Application of FDA-Approved Memantine and Newer NitroMemantine Derivatives to Treat Neurological...2015 Final 1 May 2013 - 30 Apr 2015 Application of FDA-Approved Memantine and Newer NitroMemantine Derivatives to Treat Neurological Manifestations in...FDA-approved drug, Memantine , an uncompetitive/fast off-rate antagonist of the Nmethyl-D-aspartate-type glutamate receptor, and its improved

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

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.

Impact of the FDA warning of potential ceftriaxone and calcium interactions on drug use policy in clinical practice.

PubMed

Esterly, John S; Steadman, Emily; Scheetz, Marc H

2011-06-01

In September 2007, the FDA issued an alert recommending that ceftriaxone and calcium-containing solutions should not be administered to any patient within 48 h of each other. Due to the widespread use of ceftriaxone, significant concern was expressed by the greater healthcare community about the warning, which the FDA eventually retracted in April of 2009. We sought to quantify the impact of the warning on healthcare institutions. A survey was administered to the membership of the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists to quantify perceived changes in ceftriaxone use among healthcare institutions across the United States. A survey of Infectious Diseases experts was conducted. Participants were queried for hospital policies/drug use statistics during two times: immediately after the FDA warning and approximately 13 months post warning (preceding the FDA retraction). Related changes in formulary, drug-use policy, and the number of employee hours that were devoted to addressing the FDA warning were assessed. Ninety-four surveys representing 94 hospital systems were included in the analysis. Approximately half (n = 49, 52%) of respondent institutions enacted at least one drug-use policy change based on the warning; one institution removed ceftriaxone from a clinical protocol. Institutions' final interpretations of the warning differed slightly from initial understanding of the warning, and there was an overall minor decrease in the perceived use of ceftriaxone. The majority of those surveyed (n = 70, 74%) estimated that their respective institutions devoted between 1 and 49 employee hours to address the warning. Hospitals with ID pharmacists had minimal changes to ceftriaxone use after the 2007 FDA warning. Specialized pharmacists may be uniquely situated to help hospitals interpret global recommendations locally.

FDA working to ensure the safety of medical devices used in the pediatric population.

PubMed

Flack, Marilyn Neder; Gross, Thomas P; Reid, Joy Samuels; Mills, Thalia T; Francis, Jacqueline

2012-12-01

Special initiatives exist in FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research to ensure the safety and effectiveness of medical products used in the vulnerable pediatric population. This article focuses on the special programs, projects, and special studies implemented by CDRH to ensure this safety and effectiveness in devices used in pediatric patients throughout the devices' total product life-cycles. Pediatricians play a major role in keeping medical devices safe for use in children by reporting device problems to FDA. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Science, law, and politics in the Food and Drug Administration's genetically engineered foods policy: FDA's 1992 policy statement.

PubMed

Pelletier, David L

2005-05-01

The US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) 1992 policy statement was developed in the context of critical gaps in scientific knowledge concerning the compositional effects of genetic transformation and severe limitations in methods for safety testing. FDA acknowledged that pleiotropy and insertional mutagenesis may cause unintended changes, but it was unknown whether this happens to a greater extent in genetic engineering compared with traditional breeding. Moreover, the agency was not able to identify methods by which producers could screen for unintended allergens and toxicants. Despite these uncertainties, FDA granted genetically engineered foods the presumption of GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) and recommended that producers use voluntary consultations before marketing them.

FDA regulation of tobacco advertising and youth smoking. Historical, social, and constitutional perspectives.

PubMed

Gostin, L O; Arno, P S; Brandt, A M

1997-02-05

Perspectives on tobacco control in American society have shifted markedly. As the view that smoking as a voluntarily assumed health risk has declined, the social and political environment has become more conducive to industry regulation. This transformation can be traced to the mounting evidence of the health risks of secondary smoke; the addictive quality of nicotine; the vulnerability and exploitation of young people; and industry knowledge of the harmful effects of tobacco. Regulation of tobacco advertising and promotions by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) raises serious concerns about constitutional protection for commercial speech. However, the minimal informational value of tobacco advertising suggests that it should be afforded a low level of constitutional protection. The FDA regulations impose reasonable "time, place, and manner" restrictions, leave open alternative channels of communication, restrict messages that are harmful to the public health, do not restrict political speech, prevent misleading messages, and help deter the unlawful sale of tobacco products to minors. The regulations meet the traditional criteria for regulating commercial speech, in that the government's asserted interest is strong, the agency's regulations directly advance that interest, and the regulations are no more extensive than necessary. Thus, the judiciary should defend the FDA's historical social and legislative mission to protect the public health.

The "natural" aversion: the FDA's reluctance to define a leading food-industry marketing claim, and the pressing need for a workable rule.

PubMed

Farris, April L

2010-01-01

As of 2009, the "natural foods" industry has become a 22.3 billion dollar giant and "all-natural" is the second-leading marketing claim for all new food products. Even in such a flourishing market, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has never defined the term "natural" through rulemaking. FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have instead created separate, non-identical policy statements governing the use of the term "natural," and FDA has abandoned efforts to define "natural" through rulemaking in the face of more pressing priorities. In absence of any governing federal standard, consumer advocacy groups and warring food industries have attempted to define "natural" to fit their preferences through high-stakes litigation of state law claims, leaving courts free to apply diverging standards without the expertise of FDA. Recent case law from federal district courts and the Supreme Court leaves little hope that FDA's current policy statement will preempt state law causes of action. To prevent a potential patchwork of definitions varying by state, and to create a legitimate standard resting on informed scientific expertise rather than consumer whims, FDA should engage in rulemaking to define the term "natural." This paper concludes by sketching potential formulations for such a rule based on FDA's previous successful rule-making ventures and standards used by natural foods retailers.

21 CFR 814.82 - Postapproval requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... periodic reporting on the safety, effectiveness, and reliability of the device for its intended use. FDA... a device and in the advertising of any restricted device of warnings, hazards, or precautions... extent required for the medical welfare of the individual, to determine the safety or effectiveness of...

Development of an automated assessment tool for MedWatch reports in the FDA adverse event reporting system.

PubMed

Han, Lichy; Ball, Robert; Pamer, Carol A; Altman, Russ B; Proestel, Scott

2017-09-01

As the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) receives over a million adverse event reports associated with medication use every year, a system is needed to aid FDA safety evaluators in identifying reports most likely to demonstrate causal relationships to the suspect medications. We combined text mining with machine learning to construct and evaluate such a system to identify medication-related adverse event reports. FDA safety evaluators assessed 326 reports for medication-related causality. We engineered features from these reports and constructed random forest, L1 regularized logistic regression, and support vector machine models. We evaluated model accuracy and further assessed utility by generating report rankings that represented a prioritized report review process. Our random forest model showed the best performance in report ranking and accuracy, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.66. The generated report ordering assigns reports with a higher probability of medication-related causality a higher rank and is significantly correlated to a perfect report ordering, with a Kendall's tau of 0.24 ( P  = .002). Our models produced prioritized report orderings that enable FDA safety evaluators to focus on reports that are more likely to contain valuable medication-related adverse event information. Applying our models to all FDA adverse event reports has the potential to streamline the manual review process and greatly reduce reviewer workload. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Medical Informatics Association 2017. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the United States.

