Sample records for administration fda issued

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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.

  12. 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...

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

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

    PubMed

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

    2013-01-22

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

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. 77 FR 11550 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Notification to Food and Drug Administration of Issues That May...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-02-27

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

  1. 78 FR 19715 - Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-04-02

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

  2. 78 FR 14309 - Implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Provision Requiring FDA To Establish...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-03-05

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

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

  6. An analysis of the warning letters issued by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers regarding misleading health outcomes claims

    PubMed Central

    Chatterjee, Satabdi; Patel, Harshali K.; Sansgiry, Sujit S.

    Objective To evaluate the number and type of warning letters issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to pharmaceutical manufacturers for promotional violations. Methods Two reviewers downloaded, printed and independently evaluated warning letters issued by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers from years 2003-2008. Misleading claims were broadly classified as clinical, Quality-of-Life (QoL), and economic claims. Clinical claims included claims regarding unsubstantiated efficacy, safety and tolerability, superiority, broadening of indication and/or omission of risk information. QoL claims included unsubstantiated quality of life and/or health-related quality of life claims. Economic claims included any form of claim made on behalf of the pharmaceutical companies related to cost superiority of or cost savings from the drug compared to other drugs in the market. Results In the 6-year study period, 65 warning letters were issued by FDA, which contained 144 clinical, three QoL, and one economic claim. On an average, 11 warning letters were issued per year. Omission of risk information was the most frequently violated claim (30.6%) followed by unsubstantiated efficacy claims (18.6%). Warning letters were primarily directed to manufacturers of cardiovascular (14.6%), anti-microbial (14.6%), and CNS (12.5%) drugs. Majority of the claims referenced in warning letters contained promotional materials directed to physicians (57%). Conclusions The study found that misleading clinical outcome claims formed the majority of the promotional violations, and majority of the claims were directed to physicians. Since inadequate promotion of medications may lead to irrational prescribing, the study emphasizes the importance of disseminating reliable, credible, and scientific information to patients, and more importantly, physicians to protect public health. PMID:24155837

  7. FDA Kids' Home Page

    MedlinePlus

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

  8. 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

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

  14. 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...

  15. 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.

  16. 77 FR 47652 - Second Annual Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-09

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

  17. 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.

  18. 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)

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

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

    PubMed

    Smith, Jeffrey K

    2013-04-01

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

  2. 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.

  3. 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…

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

    PubMed

    1998-09-25

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

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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...

  10. A review of FDA warning letters and notices of violation issued for patient-reported outcomes promotional claims between 2006 and 2012.

    PubMed

    Symonds, Tara; Hackford, Claire; Abraham, Lucy

    2014-06-01

    To ascertain the frequency and types of patient-reported outcome (PRO) violations made in US pharmaceutical promotional materials between 2006 and 2012 and determine whether there were increases in violation warnings after issuance of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft and final PRO Guidance. All warning letters (WLs) or notices of violation (NOVs) issued by the FDA's Office of Prescription Drug Promotion were reviewed for PRO violations (n = 213). Each letter containing a PRO violation was reviewed to determine the type of violation: 1) PRO measure not fit for purpose, 2) study design/interpretation of results, 3) statistical analysis, and 4) no treatment benefit. Forty-one (19%) letters contained information about PRO infringements. Noticeable spikes in letters were shown in 2007 (37%) and 2010 (31%) after the issuance of the draft and final PRO Guidance, respectively. The most common violation was PRO measure not fit for purpose (54%), specifically: use of individual items (45%), insufficient evidence of content validity (36%), and broadening of the claim beyond what the PRO measures (27%). Issues with study design/interpretation of results were also high (49%), particularly broadening of claim beyond what was measured in the trial (55%) and no PRO measure used (50%). A fifth of the letters issued to companies contained PRO violations, with most related to poor selection of the PRO measure used or trying to broaden the claim. More guidance from the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion about what is considered "substantial evidence" in this area could help reduce the number of letters issued. Copyright © 2014 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

  11. 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...

  12. 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...

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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

  17. 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.

  18. 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…

  19. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval end points for chronic cutaneous ulcer studies.