Small Area Estimate Maps: Does the FDA Regulate Tobacco? - Small Area Estimates

Cancer.gov

This metric is defined as a person 18 years of age or older who must have reported that he/she believes that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates tobacco products in the U.S.

Spin in RCTs of anxiety medication with a positive primary outcome: a comparison of concerns expressed by the US FDA and in the published literature.

PubMed

Beijers, Lian; Jeronimus, Bertus F; Turner, Erick H; de Jonge, Peter; Roest, Annelieke M

2017-03-29

This study aimed to determine the presence of spin in papers on positive randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of antidepressant medication for anxiety disorders by comparing concerns expressed in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews with those expressed in the published paper. For every positive anxiety medication trial with a matching publication (n=41), two independent reviewers identified the concerns raised in the US FDA reviews and those in the published literature. Spin was identified when concerns or limitations were expressed by the FDA (about the efficacy of the study drug) but not in the corresponding published paper. Concerns mentioned in the papers but not by the FDA were scored as 'non-FDA' concerns. Only six out of 35 (17%) of the FDA concerns pertaining to drug efficacy were reported in the papers. Two papers mentioned a concern that fit the FDA categories, but was not mentioned in the corresponding FDA review. Eighty-seven non-FDA concerns were counted, which often reflected general concerns or concerns related to the study design. Results indicate the presence of substantial spin in the clinical trial literature on drugs for anxiety disorders. In papers describing RCTs on anxiety medication, the concerns raised by the authors differed from those raised by the FDA. Published papers mentioned a large number of generic concerns about RCTs, such as a lack of long-term research and limited generalisability, while they mentioned few concerns about drug efficacy. These results warrant the promotion of independent statistical review, reporting of patient-level data, more study of spin, and an increased expectation that authors report FDA concerns. 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/.

AMCP Partnership Forum: Enabling the Exchange of Clinical and Economic Information Pre-FDA Approval.

PubMed

2017-01-01

Current federal laws and FDA regulations have significantly restricted the sharing of clinical and health economic information on biopharmaceuticals that have yet to receive FDA approval. Over the past several years, organizations that make health care coverage decisions, including those that set copayments, premiums, and formulary placement, have expressed a need for receiving this information before approval, as long as appropriate safeguards exist to prevent this information from reaching unintended entities. Population health decision makers have indicated that waiting until FDA approval is often too late for the critical planning, budgeting, and forecasting associated with health benefit design, especially given the recent influx of high-cost medications and scrutiny for better evaluation and preparation. Recognizing that securities laws restrict the disclosure of nonpublic information and may need to be amended, permissible early dissemination would allow population health decision makers to incorporate clinical and economic information for pipeline drugs or expanded indications into financial forecasting for the following year's plan. Access to this information is needed 12-18 months before FDA approval when organizations are deciding on terms of coverage and budgetary assumptions for state health insurance rate filings, Medicare and Medicaid bids, contracts with health care purchasers, and other financial arrangements. The need for exchange of clinical economic information before FDA approval was first introduced at a previous Academy of Managed Care (AMCP) forum in March 2016, which addressed section 114 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act and the communication of such information after FDA approval. To address preapproval information specifically, AMCP convened a Partnership Forum on September 13-14, 2016. This forum included a diverse group of stakeholders representing managed care, the biopharmaceutical industry, providers, patients

Estimating the extent of reporting to FDA: a case study of statin-associated rhabdomyolysis.

PubMed

McAdams, Mara; Staffa, Judy; Dal Pan, Gerald

2008-03-01

To estimate the extent of reporting to FDA through statin-associated rhabdomyolysis data. Data included incidence rates (IRs) of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis among statin users from a population-based study, and comparable reported AERS cases and national estimates of statin use from an AERS analysis. Using IRs, national estimates of statin use and average days supply per prescription, we estimated the number of US statin-associated cases of hospitalized rhabdomyolysis. We compared this estimate to the observed number of cases reported to FDA to evaluate the extent of reporting. We repeated this method for atorvastatin, cerivastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin and statin combinations. We performed sensitivity analyses to check for biases such as misclassification of statin use and cohort selection bias. We evaluated potential time-dependent cerivastatin reporting by a "Dear Health Care Provider (DHCP)" letter. The estimated extent of reporting to FDA varied by statin (atorvastatin, 5.0%; cerivastatin, 31.2%; simvastatin, 14.2%; all four combined, 17.7%; and non-cerivastatin statins combined, 9.9%). No pravastatin-associated cohort cases occurred. Across a reasonable value range, sensitivity analyses did not significantly alter the results; overall the cohort was similar to national statin-users. There was a large increase in AERS reports after the cerivastatin DHCP letter and the estimated extent of reporting increased from 14.8 to 35.0%. The extent of reporting of adverse events to FDA varied by statin and may be influenced by publicity. For statins-associated rhabdomyolysis, the estimated extent of reporting appears to range from 5 to 30% but in the absence of stimulated reporting appears to be 5-15%. Copyright 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Network-Based Real-time Integrated Fire Detection and Alarm (FDA) System with Building Automation

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Anwar, F.; Boby, R. I.; Rashid, M. M.; Alam, M. M.; Shaikh, Z.

2017-11-01

Fire alarm systems have become increasingly an important lifesaving technology in many aspects, such as applications to detect, monitor and control any fire hazard. A large sum of money is being spent annually to install and maintain the fire alarm systems in buildings to protect property and lives from the unexpected spread of fire. Several methods are already developed and it is improving on a daily basis to reduce the cost as well as increase quality. An integrated Fire Detection and Alarm (FDA) systems with building automation was studied, to reduce cost and improve their reliability by preventing false alarm. This work proposes an improved framework for FDA system to ensure a robust intelligent network of FDA control panels in real-time. A shortest path algorithmic was chosen for series of buildings connected by fiber optic network. The framework shares information and communicates with each fire alarm panels connected in peer to peer configuration and declare the network state using network address declaration from any building connected in network. The fiber-optic connection was proposed to reduce signal noises, thus increasing large area coverage, real-time communication and long-term safety. Based on this proposed method an experimental setup was designed and a prototype system was developed to validate the performance in practice. Also, the distributed network system was proposed to connect with an optional remote monitoring terminal panel to validate proposed network performance and ensure fire survivability where the information is sequentially transmitted. The proposed FDA system is different from traditional fire alarm and detection system in terms of topology as it manages group of buildings in an optimal and efficient manner.Introduction

FDA approves efavirenz. Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Highleyman, L

1998-10-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved DuPont Pharma's new non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) efavirenz (Sustiva, DMP-266). Efavirenz has shown promise in trials with over 2000 participants for up to 24 weeks, and early data suggests it may be as effective as protease inhibitors when used in a combination regimen. It is the first anti-HIV drug approved for once-daily dosing. Efavirenz is well tolerated, and the main side effects reported are dizziness, insomnia, abnormal dreams, and skin rash. Efavirenz has been approved for adults and children, but should not be used by pregnant women. Contact information is provided.