    PubMed

    Eaglstein, William H; Kirsner, Robert S; Robson, Martin C

    2012-01-01

    The rising costs of caring for chronic cutaneous ulcers (CCUs) and recent appreciation of the mortality of CCUs have led to consideration of the reasons for the failure to have new drug therapies. No new chemical entities to heal CCUs have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in over a decade, in part due to an inability to reach the FDA accepted end point of "complete wound closure." The frequent failure to reach the complete closure end point brings forward the question of the relevance of other healing end points such as improved quality of life, or partial healing. Because CCUs carry a prognosis and mortality rate worse than many cancers, it is reasonable to compare the FDA trial end points for cancer drug approval with those for CCUs. And the difference is quite striking. While there is only one end point for CCUs, there are five surrogate and three direct end points for cancers. In contrast to cancer, surrogate end points and partial healing are not acceptable for therapies aimed at CCUs. For example, making tumors smaller is an acceptable end point, but making CCUs smaller is not and improvement in the signs and symptoms of cancer is an acceptable end point for cancers but not CCUs. As CCUs carry a prognosis and mortality rate worse than many cancers, we believe a reconsideration of end points for CCUs is highly warranted. © 2012 by the Wound Healing Society.

  20. Drugs@FDA: FDA Approved Drug Products

    MedlinePlus

    ... Cosmetics Tobacco Products Home Drug Databases Drugs@FDA Drugs@FDA: FDA Approved Drug Products Share Tweet Linkedin Pin it More sharing ... Download Drugs@FDA Express for free Search by Drug Name, Active Ingredient, or Application Number Enter at ...

  1. 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...

  2. 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.

  3. 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...

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

    PubMed

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

    2014-11-01

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

  5. 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.

  6. 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...

  7. FDA plan for statutory compliance. Notice of availability.

    PubMed

    1998-11-24

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

  8. 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.

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. 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

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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

  2. 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...

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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.

  12. 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

  13. 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...

  14. 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...

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

    PubMed

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

    2015-09-01

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

  16. 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).

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 76 FR 67461 - Cosmetic Microbiological Safety Issues; Public Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-11-01

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0770] Cosmetic Microbiological Safety Issues; Public Meeting AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public meeting; request for comments and opening of a docket. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug...

  1. Issues in Educational Administration.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Ediger, Marlow

    School administrators need to study and analyze the pros and cons of issues before making decisions. Ultimately, decisions need to be made by administrators as to which philosophies of education to implement in resolving conflicting points of view. More research studies would lead to an increased number of syntheses of the pros and cons of certain…

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

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

    PubMed

    Golodner, L F

    1998-01-01

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

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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.

  11. 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.

  12. 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...

  13. A study of warning letters issued to clinical investigators and institutional review boards by the United States Food and Drug Administration.

    PubMed

    Gogtay, N J; Doshi, B M; Kannan, S; Thatte, U

    2011-01-01

    Warning letters (WLs) issued by the US FDA (United States Food and Drug Administration) mention the nature of violations by clinical investigators and institutional review boards (IRBS) and can help as training tools. WLs issued by the US FDA between January 2005 and December 2010 to clinical investigators and IRBs were reviewed for various violation themes. A total of 129 WLs were issued to investigators and 40 to IRBs. Among the WLs issued to investigators, 67 (51.95%) were issued for drug-related research and 62 (48.06%) were for device-related research. For investigators, deviation from the investigational plan was the most common violation (81%) followed by failure to maintain accurate and adequate case histories (58.1%) and then informed consent issues (48.06%). Among WLs issued to IRBs, failure to have and follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) was seen in 93.89% followed by issues pertaining to membership (59.4%). When compared to a similar study published in 2004, for clinical investigators, no improvement was seen with respect to deviation from the investigational plan and study supervision. However, a significant improvement was seen in reporting of adverse events to IRBs, and some improvement was seen in the area of informed consent. For IRBs, no improvement was seen in most areas which included maintaining and following SOPs, membership, quorum requirements, misuse of expedited review and informed consent. WLs serve as indicators of an active regulatory agency which should translate into greater safety for participants in clinical trials. For developing countries with weak regulatory systems, these can serve as useful learning tools to help improve systems and put in patient safeguards.

  14. 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

  15. 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.

  16. 78 FR 44574 - Third Annual Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-07-24

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

  17. 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.

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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.

  7. Analysis of warning letters issued by the US Food and Drug Administration to clinical investigators, institutional review boards and sponsors: a retrospective study.

    PubMed

    Shetty, Yashashri C; Saiyed, Aafreen A

    2015-05-01

    The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issues warning letters to all research stakeholders if unacceptable deficiencies are found during site visits. Warning letters issued by the FDA between January 2011 and December 2012 to clinical investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) were reviewed for various violation themes and compared to similar studies in the past. Warning letters issued to sponsors between January 2005 and December 2012 were analysed for the first time for a specific set of violations using descriptive statistics. Failure to protect subject safety and to report adverse events to IRBs was found to be significant compared to prior studies for clinical investigators, while failure to follow standard operating procedures and maintain documentation was noted as significant in warning letters to IRBs. Failure to maintain minutes of meeting and to follow written procedures for continuing review were new substantial violations in warning letters issued to IRBs. Forty-six warning letters were issued to sponsors, the most common violations being failure to follow a monitoring schedule (58.69%), failure to obtain investigator agreement (34.78%), failure to secure investigators' compliance (30.43%), and failure to maintain data records and ship documents to investigators (30.43%). Appropriate methods for handling clinical trial procedural violations should be developed and implemented worldwide. 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.

  8. 77 FR 70168 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; The Content of Investigational...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-11-23

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

  9. 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

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

    PubMed

    Kremzner, Mary

    2016-01-01

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

  11. 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.

  12. 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

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

    PubMed

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

    2013-03-11

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

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 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.

  17. Biomedical applications of tissue engineering technology: regulatory issues.

    PubMed

    Hellman, K B

    1995-01-01

    Novel emerging technologies such as tissue engineering, which utilize the approaches of molecular and cell biology, biotechnology, as well as materials science and engineering, are being used in the development of a wide range of biomedical products developed by industries regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA's mission is to promote and protect the public health by ensuring the safety and effectiveness of pharmaceuticals and medical devices, including those manufactured by novel technology, as assessed by scientific principles and methods. Regulatory review is conducted on a product-by-product basis. To accomplish its mission over the wide range of products in its regulatory purview, the FDA has six centers, each staffed with the scientific and regulatory expertise to evaluate the products in the center's jurisdiction. Recent legislative and regulatory changes are designed to simplify and facilitate the administrative process for evaluating novel combination products emanating from such interdisciplinary technology as tissue engineering and to resolve questions of product regulatory jurisdiction. Under the new procedures, the FDA may designate a lead FDA center for product review based on the primary mode of action of the combination product, with additional center(s) designated to assist in the evaluation in a collaborative or consultative capacity. In addition, FDA centers have increased their cooperation and information sharing with regard to evolving interdisciplinary technology. The FDA InterCenter Tissue Engineering Initiative was established to develop information on intercenter efforts in the evaluation of tissue engineering applications and to identify areas for further consideration. The FDA InterCenter Tissue Engineering Working Group, comprised of staff from the Center for Biologies Evaluation and Research (CBER), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), and Center

  18. Cultural Issues in Psychiatric Administration and Leadership.

    PubMed

    Aggarwal, Neil Krishan

    2015-09-01

    This paper addresses cultural issues in psychiatric administration and leadership through two issues: (1) the changing culture of psychiatric practice based on new clinician performance metrics and (2) the culture of psychiatric administration and leadership in light of organizational cultural competence. Regarding the first issue, some observers have discussed the challenges of creating novel practice environments that balance business values of efficient performance with fiduciary values of treatment competence. This paper expands upon this discussion, demonstrating that some metrics from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the nation's largest funder of postgraduate medical training, may penalize clinicians for patient medication behaviors that are unrelated to clinician performance. A focus on pharmacotherapy over psychotherapy in these metrics has unclear consequences for the future of psychiatric training. Regarding the second issue, studies of psychiatric administration and leadership reveal a disproportionate influence of older men in positions of power despite efforts to recruit women, minorities, and immigrants who increasingly constitute the psychiatric workforce. Organizational cultural competence initiatives can diversify institutional cultures so that psychiatric leaders better reflect the populations they serve. In both cases, psychiatric administrators and leaders play critical roles in ensuring that their organizations respond to social challenges.

  19. "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.

  20. 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

  1. Life cycle of medical product rules issued by the US Food and Drug Administration.

    PubMed

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

    2014-08-01

    The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses rulemaking as one of its primary tools to protect the public health and implement laws enacted by Congress and the president. Because of the many effects that these rules have on social welfare and the economy, the FDA and other executive agencies receive input from the executive branch, the public, and in some cases, the courts, during the process of rulemaking. In this article, we examine the life cycle of FDA regulations concerning medical products and review notable features of the rulemaking process. The current system grants substantial opportunities for diverse stakeholders to participate in and influence how rules are written and implemented. However, the duration, complexity, and adversarial qualities of the rulemaking process can hinder the FDA's ability to achieve its policy and public health goals. There is considerable variation in the level of transparency at different stages in the process, ranging from freely accessible public comments to undisclosed internal agency deliberations. In addition, significant medical product rules are associated with lengthy times to finalization, in some cases for unclear reasons. We conclude by identifying potential areas for reform on the basis of transparency and efficiency. Copyright © 2014 by Duke University Press.