Year 2000 (Y2K) computer compliance guide; guidance for FDA personnel. Food and Drug Administration. Notice.

PubMed

1999-05-14

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a new compliance policy guide (CPG) entitled "Year 2000 (Y2K) Computer Compliance" (section 160-800). This guidance document represents the agency's current thinking on the manufacturing and distribution of domestic and imported products regulated by FDA using computer systems that may not perform properly before, or during, the transition to the year 2000 (Y2K). The text of the CPG is included in this notice. This compliance guidance document is an update to the Compliance Policy Guides Manual (August 1996 edition). It is a new CPG, and it will be included in the next printing of the Compliance Policy Guides Manual. This CPG is intended for FDA personnel, and it is available electronically to the public.

A Pharmacovigilance Signaling System Based on FDA Regulatory Action and Post-Marketing Adverse Event Reports.

PubMed

Hoffman, Keith B; Dimbil, Mo; Tatonetti, Nicholas P; Kyle, Robert F

2016-06-01

Many serious drug adverse events (AEs) only manifest well after regulatory approval. Therefore, the development of signaling methods to use with post-approval AE databases appears vital to comprehensively assess real-world drug safety. However, with millions of potential drug-AE pairs to analyze, the issue of focus is daunting. Our objective was to develop a signaling platform that focuses on AEs with historically demonstrated regulatory interest and to analyze such AEs with a disproportional reporting method that offers broad signal detection and acceptable false-positive rates. We analyzed over 1500 US FDA regulatory actions (safety communications and drug label changes) from 2008 to 2015 to construct a list of eligible signal AEs. The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) was used to evaluate disproportional reporting rates, constrained by minimum case counts and confidence interval limits, of these selected AEs for 109 training drugs. This step led to 45 AEs that appeared to have a low likelihood of being added to a label by FDA, so they were removed from the signal eligible list. We measured disproportional reporting for the final group of eligible AEs on a test group of 29 drugs that were not used in either the eligible list construction or the training steps. In a group of 29 test drugs, our model reduced the number of potential drug-AE signals from 41,834 to 97 and predicted 73 % of individual drug label changes. The model also predicted at least one AE-drug pair label change in 66 % of all the label changes for the test drugs. By concentrating on AE types with already demonstrated interest to FDA, we constructed a signaling system that provided focus regarding drug-AE pairs and suitable accuracy with regard to the issuance of FDA labeling changes. We suggest that focus on historical regulatory actions may increase the utility of pharmacovigilance signaling systems.

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

FDA has the legal authority to adopt a threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for substances in food at trace levels.

PubMed

Hahn, Martin J

2010-01-01

It now is possible to detect many substances in the parts per trillion and further advances will allow for even lower levels of detection. Many of these substances may always have been present in the food supply, but escaped detection. Others may have been introduced through environmental contamination, changes in food processing, sourcing of ingredients from different manufacturers or countries, and a myriad of other reasons. The adulteration and various safety provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), principles of statutory construction, and case law, provide FDA with the legal authority to adopt the threshold concept. FDA and the courts have long recognized it is possible to establish safe levels of poisonous or deleterious substances found in foods. FDA routinely conducts such an analysis under the general adulteration provisions of the FDCA and has identified safe levels for numerous environmental contaminants found in food. The courts have recognized that through its exercise of enforcement discretion, FDA has the legal authority to establish non-binding defect action levels for contaminants. FDA similarly could implement the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) through its exercise of enforcement discretion.

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 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

The FDA's decision-making process: isn't it time to temper the principle of protective paternalism?

PubMed

Brandt, Lawrence J

2008-05-01

The authors conducted a well-designed, multinational, large study of women younger than 65 yr of age with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) with a mixed pattern of diarrhea and constipation (IBS-M) or constipation (IBS-C) and showed that a statistically greater percentage of patients in each group responded to tegaserod compared with patients treated with placebo. Practicality looms large, however, in that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) disallowed the continued marketing of tegaserod because of cardiovascular safety concerns, and it now is only available under a restricted access program. The wisdom of this decision aside, it is disturbing that the FDA revealed a zero-tolerance for any significant risk of disease when a drug (e.g., tegaserod) was used for a nonlife-threatening condition; the FDA chose to neglect any potential benefit of significant improvement in quality of life, while at the same time allowing the continued availability of sildenifil for erectile dysfunction and other medications (e.g., rosiglitazone and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs]), each with a far greater risk of cardiovascular complications. Whether tegaserod will be re-released and, if so, under what conditions, is yet to be determined, as is the question of whether the FDA will decide to allow a more transparent decision-making process with input from all interested parties affected by their decision.

An Improved Adaptive Received Beamforming for Nested Frequency Offset and Nested Array FDA-MIMO Radar.

PubMed

Cheng, Sibei; Zhang, Qingjun; Bian, Mingming; Hao, Xinhong

2018-02-08

For the conventional FDA-MIMO (frequency diversity array multiple-input-multiple-output) Radar with uniform frequency offset and uniform linear array, the DOFs (degrees of freedom) of the adaptive beamformer are limited by the number of elements. A better performance-for example, a better suppression for strong interferences and a more desirable trade-off between the main lobe and side lobe-can be achieved with a greater number of DOFs. In order to obtain larger DOFs, this paper researches the signal model of the FDA-MIMO Radar with nested frequency offset and nested array, then proposes an improved adaptive beamforming method that uses the augmented matrix instead of the covariance matrix to calculate the optimum weight vectors and can be used to improve the output performances of FDA-MIMO Radar with the same element number or reduce the element number while maintain the approximate output performances such as the received beampattern, the main lobe width, side lobe depths and the output SINR (signal-to-interference-noise ratio). The effectiveness of the proposed scheme is verified by simulations.

An Improved Adaptive Received Beamforming for Nested Frequency Offset and Nested Array FDA-MIMO Radar

PubMed Central

Cheng, Sibei; Zhang, Qingjun; Bian, Mingming; Hao, Xinhong

2018-01-01

For the conventional FDA-MIMO (frequency diversity array multiple-input-multiple-output) Radar with uniform frequency offset and uniform linear array, the DOFs (degrees of freedom) of the adaptive beamformer are limited by the number of elements. A better performance—for example, a better suppression for strong interferences and a more desirable trade-off between the main lobe and side lobe—can be achieved with a greater number of DOFs. In order to obtain larger DOFs, this paper researches the signal model of the FDA-MIMO Radar with nested frequency offset and nested array, then proposes an improved adaptive beamforming method that uses the augmented matrix instead of the covariance matrix to calculate the optimum weight vectors and can be used to improve the output performances of FDA-MIMO Radar with the same element number or reduce the element number while maintain the approximate output performances such as the received beampattern, the main lobe width, side lobe depths and the output SINR (signal-to-interference-noise ratio). The effectiveness of the proposed scheme is verified by simulations. PMID:29419814

Implementing the Biopharmaceutics Classification System in Drug Development: Reconciling Similarities, Differences, and Shared Challenges in the EMA and US-FDA-Recommended Approaches.