  2. 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

  3. Cultural Issues in Psychiatric Administration and Leadership

    PubMed Central

    Aggarwal, Neil Krishan

    2016-01-01

    This paper addresses cultural issues in psychiatric administration and leadership through two issues: (1) the changing culture of psychiatric practice based on new clinician performance metrics and (2) the culture of psychiatric administration and leadership in light of organizational cultural competence. Regarding the first issue, some observers have discussed the challenges of creating novel practice environments that balance business values of efficient performance with fiduciary values of treatment competence. This paper expands upon this discussion, demonstrating that some metrics from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the nation’s largest funder of postgraduate medical training, may penalize clinicians for patient medication behaviors that are unrelated to clinician performance. A focus on pharmacotherapy over psychotherapy in these metrics has unclear consequences for the future of psychiatric training. Regarding the second issue, studies of psychiatric administration and leadership reveal a disproportionate influence of older men in positions of power despite efforts to recruit women, minorities, and immigrants who increasingly constitute the psychiatric workforce. Organizational cultural competence initiatives can diversify institutional cultures so that psychiatric leaders better reflect the populations they serve. In both cases, psychiatric administrators and leaders play critical roles in ensuring that their organizations respond to social challenges. PMID:26071640

  4. 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…

  5. 78 FR 58316 - Complex Issues in Developing Medical Devices for Pediatric Patients Affected by Rare Diseases...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-09-23

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-1073] Complex Issues in Developing Medical Devices for Pediatric Patients Affected by Rare Diseases; Public Workshop; Request for Comments AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop...

  6. 20 CFR 405.325 - Issues before an administrative law judge.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... 20 Employees' Benefits 2 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Issues before an administrative law judge. 405.325 Section 405.325 Employees' Benefits SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW PROCESS FOR ADJUDICATING INITIAL DISABILITY CLAIMS Administrative Law Judge Hearing § 405.325 Issues...

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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

  10. 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 ...

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

    PubMed

    Hamrell, Michael R

    2010-12-01

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

  12. Schedules of Controlled Substances: Placement of FDA-Approved Products of Oral Solutions Containing Dronabinol [(-)-delta-9-transtetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC)] in Schedule II. Interim final rule, with request for comments.

    PubMed

    2017-03-23

    On July 1, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a new drug application for Syndros, a drug product consisting of dronabinol [(-)-delta-9-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta-9-THC)] oral solution. Thereafter, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) with a scheduling recommendation that would result in Syndros (and other oral solutions containing dronabinol) being placed in schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). In accordance with the CSA, as revised by the Improving Regulatory Transparency for New Medical Therapies Act, DEA is hereby issuing an interim final rule placing FDA-approved products of oral solutions containing dronabinol in schedule II of the CSA.

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 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.

  16. 75 FR 11893 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Task Force; Request for Comments

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-03-12

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

  17. 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.

  18. 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...

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

    PubMed

    Rosen, E; Tsesis, I; Vered, M

    2015-10-01

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

  20. 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.

  1. 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.

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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.

  8. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Evaluation of the Safety of Animal Clones: A Failure to Recognize the Normativity of Risk Assessment Projects

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Meghani, Zahra; de Melo-Martin, Inmaculada

    2009-01-01

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced recently that food products derived from some animal clones and their offspring are safe for human consumption. In response to criticism that it had failed to engage with ethical, social, and economic concerns raised by livestock cloning, the FDA argued that addressing normative issues prior to…

  9. Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Warning Letters: False Promotional Claims Relating to Prescription and Over-the-Counter Medications.

    PubMed

    Salas, Maribel; Martin, Michelle; Pisu, Maria; McCall, Erin; Zuluaga, Alvaro; Glasser, Stephen P

    2008-03-01

    Recent studies have suggested that there has been an increase in the number of 'warning letters' issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) despite the publication of the FDA advertising guidelines. However, limited information is available on the description of warning letters. The objective of this study was to analyse the frequency and content of FDA warning letters in relation to promotional claims and discuss the influence of regulatory and industry constraints on promotion. All warning letters published by the FDA between 5 May 1995 and 11 June 2007 were reviewed. Warning letters related to promotional issues were included and analysed. Information related to the identification number, date of the warning letter, FDA division that issued the letter, drug name, manufacturer, specific warning problem, type of promotional material and requested action was extracted. Two independent investigators reviewed and classified each PDF file, any differences were discussed until a consensus was reached. Between May 1995 and June 2007 a total of 8692 warning letters were issued, of which 25% were related to drugs. Of these, 206 warning letters focused on drug promotion and were included in this study: 23% were issued in 2005, 15% in 2004 and 14% in 1998. In total, 47% of the warning letters were issued because of false or misleading unapproved doses and uses, 27% failed to disclose risks, 15% cited misleading promotion, 8% related to misleading labelling and 3% promoted false effectiveness claims. There is an important variation in the number of warning letters issued in the last decade, probably because of the increasing number of drugs approved by the FDA, drug withdrawal scandals, and the publication of the FDA and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) guidelines. We found that benefit-related claims, such as unapproved uses or doses of drugs, and failure to disclose risks, are the main causes of FDA issued warning letters for

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

    PubMed

    2015-09-15

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

  11. 77 FR 55845 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration: Request for Nominations

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-09-11

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

  12. 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- ...

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 75 FR 29561 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and Drugs.Com

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-05-26

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0004] [FDA 225-09-0012] Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and Drugs.Com... Administration (FDA) is providing notice of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and Drugs.Com. The...

  16. 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...

  17. 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.

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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."

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. 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

  6. 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.

  7. 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

  8. 75 FR 21632 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Total Product Life Cycle...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-04-26

    ...] Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Total Product Life Cycle: Infusion... the draft guidance document entitled ``Total Product Life Cycle: Infusion Pump--Premarket Notification... this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing a public meeting regarding external infusion...

  9. 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.

  10. 21 CFR 1271.3 - How does FDA define important terms in this part?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

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

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. 76 FR 55928 - Food and Drug Administration Health Professional Organizations Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-09-09

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

  14. 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.

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

    PubMed

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

    2012-01-01

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

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  18. 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.

  19. 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.

  20. 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.

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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.

  4. 78 FR 76842 - Food and Drug Administration/American Academy of Ophthalmology Workshop on Developing Novel...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-12-19

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

  5. 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.

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 21 CFR 830.110 - Application for accreditation as an issuing agency.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA Accreditation of an Issuing Agency.... (1) An applicant seeking initial FDA accreditation as an issuing agency shall notify FDA of its desire to be accredited by sending a notification by email to [email protected]fda.hhs.gov, or by correspondence to...

  9. 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.

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

    PubMed

    Zineh, Issam; Pacanowski, Michael A

    2011-08-01

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

  11. 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 ...

  12. 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.

  13. Bisphosphonates and Nonhealing Femoral Fractures: Analysis of the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and International Safety Efforts

    PubMed Central

    Edwards, Beatrice J.; Bunta, Andrew D.; Lane, Joseph; Odvina, Clarita; Rao, D. Sudhaker; Raisch, Dennis W.; McKoy, June M.; Omar, Imran; Belknap, Steven M.; Garg, Vishvas; Hahr, Allison J.; Samaras, Athena T.; Fisher, Matthew J.; West, Dennis P.; Langman, Craig B.; Stern, Paula H.

    2013-01-01

    Background: In the United States, hip fracture rates have declined by 30% coincident with bisphosphonate use. However, bisphosphonates are associated with sporadic cases of atypical femoral fracture. Atypical femoral fractures are usually atraumatic, may be bilateral, are occasionally preceded by prodromal thigh pain, and may have delayed fracture-healing. This study assessed the occurrence of bisphosphonate-associated nonhealing femoral fractures through a review of data from the U.S. FDA (Food and Drug Administration) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) (1996 to 2011), published case reports, and international safety efforts. Methods: We analyzed the FAERS database with use of the proportional reporting ratio (PRR) and empiric Bayesian geometric mean (EBGM) techniques to assess whether a safety signal existed. Additionally, we conducted a systematic literature review (1990 to February 2012). Results: The analysis of the FAERS database indicated a PRR of 4.51 (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.44 to 5.92) for bisphosphonate use and nonhealing femoral fractures. Most cases (n = 317) were attributed to use of alendronate (PRR = 3.32; 95% CI, 2.71 to 4.17). In 2008, international safety agencies issued warnings and required label changes. In 2010, the FDA issued a safety notification, and the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) issued recommendations about bisphosphonate-associated atypical femoral fractures. Conclusions: Nonhealing femoral fractures are unusual adverse drug reactions associated with bisphosphonate use, as up to 26% of published cases of atypical femoral fractures exhibited delayed healing or nonhealing. PMID:23426763

  14. 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.

  15. 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

  16. 77 FR 11553 - Draft Guidance on Food and Drug Administration Oversight of Positron Emission Tomography Drug...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-02-27

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0080... Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance entitled ``FDA... that address nearly all aspects of the FDA approval and surveillance processes, including application...