PubMed

Cardot, J-M; Garcia Arieta, A; Paixao, P; Tasevska, I; Davit, B

2016-07-01

The US-FDA recently posted a draft guideline for industry recommending procedures necessary to obtain a biowaiver for immediate-release oral dosage forms based on the Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS). This review compares the present FDA BCS biowaiver approach, with the existing European Medicines Agency (EMA) approach, with an emphasis on similarities, difficulties, and shared challenges. Some specifics of the current EMA BCS guideline are compared with those in the recently published draft US-FDA BCS guideline. In particular, similarities and differences in the EMA versus US-FDA approaches to establishing drug solubility, permeability, dissolution, and formulation suitability for BCS biowaiver are critically reviewed. Several case studies are presented to illustrate the (i) challenges of applying for BCS biowaivers for global registration in the face of differences in the EMA and US-FDA BCS biowaiver criteria, as well as (ii) challenges inherent in applying for BCS class I or III designation and common to both jurisdictions.

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.

Software-Related Recalls of Health Information Technology and Other Medical Devices: Implications for FDA Regulation of Digital Health.

PubMed

Ronquillo, Jay G; Zuckerman, Diana M

2017-09-01

Policy Points: Medical software has become an increasingly critical component of health care, yet the regulation of these devices is inconsistent and controversial. No studies of medical devices and software assess the impact on patient safety of the FDA's current regulatory safeguards and new legislative changes to those standards. Our analysis quantifies the impact of software problems in regulated medical devices and indicates that current regulations are necessary but not sufficient for ensuring patient safety by identifying and eliminating dangerous defects in software currently on the market. New legislative changes will further deregulate health IT, reducing safeguards that facilitate the reporting and timely recall of flawed medical software that could harm patients. Medical software has become an increasingly critical component of health care, yet the regulatory landscape for digital health is inconsistent and controversial. To understand which policies might best protect patients, we examined the impact of the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) regulatory safeguards on software-related technologies in recent years and the implications for newly passed legislative changes in regulatory policy. Using FDA databases, we identified all medical devices that were recalled from 2011 through 2015 primarily because of software defects. We counted all software-related recalls for each FDA risk category and evaluated each high-risk and moderate-risk recall of electronic medical records to determine the manufacturer, device classification, submission type, number of units, and product details. A total of 627 software devices (1.4 million units) were subject to recalls, with 12 of these devices (190,596 units) subject to the highest-risk recalls. Eleven of the devices recalled as high risk had entered the market through the FDA review process that does not require evidence of safety or effectiveness, and one device was completely exempt from regulatory review

FDA approval of expanded age indication for a tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine.

PubMed

2011-09-23

On July 8, 2011, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved an expanded age indication for the tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and acellular pertussis vaccine (Tdap) Boostrix (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium). Originally, Boostrix was licensed in 2005 for persons aged 10 through 18 years, but in 2008, FDA approved an expanded age indication for Boostrix to include persons aged 19 through 64 years. FDA has now expanded the age indication to include persons aged 65 years and older. Boostrix is now licensed for use in persons aged 10 years and older as a single-dose booster vaccination. This notice summarizes the indications for use of Boostrix. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) for Tdap vaccines have been published previously. Publication of revised Tdap recommendations within the next year is anticipated.

Language and Nutrition (Mis)Information: Food Labels, FDA Policies and Meaning

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Taylor, Christy Marie

2013-01-01

In this dissertation, I address the ways in which food manufacturers can exploit the often vague and ambiguous nature of FDA policies concerning language and images used on food labels. Employing qualitative analysis methods (Strauss, 1987; Denzin and Lincoln, 2003; Mackey and Gass, 2005) that drew upon critical discourse analysis (Fairclough,…

Consortium on Methods Evaluating Tobacco: Research Tools to Inform FDA Regulation of Snus.

PubMed

Berman, Micah L; Bickel, Warren K; Harris, Andrew C; LeSage, Mark G; O'Connor, Richard J; Stepanov, Irina; Shields, Peter G; Hatsukami, Dorothy K

2017-10-04

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has purview over tobacco products. To set policy, the FDA must rely on sound science, yet most existing tobacco research methods have not been designed to specifically inform regulation. The NCI and FDA-funded Consortium on Methods Evaluating Tobacco (COMET) was established to develop and assess valid and reliable methods for tobacco product evaluation. The goal of this paper is to describe these assessment methods using a U.S. manufactured "snus" as the test product. In designing studies that could inform FDA regulation, COMET has taken a multidisciplinary approach that includes experimental animal models and a range of human studies that examine tobacco product appeal, addictiveness, and toxicity. This paper integrates COMET's findings over the last 4 years. Consistency in results was observed across the various studies, lending validity to our methods. Studies showed low abuse liability for snus and low levels of consumer demand. Toxicity was less than cigarettes on some biomarkers but higher than medicinal nicotine. Using our study methods and the convergence of results, the snus that we tested as a potential modified risk tobacco product is likely to neither result in substantial public health harm nor benefit. This review describes methods that were used to assess the appeal, abuse liability, and toxicity of snus. These methods included animal, behavioral economics, and consumer perception studies, and clinical trials. Across these varied methods, study results showed low abuse-liability and appeal of the snus product we tested. In several studies, demand for snus was lower than for less toxic nicotine gum. The consistency and convergence of results across a range of multi-disciplinary studies lends validity to our methods and suggests that promotion of snus as a modified risk tobacco products is unlikely to produce substantial public health benefit or harm. © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press

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

Regulatory Requirements for Devices for the Handicapped.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Stigi, John, Ed.; Rivera, Richard J., Ed.

This booklet explains in question/answer form the basic regulatory requirements established by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the federal government concerning the manufacture, marketing and distribution of medical devices (including implantable devices and devices previously regulated as drugs) for persons with disabilities. Topics…

In Vitro Screening of an FDA-Approved Library Against ESKAPE Pathogens

PubMed Central

Younis, Waleed; AbdelKhalek, Ahmed; Mayhoub, Abdelrahman S.; Seleem, Mohamed N.

2017-01-01

Bacterial resistance to conventional antibiotics is an increasingly serious threat to public health worldwide that requires immediate exploration and the development of novel antimicrobial compounds. Drug repurposing is an inexpensive and untapped source of new antimicrobial leads, and it holds many attractive features warranting further attention for antimicrobial drug discovery. In an effort to repurpose drugs and explore new leads in the field of antimicrobial drug discovery, we performed a whole-cell screening assay of 1,600 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs against Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter cloacae (ESKAPE) pathogens. The in vitro screening identified 49 non-antimicrobial drugs that were active against at least one species of ESKAPE pathogen. Although some of these drugs were known to have antibacterial activity, many have never been reported before. In particular, sulfonamide-containing structures represent a novel drug scaffold that should be investigated further. The characteristics of these drugs as antimicrobial agents may offer a safe, effective, and quick supplement to current approaches to treating bacterial infections. PMID:28190396

Postmarket studies required by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs and biologics approved between 2009 and 2012: cross sectional analysis.

PubMed

Wallach, Joshua D; Egilman, Alexander C; Dhruva, Sanket S; McCarthy, Margaret E; Miller, Jennifer E; Woloshin, Steven; Schwartz, Lisa M; Ross, Joseph S

2018-05-24

To characterize postmarketing requirements for new drugs and biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to examine rates and timeliness of registration, results reporting, and publication of required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials. Cross sectional analysis. Postmarketing requirements for all new drugs and biologics approved by the FDA between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2012, with follow-up up to 15 November 2017. Postmarketing requirements and their characteristics known at the time of FDA approval, including FDA authority, study design, and study characteristics. Rates and timeliness of registration and results reporting on ClinicalTrials.gov and publication in peer reviewed journals of required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials. Between 2009 and 12, the FDA approved 97 new drugs and biologics for 106 indications with at least one postmarketing requirement at the time of first approval, for a total of 437 postmarketing requirements. Postmarket study descriptions were short (median word count 44 (interquartile range 29-71)) and often lacked information to determine an up to date progress (131 (30%)). 220 (50.3%) postmarketing requirements were for new animal or other studies (including pharmacokinetic studies); 134 (30.7%) were for prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials; and 83 (19.0%) were for secondary analyses or follow-up studies. Of 110 clinical trials, 38 (34.5%), 44 (40.0%), 62 (56.4%), 66 (60.0%), and 98 (89.1%) did not report enough information to establish use of randomization, comparator type, allocation, outcome, and number of patients to be enrolled, respectively. Of 134 required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials, 102 (76.1%) were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; of 50 registered and completed studies, 36 (72.0%) had reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Among 65 completed studies, 47 (72.3%) had either reported results

Safety assessment of FDA-approved (orlistat and lorcaserin) anti-obesity medications.

PubMed

Halpern, Bruno; Halpern, Alfredo

2015-02-01

Options for treating obesity remain limited despite it being a chronic, recurrent and morbid condition. New drugs that are proposed for its treatment encounter strong reluctance by regulatory agencies and many doctors. This review will focus on the safety of an older drug, orlistat (the only one still approved in the European Union) and a newer recently FDA-approved one, lorcaserin. Both are approved as long-term monotherapy for obesity in the United States of America and they have demonstrated median weight loss of nearly 3% over placebo. Research, development and approval of new anti-obesity drugs are necessary for improved management of this chronic condition. Orlistat and lorcaserin are two FDA-approved drugs with limited overall efficacy. Nevertheless they are useful weapons for at least some obese individuals. Orlistat has a long and solid safety profile, whereas the safety of lorcaserin is still a matter of debate, mainly due to a lack of long-term data. However, lorcaserin's selective agonism on 5HT2c serotonin receptors diminishes concerns about valvulopathy associated with other serotonin agonists, such as fenfluramine.

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.

FDA adverse Event Problem Codes: standardizing the classification of device and patient problems associated with medical device use.

PubMed

Reed, Terrie L; Kaufman-Rivi, Diana

2010-01-01

The broad array of medical devices and the potential for device failures, malfunctions, and other adverse events associated with each device creates a challenge for public health device surveillance programs. Coding reported events by type of device problem provides one method for identifying a potential signal of a larger device issue. The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Event Problem Codes that are used to report adverse events previously lacked a structured set of controls for code development and maintenance. Over time this led to inconsistent, ambiguous, and duplicative concepts being added to the code set on an ad-hoc basis. Recognizing the limitation of its coding system the FDA set out to update the system to improve its usefulness within FDA and as a basis of a global standard to identify important patient and device outcomes throughout the medical community. In 2004, FDA and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) whereby NCI agreed to provide terminology development and maintenance services to all FDA Centers. Under this MOU, CDRH's Office of Surveillance and Biometrics (OSB) convened a cross-Center workgroup and collaborated with staff at NCI Enterprise Vocabulary Service (EVS) to streamline the Patient and Device Problem Codes and integrate them into the NCI Thesaurus and Meta-Thesaurus. This initiative included many enhancements to the Event Problem Codes aimed at improving code selection as well as improving adverse event report analysis. LIMITATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff resources, database concerns, and limited collaboration with external groups in the initial phases of the project are discussed. Adverse events associated with medical device use can be better understood when they are reported using a consistent and well-defined code set. This FDA initiative was an attempt to improve the structure and add control mechanisms to an existing code set

Retrospective review of the performance standard for diagnostic x-ray equipment; availability of report--FDA. Notice; final rule-related.

PubMed

1985-11-12

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a report prepared by the X-Ray Standard Review Group (XSRG) in FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). The report contains the review group's assessment of the performance standard for diagnostic x-ray systems and their major components. It contains recommendations for changes in the standard with respect to the need to ensure that regulatory controls keep pace with developing technology and the needs of the radiological community. In addition, FDA is inviting interested persons to submit written comments, data, or information regarding the report for the agency's consideration in deciding whether to initiate any changes in the performance standard.

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.

Disproportionality analysis of buprenorphine transdermal system and cardiac arrhythmia using FDA and WHO postmarketing reporting system data.

PubMed

Sessler, Nelson E; Walker, Ekaterina; Chickballapur, Harsha; Kacholakalayil, James; Coplan, Paul M

2017-01-01

Positive-controlled clinical studies have shown a dose dependent effect of buprenorphine transdermal system on QTc interval prolongation. This study provides assessment of the buprenorphine transdermal system and cardiac arrhythmia using US FDA and WHO postmarketing reporting databases. Disproportionality analysis of spontaneously reported adverse events to assess whether the reporting rate of cardiac arrhythmia events was disproportionately elevated relative to expected rates of reporting in both FDA and WHO databases. Cardiac arrhythmia events were identified using the standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities query for torsade de pointes and/or QT prolongation (TdP/QTP). The threshold for a signal of disproportionate adverse event reporting was defined as the lower 90% confidence limit ≥ 2 of the Empiric Bayes geometric mean in FDA database and as the lower 95% confidence limit of the Informational Component >0 in WHO database. There were 124 (<1%) and 77 (2%) cardiac arrhythmia event cases associated with buprenorphine transdermal as compared to 3206 (12%) and 2913 (14%) involving methadone in the FDA and WHO databases, respectively. In the FDA database methadone was associated with a signal of disproportionate reporting for TdP/QTP (EB05 3.26); however, buprenorphine transdermal was not (EB05 0.33). In the WHO database methadone was associated with a signal of disproportionate reporting for TdP/QTP (IC025 2.66); however, buprenorphine transdermal was not (IC025 -0.88). Similar trends were observed in sensitivity analyses by age, gender, and specific terms related to ventricular arrhythmia. The signal identified in the transdermal buprenorphine thorough QTc study, which led to a dose limitation in its US label, does not translate into a signal of increased risk for cardiac arrhythmia in real world use, as assessed by this method of analyzing post-market surveillance data.

Pharmacokinetics of pediatric lopinavir/ritonavir tablets in children when administered twice daily according to FDA weight bands.