  17. 77 FR 71803 - Guidance on Food and Drug Administration Oversight of Positron Emission Tomography Drug Products...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-12-04

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0080... and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a guidance entitled ``FDA Oversight of... nearly all aspects of the FDA approval and surveillance processes, including application submission...

  18. 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

  19. 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.

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

    PubMed

    Wanasika, Isaac

    2016-03-26

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

  1. 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.

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 75 FR 15439 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-03-29

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

  8. 78 FR 15957 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-03-13

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

  9. 77 FR 10537 - Food and Drug Administration/Xavier University Global Medical Device Conference

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-02-22

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

  10. 77 FR 41413 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Medical Devices: The Pre...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-07-13

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

  11. Regulatory issues with multiplicity in drug approval: Principles and controversies in a changing landscape.

    PubMed

    Benda, Norbert; Brandt, Andreas

    2018-01-01

    Recently, new draft guidelines on multiplicity issues in clinical trials have been issued by European Medicine Agency (EMA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA), respectively. Multiplicity is an issue in clinical trials, if the probability of a false-positive decision is increased by insufficiently accounting for testing multiple hypotheses. We outline the regulatory principles related to multiplicity issues in confirmatory clinical trials intended to support a marketing authorization application in the EU, describe the reasons for an increasing complexity regarding multiple hypotheses testing and discuss the specific multiplicity issues emerging within the regulatory context and being relevant for drug approval.

  12. 21 CFR 830.130 - Suspension or revocation of the accreditation of an issuing agency.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES UNIQUE DEVICE IDENTIFICATION FDA Accreditation of an Issuing Agency § 830.130 Suspension or revocation of the accreditation of an issuing agency. FDA may suspend or revoke the accreditation of an issuing agency if FDA finds, after providing the issuing...

  13. 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

  14. Chromium picolinate intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: an evidence-based review by the United States Food and Drug Administration.

    PubMed

    Trumbo, Paula R; Ellwood, Kathleen C

    2006-08-01

    The labeling of both health claims that meet significant scientific agreement (SSA) and qualified health claims on conventional foods and dietary supplements requires pre-market approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Approval by the FDA involves, in part, a thorough review of the scientific evidence to support an SSA or a qualified health claim. This article discusses FDA's evidence-based review of the scientific evidence on the role of chromium picolinate supplements in reducing the risk of type 2 diabetes. Based on this evidence-based review, FDA issued a letter of enforcement discretion for one qualified health claim on chromium picolinate and risk of insulin resistance, a surrogate endpoint for type 2 diabetes. The agency concluded that the relationship between chromium picolinate intake and insulin resistance is highly uncertain.

  15. 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/

  16. 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.

  17. 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 ...

  18. 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.

  19. 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

  20. Still the Great Debate - "Fair Balance" in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Advertising Comment on "Trouble Spots in Online Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Promotion: A Content Analysis of FDA Warning Letters".

    PubMed

    Rollins, Brent L

    2016-02-10

    The above titled paper examined the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) warning letters and notice of violations (NOV) over a 10-year period. Findings from this content analysis reinforced what has been the primary issue for prescription direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) since its beginning, the fair balance of risk and benefit information. As opposed to another analysis in 2026 about this still being an issue, is there anything that can be done to prevent this problem from continuing? © 2016 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

  1. 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

  2. 77 FR 70166 - Provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act Related to Medical Gases...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-11-23

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

  3. Rural Education Issues: Rural Administrators Speak Out

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Williams, Julia; Nierengarten, Gerry

    2010-01-01

    The purpose of this study was to identify the issues that most affect Minnesota's rural public school administrators as they attempt to fulfill the mandates required from state legislation and communities. A second purpose was to identify exemplary practices valued by individual Minnesota rural schools and districts. Electronic surveys were sent…

  4. Focusing on Staff Development and Administrative Issues.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Kolvitz, Marcia, Ed.

    These four conference papers from the Biennial Conference on Postsecondary Education for Persons who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing focus on staff development and administrative issues for postsecondary personnel working with students with deafness or who are hard of hearing. The first paper, "Mentorship for the Working Interpreter"…