PubMed

Bastiaans, Diane E T; Forcat, Silvia; Lyall, Hermione; Cressey, Tim R; Hansudewechakul, Rawiwan; Kanjanavanit, Suparat; Noguera-Julian, Antoni; Königs, Christoph; Inshaw, Jamie R J; Chalermpantmetagul, Suwalai; Saïdi, Yacine; Compagnucci, Alexandra; Harper, Lynda M; Giaquinto, Carlo; Colbers, Angela P H; Burger, David M

2014-03-01

Lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) pediatric tablets (100/25 mg) are approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) as part of combination antiretroviral therapy. Dosing is based on body weight bands or body surface area under FDA approval and only body surface area by the EMA. This can lead to a different recommended dose. In addition, weight band-based dosing has not been formally studied in the target population. We evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) of LPV/r in children, administered twice daily according to the FDA weight bands, using pediatric tablets. Fifty-three HIV-infected children were included in the PK substudy of the Paediatric European Network for the Treatment of AIDS 18 trial (KONCERT). In this study, children were randomized to receive LPV/r twice or once daily, according to FDA weight bands. A PK assessment was performed in 17, 16 and 20 children in the 15-25 kg, ≥ 25-35 kg and >35 kg weight band, respectively, while children took the tablets twice daily. Rich sampling was performed, and PK parameters were calculated by noncompartmental analysis. Given the high percentage of Asian children, it was also tested whether there was a difference in PK parameters between Asian and non-Asian children. For the total group, LPV geometric mean AUC0-12, Cmax and C12 were 106.9 h × mg/L, 12.0 mg/L and 4.9 mg/L, respectively. There were no significant differences in LPV PK parameters between the weight bands. In addition, weight was not found to be associated with variability in Cmax, C12 or AUC0-12 for the LPV PK parameters. FDA weight band-based dosing recommendations provide adequate exposure to LPV when using LPV/r pediatric tablets.

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

Translation of proteomic biomarkers into FDA approved cancer diagnostics: issues and challenges

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Tremendous efforts have been made over the past few decades to discover novel cancer biomarkers for use in clinical practice. However, a striking discrepancy exists between the effort directed toward biomarker discovery and the number of markers that make it into clinical practice. One of the confounding issues in translating a novel discovery into clinical practice is that quite often the scientists working on biomarker discovery have limited knowledge of the analytical, diagnostic, and regulatory requirements for a clinical assay. This review provides an introduction to such considerations with the aim of generating more extensive discussion for study design, assay performance, and regulatory approval in the process of translating new proteomic biomarkers from discovery into cancer diagnostics. We first describe the analytical requirements for a robust clinical biomarker assay, including concepts of precision, trueness, specificity and analytical interference, and carryover. We next introduce the clinical considerations of diagnostic accuracy, receiver operating characteristic analysis, positive and negative predictive values, and clinical utility. We finish the review by describing components of the FDA approval process for protein-based biomarkers, including classification of biomarker assays as medical devices, analytical and clinical performance requirements, and the approval process workflow. While we recognize that the road from biomarker discovery, validation, and regulatory approval to the translation into the clinical setting could be long and difficult, the reward for patients, clinicians and scientists could be rather significant. PMID:24088261

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.

Chloroquine, a FDA-approved Drug, Prevents Zika Virus Infection and its Associated Congenital Microcephaly in Mice.

PubMed

Li, Chunfeng; Zhu, Xingliang; Ji, Xue; Quanquin, Natalie; Deng, Yong-Qiang; Tian, Min; Aliyari, Roghiyh; Zuo, Xiangyang; Yuan, Ling; Afridi, Shabbir Khan; Li, Xiao-Feng; Jung, Jae U; Nielsen-Saines, Karin; Qin, Frank Xiao-Feng; Qin, Cheng-Feng; Xu, Zhiheng; Cheng, Genhong

2017-10-01

Zika virus (ZIKV) has become a global public health emergency due to its rapidly expanding range and its ability to cause severe congenital defects such as microcephaly. However, there are no FDA-approved therapies or vaccines against ZIKV infection. Through our screening of viral entry inhibitors, we found that chloroquine (CQ), a commonly used antimalarial and a FDA-approved drug that has also been repurposed against other pathogens, could significantly inhibit ZIKV infection in vitro, by blocking virus internalization. We also demonstrated that CQ attenuates ZIKV-associated morbidity and mortality in mice. Finally, we proved that CQ protects fetal mice from microcephaly caused by ZIKV infection. Our methodology of focusing on previously identified antivirals in screens for effectiveness against ZIKV proved to be a rapid and efficient means of discovering new ZIKV therapeutics. Selecting drugs that were previously FDA-approved, such as CQ, also improves the likelihood that they may more quickly reach stages of clinical testing and use by the public. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Investigational new drug safety reporting requirements for human drug and biological products and safety reporting requirements for bioavailability and bioequivalence studies in humans. Final rule.

PubMed

2010-09-29

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its regulations governing safety reporting requirements for human drug and biological products subject to an investigational new drug application (IND). The final rule codifies the agency's expectations for timely review, evaluation, and submission of relevant and useful safety information and implements internationally harmonized definitions and reporting standards. The revisions will improve the utility of IND safety reports, reduce the number of reports that do not contribute in a meaningful way to the developing safety profile of the drug, expedite FDA's review of critical safety information, better protect human subjects enrolled in clinical trials, subject bioavailability and bioequivalence studies to safety reporting requirements, promote a consistent approach to safety reporting internationally, and enable the agency to better protect and promote public health.

Do the EMA accelerated assessment procedure and the FDA priority review ensure a therapeutic added value? 2006-2015: a cohort study.

PubMed

Boucaud-Maitre, Denis; Altman, Jean-Jacques

2016-10-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) have both implemented procedures in order to shorten review time for marketing authorizations with potential therapeutic added value, called priority review and accelerated assessment procedure, respectively. The aim of this study is to compare the new molecular entities (NME) assessed in shorter review time by both agencies and to investigate whether granting a shorter review time status subsequently predicts its therapeutic value attributed by a health technology assessment agency, the French Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS). All NME approved by the EMA and the FDA with a therapeutic added value between 2007 and June 30, 2015 were extracted. We assessed the sensibility, the positive predictive value, and the EMA review time. One hundred seventy-eight NME were approved by the FDA and the EMA and a therapeutic value was available for 160 NME. Eighty-eight (55.0 %) NME were on FDA priority review, 24 (15.0 %) on EMA accelerated procedure and 43 (26.9 %) were considered of high clinical added value. The sensibility was 86.0 % for the FDA and 30.2 % for the EMA. The positive predictive value was, respectively, 42.0 and 54.2 %. Twenty-five NME on FDA priority review and of high therapeutic added value were not on EMA accelerated assessment procedure, leading to a supplementary mean EMA review time of 146 days. The EMA was restrictive to grant a shorten review time status for products with therapeutic interest during the study period.

Regulatory Underpinnings of Global Health Security: FDA's Roles in Preventing, Detecting, and Responding to Global Health Threats

PubMed Central

Bond, Katherine C.; Maher, Carmen

2014-01-01

In February 2014, health officials from around the world announced the Global Health Security Agenda, a critical effort to strengthen national and global systems to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats and to foster stronger collaboration across borders. With its increasing global roles and broad range of regulatory responsibilities in ensuring the availability, safety, and security of medical and food products, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is engaged in a range of efforts in support of global health security. This article provides an overview of FDA's global health security roles, focusing on its responsibilities related to the development and use of medical countermeasures (MCMs) for preventing, detecting, and responding to global infectious disease and other public health emergency threats. The article also discusses several areas—antimicrobial resistance, food safety, and supply chain integrity—in which FDA's global health security roles continue to evolve and extend beyond MCMs and, in some cases, beyond traditional infectious disease threats. PMID:25254912

Regulatory underpinnings of Global Health security: FDA's roles in preventing, detecting, and responding to global health threats.

PubMed

Courtney, Brooke; Bond, Katherine C; Maher, Carmen

2014-01-01

In February 2014, health officials from around the world announced the Global Health Security Agenda, a critical effort to strengthen national and global systems to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats and to foster stronger collaboration across borders. With its increasing global roles and broad range of regulatory responsibilities in ensuring the availability, safety, and security of medical and food products, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is engaged in a range of efforts in support of global health security. This article provides an overview of FDA's global health security roles, focusing on its responsibilities related to the development and use of medical countermeasures (MCMs) for preventing, detecting, and responding to global infectious disease and other public health emergency threats. The article also discusses several areas-antimicrobial resistance, food safety, and supply chain integrity-in which FDA's global health security roles continue to evolve and extend beyond MCMs and, in some cases, beyond traditional infectious disease threats.

75 FR 18505 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-12

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0165] International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal... veterinary use by the International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration...

FDA toxicity databases and real-time data entry.

PubMed

Arvidson, Kirk B

2008-11-15

Structure-searchable electronic databases are valuable new tools that are assisting the FDA in its mission to promptly and efficiently review incoming submissions for regulatory approval of new food additives and food contact substances. The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Office of Food Additive Safety (CFSAN/OFAS), in collaboration with Leadscope, Inc., is consolidating genetic toxicity data submitted in food additive petitions from the 1960s to the present day. The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Science's Informatics and Computational Safety Analysis Staff (CDER/OPS/ICSAS) is separately gathering similar information from their submissions. Presently, these data are distributed in various locations such as paper files, microfiche, and non-standardized toxicology memoranda. The organization of the data into a consistent, searchable format will reduce paperwork, expedite the toxicology review process, and provide valuable information to industry that is currently available only to the FDA. Furthermore, by combining chemical structures with genetic toxicity information, biologically active moieties can be identified and used to develop quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) modeling and testing guidelines. Additionally, chemicals devoid of toxicity data can be compared to known structures, allowing for improved safety review through the identification and analysis of structural analogs. Four database frameworks have been created: bacterial mutagenesis, in vitro chromosome aberration, in vitro mammalian mutagenesis, and in vivo micronucleus. Controlled vocabularies for these databases have been established. The four separate genetic toxicity databases are compiled into a single, structurally-searchable database for easy accessibility of the toxicity information. Beyond the genetic toxicity databases described here, additional databases for subchronic, chronic, and teratogenicity studies have been prepared.

FDA toxicity databases and real-time data entry

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

Arvidson, Kirk B.

Structure-searchable electronic databases are valuable new tools that are assisting the FDA in its mission to promptly and efficiently review incoming submissions for regulatory approval of new food additives and food contact substances. The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Office of Food Additive Safety (CFSAN/OFAS), in collaboration with Leadscope, Inc., is consolidating genetic toxicity data submitted in food additive petitions from the 1960s to the present day. The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Science's Informatics and Computational Safety Analysis Staff (CDER/OPS/ICSAS) is separately gathering similar information from their submissions. Presently, these data are distributedmore » in various locations such as paper files, microfiche, and non-standardized toxicology memoranda. The organization of the data into a consistent, searchable format will reduce paperwork, expedite the toxicology review process, and provide valuable information to industry that is currently available only to the FDA. Furthermore, by combining chemical structures with genetic toxicity information, biologically active moieties can be identified and used to develop quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) modeling and testing guidelines. Additionally, chemicals devoid of toxicity data can be compared to known structures, allowing for improved safety review through the identification and analysis of structural analogs. Four database frameworks have been created: bacterial mutagenesis, in vitro chromosome aberration, in vitro mammalian mutagenesis, and in vivo micronucleus. Controlled vocabularies for these databases have been established. The four separate genetic toxicity databases are compiled into a single, structurally-searchable database for easy accessibility of the toxicity information. Beyond the genetic toxicity databases described here, additional databases for subchronic, chronic, and teratogenicity studies have been

42 CFR 84.135 - Half-mask facepieces, full facepieces, hoods, and helmets; fit; minimum requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... 42 Public Health 1 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Half-mask facepieces, full facepieces, hoods, and... OF RESPIRATORY PROTECTIVE DEVICES Supplied-Air Respirators § 84.135 Half-mask facepieces, full facepieces, hoods, and helmets; fit; minimum requirements. (a) Half-mask facepieces and full facepieces shall...

FDA Approves Immunotherapy for a Cancer that Affects Infants and Children | FNLCR Staging

Cancer.gov

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved dinutuximab (ch14.18) as an immunotherapy for neuroblastoma, a rare type of childhood cancer that offers poor prognosis for about half of the children who are affected.  The National Cancer In

The next forum for unraveling FDA off-label marketing rules: State and federal legislatures.

PubMed

Sinha, Michael S; Kesselheim, Aaron S

2018-05-01

In a Guest Editorial, Aaron S. Kesselheim and Michael S. Sinha show how federal and state legislation to allow promotion of drugs for non-approved uses threatens to undermine the FDA's public health mission.

Federal Protection for Human Research Subjects: An Analysis of the Common Rule and Its Interactions with FDA Regulations and the HIPAA Privacy Rule

DTIC Science & Technology

2005-06-02

the interaction of the Privacy Rule and FDA regulations with the Common Rule. Appendix B CRS-12 20 Phocomelia Syndrome is a birth defect that may...linked to the birth defect phocomelia .20 ! Congress enacts the Drug Amendments of 1962 (P.L. 87-781), requiring researchers to obtain subjects...information about Phocomelia Syndrome, see [http://my.webmd.com/hw/health_guide_atoz/nord780.asp], visited Apr. 11, 2005. 178 Section 505(i) of the Food

Violations of exhibiting and FDA rules at an American Psychiatric Association annual meeting.

PubMed

Lurie, Peter; Tran, Tung; Wolfe, Sidney Manuel; Goodman, Robert

2005-12-01

We conducted a cross-sectional study of all exhibit booths for the 24 pharmaceutical companies at the 2002 American Psychiatric Association (APA) convention. We collected and categorized one of each item distributed by the companies at each booth. A total of 268 items were collected from 24 companies (median=8). The most common categories of items were "reprints or pamphlets" (37%) and "noneducational gifts" (27%), including music CDs and invitations to dinners and museums. There were a total of 16 violations of the APA's own exhibit rules: eight companies had one violation and two companies had four violations. Four companies engaged in FDA-prohibited off-label promotion; one also violated the APA code. Over half of all companies (54%) were in violation of either APA rules or FDA regulations. The APA's voluntary code has failed to adequately reduce inappropriate promotional activity at the annual APA meeting.