  5. Data Integrity: History, Issues, and Remediation of Issues.

    PubMed

    Rattan, Anil K

    2018-01-01

    Data integrity is critical to regulatory compliance, and the fundamental reason for 21 CFR Part 11 published by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA published the first guideline in 1963, and since then FDA and European Union (EU) have published numerous guidelines on various topics related to data integrity for the pharmaceutical industry. Regulators wanted to make certain that industry capture accurate data during the drug development lifecycle and through commercialization-consider the number of warning letters issued lately by inspectors across the globe on data integrity. This article discusses the history of regulations put forward by various regulatory bodies, the term ALCOA Plus adopted by regulators, the impact of not following regulations, and some prevention methods by using some simple checklists, self-audit, and self-inspection techniques. FDA uses the acronym ALCOA to define its expectations of electronic data. ALCOA stands for Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original, and Accurate. ALCOA was further expanded to ALCOA Plus, and the Plus means Enduring, Available and Accessible, Complete, Consistent, Credible, and Corroborated. If we do not follow the regulations as written, then there is a huge risk. This article covers some of the risk aspects. To prevent data integrity, various solutions can be implemented such as a simple checklist for various systems, self-audit, and self-inspections. To do that we have to develop strategy, people, implement better business processes, and gain a better understanding of data lifecycle as well as technology. LAY ABSTRACT: If one does a Google search on "What is data integrity?" the first page will give the definition of data integrity, how to learn more about data integrity, the history of data integrity, risk management of data integrity, and at the top about various U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Union (EU) regulations. Data integrity is nothing but about accuracy of data

  6. US Food and Drug Administration draft recommendations on radioactive contamination of food

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

    Thompson, D.L.

    Recommendations on accidental radioactive contamination of human food were issued in 1982 by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The recommendations provided guidance to State and local government officials in the exercise of their respective authorities, and were applicable to emergency response planning and to the conduct of radiation protection activities associated with the production, processing, distribution, and use of human food accidentally contaminated with radioactive material. Review of the 1982 FDA recommendations, stimulated by the events following the 1986 accident at Chernobyl, indicated that it would be appropriate to update the recommendations to incorporate newer scientific information and radiationmore » protection philosophy, to include experience gained since 1982, and to take into account international advances. This paper presents a brief outline of the FDA`s approach to its draft revision. the most recent draft was circulated for interagency review in November 1994. Modification made in response to the comments received are included in this paper. 20 refs., 6 tabs.« less

  7. 77 FR 21784 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-04-11

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

  8. 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.

  9. 76 FR 82311 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Food and Drug Administration Report on Good...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-12-30

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2009-N-0247] Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Food and Drug Administration Report on Good Guidance Practices: Improving Efficiency and Transparency; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug...

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

    PubMed

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

    2014-10-01

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

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

    PubMed

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

    2018-04-01

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

  12. 75 FR 17423 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration, United States Department of...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-04-06

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

  13. 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.

  14. 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.

  15. 77 FR 40069 - Single-Ingredient, Immediate-Release Drug Products Containing Oxycodone for Oral Administration...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-07-06

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

  16. 75 FR 13766 - Food and Drug Administration and Process Analytical Technology for Pharma Manufacturing: Food and...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-03-23

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

  17. 75 FR 73107 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Blood Lancet Labeling; Availability

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-11-29

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

  18. 76 FR 78931 - Food and Drug Administration Rare Disease Patient Advocacy Day; Notice of Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-12-20

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

  19. Comparison of content of FDA letters not approving applications for new drugs and associated public announcements from sponsors: cross sectional study

    PubMed Central

    Chahal, Harinder S; Sigelman, Daniel W; Stacy, Sylvie; Sclar, Joshua; Ddamulira, Barbara

    2015-01-01

    Objectives To describe the content of non-public complete response letters issued by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when they do not approve marketing applications from sponsors (drug companies) and to compare them with the content any subsequent press releases issued by those sponsors Design Cross sectional study. Data sources All applications for which FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research initially issued complete response letters (n=61) from 11 August 2008 to 27 June 2013. Complete response letters and press releases were divided into discrete statements related to seven domains and 64 subdomains and assessed to determine whether they matched. Results 48% (29) of complete response letters cited deficiencies in both the safety and efficacy domains, and only 13% cited neither safety nor efficacy deficiencies. No press release was issued for 18% (11) of complete response letters, and 21% (13) of press releases did not match any statements from the letters. Press release statements matched 93 of the 687 statements (14%), including 16% (30/191) of efficacy and 15% (22/150) of safety statements. Of 32 complete response letters that called for a new clinical trial for safety or efficacy, 59% (19) had matching press release statements. Seven complete response letters reported higher mortality rates in treated participants; only one associated press release mentioned this fact. Conclusions FDA generally issued complete response letters to sponsors for multiple substantive reasons, most commonly related to safety and/or efficacy deficiencies. In many cases, press releases were not issued in response to those letters and, when they were, omitted most of the statements in the complete response letters. Press releases are incomplete substitutes for the detailed information contained in complete response letters. PMID:26063327

  20. 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

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. FDA Approves Immunotherapy for a Cancer that Affects Infants and Children | Poster

    Cancer.gov

    By Frank Blanchard, Staff Writer The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently 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 Institute’s (NCI) Biopharmaceutical Development Program (BDP) at the Frederick National

  4. 42 CFR 405.1863 - Administrative policy at issue.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-10-01

    ... 42 Public Health 2 2011-10-01 2011-10-01 false Administrative policy at issue. 405.1863 Section 405.1863 Public Health CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES MEDICARE PROGRAM FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE AGED AND DISABLED Provider Reimbursement...