NCI, NHLBI, FDA, AACC, and CMS Collaborate in Advancing Proteomics Regulatory Science | Office of Cancer Clinical Proteomics Research

Cancer.gov

Despite great strides in proteomics and the growing number of articles citing the discovery of potential biomarkers, the actual rate of introduction of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved protein analytes has been relatively unchanged over the past 10 years. One of reasons for the lack of new protein-based biomarkers approved has been a lack of information and understanding by the proteomics research community to the regulatory process used by the FDA. To address this issue, Dr.

Effects of FDA Advisories on the Pharmacologic Treatment of ADHD, 2004–2008

PubMed Central

Kornfield, Rachel; Watson, Sydeaka; Higashi, Ashley S.; Conti, Rena M.; Dusetzina, Stacie B.; Garfield, Craig F.; Dorsey, E. Ray; Huskamp, Haiden A.; Alexander, G. Caleb

2014-01-01

Objective This study assessed the effect of public health advisories issued between 2005 and 2007 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on treatments of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and physician prescribing practices. Methods Data obtained from the IMS Health National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative audit of ambulatory physicians, were used to examine trends in office visits by children and adolescents (under age 18) during which ADHD was treated with Adderall, other psychostimulants, or atomoxetine. Segmented time series regressions were conducted to determine changes in use associated with three advisories issued between 2005 and 2007. Results In 2004, before the first FDA advisory, Adderall accounted for 36% of ADHD pharmacotherapy treatment visits. Other stimulants accounted for 46%, and atomoxetine accounted for 19%. Overall pharmacotherapy treatment rates were stable over the study period, but by 2008 the treatment visits accounted for by Adderall (that is, market share) declined to 24%, and the market share for atomoxetine declined to 8%. The market share for substitute therapies—clonidine, guanfacine, and bupropion—was stable over this period, ranging from 5% to 7%. Despite the declines in the use of Adderall and atomoxetine over the study period, results from the regression models suggest that the advisories did not have a statistically significant effect on ADHD medication prescribing. Conclusions FDA advisories regarding potential cardiovascular and other risks of ADHD medications had little discernible incremental effect on the use of these medicines in this nationally representative ambulatory audit. PMID:23318985

Working draft of the FDA GMP final rule (Part I).

PubMed

Donawa, M E

1995-10-01

On 24 July 1995, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a notice of availability of a working draft of a final rule for new good manufacturing practice (GMP) regulations for medical devices. The new regulations could be in force by late 1996. This is the first of a two-part series of articles discussing key provisions of the working draft and their importance to companies marketing or planning to market devices in the US.

Association between change of health care providers and pregnancy exposure to FDA category C, D and X drugs.

PubMed

Yang, Jianzhou; Xie, Rihua; Krewski, Daniel; Wang, Yongjin; Walker, Mark; Cao, Wenjun; Wen, Shi Wu

2014-01-01

Changing health care providers frequently breaks the continuity of care, which is associated with many health care problems. The purpose of this study was to examine the association between a change of health care providers and pregnancy exposure to FDA category C, D and X drugs. A 50% random sample of women who gave a birth in Saskatchewan between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2000 were chosen for this study. The association between the number of changes in health care providers and with pregnancy exposure to category C, D, and X drugs for those women with and without chronic diseases were evaluated using multiple logistical regression, with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as the association measures. A total of 18 568 women were included in this study. Rates of FDA C, D, and X drug uses were 14.35%, 17.07%, 21.72%, and 31.14%, in women with no change of provider, 1-2 changes, 3-5 changes, and more than 5 changes of health care providers. An association between the number of changes of health care providers and pregnancy exposure to FDA C, D, and X drugs existed in women without chronic diseases but not in women with chronic disease. Change of health care providers is associated with pregnancy exposure to FDA category C, D and X drugs in women without chronic diseases.

Towards a Computational Analysis of Status and Leadership Styles on FDA Panels

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Broniatowski, David A.; Magee, Christopher L.

Decisions by committees of technical experts are increasingly impacting society. These decision-makers are typically embedded within a web of social relations. Taken as a whole, these relations define an implicit social structure which can influence the decision outcome. Aspects of this structure are founded on interpersonal affinity between parties to the negotiation, on assigned roles, and on the recognition of status characteristics, such as relevant domain expertise. This paper build upon a methodology aimed at extracting an explicit representation of such social structures using meeting transcripts as a data source. Whereas earlier results demonstrated that the method presented here can identify groups of decision-makers with a contextual affinity (i.e., membership in a given medical specialty or voting clique), we now can extract meaningful status hierarchies, and can identify differing facilitation styles among committee chairs. Use of this method is demonstrated on the transcripts of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory panel meeting transcripts; nevertheless, the approach presented here is extensible to other domains and requires only a meeting transcript as input.

High-risk medical devices, children and the FDA: regulatory challenges facing pediatric mechanical circulatory support devices.

PubMed

Almond, Christopher S D; Chen, Eric A; Berman, Michael R; Less, Joanne R; Baldwin, J Timothy; Linde-Feucht, Sarah R; Hoke, Tracey R; Pearson, Gail D; Jenkins, Kathy; Duncan, Brian W; Zuckerman, Bram D

2007-01-01

Pediatric mechanical circulatory support is a critical unmet need in the United States. Infant- and child-sized ventricular assist devices are currently being developed largely through federal contracts and grants through the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). Human testing and marketing of high-risk devices for children raises epidemiologic and regulatory issues that will need to be addressed. Leaders from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), NHLBI, academic pediatric community, and industry convened in January 2006 for the first FDA Workshop on the Regulatory Process for Pediatric Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices. The purpose was to provide the pediatric community with an overview of the federal regulatory process for high-risk medical devices and to review the challenges specific to the development and regulation of pediatric mechanical circulatory support devices. Pediatric mechanical circulatory support present significant epidemiologic, logistic, and financial challenges to industry, federal regulators, and the pediatric community. Early interactions with the FDA, shared appreciation of challenges, and careful planning will be critical to avoid unnecessary delays in making potentially life-saving devices available for children. Collaborative efforts to address these challenges are warranted.

An integrated bioinformatics infrastructure essential for advancing pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine in the context of the FDA's Critical Path Initiative.

PubMed

Tong, Weida; Harris, Stephen C; Fang, Hong; Shi, Leming; Perkins, Roger; Goodsaid, Federico; Frueh, Felix W

2007-01-01

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is identified in the FDA Critical Path document as a major opportunity for advancing medical product development and personalized medicine. An integrated bioinformatics infrastructure for use in FDA data review is crucial to realize the benefits of PGx for public health. We have developed an integrated bioinformatics tool, called ArrayTrack, for managing, analyzing and interpreting genomic and other biomarker data (e.g. proteomic and metabolomic data). ArrayTrack is a highly flexible and robust software platform, which allows evolving with technological advances and changing user needs. ArrayTrack is used in the routine review of genomic data submitted to the FDA; here, three hypothetical examples of its use in the Voluntary eXploratory Data Submission (VXDS) program are illustrated.: © Published by Elsevier Ltd.