  5. 42 CFR 405.1863 - Administrative policy at issue.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-10-01

    ... 42 Public Health 2 2010-10-01 2010-10-01 false Administrative policy at issue. 405.1863 Section 405.1863 Public Health CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES MEDICARE PROGRAM FEDERAL HEALTH INSURANCE FOR THE AGED AND DISABLED Provider Reimbursement...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. SmartTots: a public-private partnership between the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the International Anesthesia Research Society (IARS).

    PubMed

    Ramsay, James G; Roizen, Michael

    2012-10-01

    A history of the public-private partnership 'SmartTots' between the IARS and FDA is presented. In order to raise money for research to better understand the relationship between sedative and anesthetic agents and neurotoxicity in the developing brain, the FDA approached the IARS in 2008. A partnership was developed over the following 2 years, then a Scientific Advisory Board was created to develop a research agenda. The IARS contributed $200 000 in 2011 to provide initial funding; 33 proposals were submitted in response to a request for proposals in late 2011 and resulted in the awarding of two, $100 000 grants in 2012. An Executive Board was appointed under the leadership of Michael Roizen to spearhead additional fund-raising efforts, and a director of development is working with Dr. Roizen and the Board to raise funds from individuals and organizations. Dr. Roizen has personally committed to a matching grant for anesthesiologists, up to $50 000 per year for 20 years ($1 million). Readers of the journal are encouraged to go to the website www.smarttots.org in order to better understand the issue, to contribute to the research fund themselves, and to encourage their own professional organizations to partner with SmartTots in fund-raising. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

  12. 78 FR 54901 - Food and Drug Administration/American Academy of Ophthalmology Workshop on Developing Novel...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-09-06

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

  13. 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.

  14. 75 FR 34464 - Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug Administration and Drugs.Com; Correction of...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-17

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

  15. Some Issues of Particular Concern to Sociologists as Academic Administrators

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Wong, Paul

    2008-01-01

    As a sociologist who has served in deanships and other university administrative positions in the past 15 years, the author has been particularly concerned with race/class/gender issues in academia. This paper identified some of the issues and discussed the relevance of sociological training in addressing them.

  16. 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.

  17. 9 CFR 102.1 - Licenses issued by the Administrator.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... biological products under the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act shall hold an unexpired and unrevoked U.S. Veterinary Biologics Establishment License issued by the Administrator and a U.S. Veterinary Biological Product License...

  18. 9 CFR 102.1 - Licenses issued by the Administrator.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... biological products under the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act shall hold an unexpired and unrevoked U.S. Veterinary Biologics Establishment License issued by the Administrator and a U.S. Veterinary Biological Product License...

  19. 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

  20. 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

  1. 77 FR 52744 - Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency Orphan Product Designation and Grant Workshop

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-30

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

  2. 76 FR 9027 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff on Best Practices for...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-02-16

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

  3. Teaching Ethics and Values in Public Administration Programs: Innovations, Strategies, and Issues. SUNY Series in Public Administration.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Bowman, James, Ed.; Menzel, Donald, Ed.

    The 17 chapters in this book consider innovations, teaching strategies, and issues in ethics instruction for professional and graduate programs in public affairs/administration. Following an introductory chapter which summarizes data reported in a 1995 national survey of 138 graduate departments of public affairs/administration, chapter titles…

  4. 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

  5. 77 FR 20826 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Food and Drug Administration and...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-04-06

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

  6. 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.

  7. 75 FR 48699 - Memorandum of Understanding Between United States Food and Drug Administration and the Centers...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-08-11

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

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. Delegations of authority and organization; Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Food and Drug Administration, HHS. Final rule.

    PubMed

    1999-02-02

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the regulations for delegations of authority to reflect redelegations to other officials within the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) pertaining to: Certifying true copies and using the Department seal, disclosing official records, issuing reports of minor violations, and medical device reporting procedures. This amendment is intended to reflect those redelegations.

  11. Recommendations to minimize diagnostic nuclear medicine exposure to the embryo, fetus, and infant; availability of final recommendations--FDA. Notice.

    PubMed

    1986-02-19

    Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of final recommendations to minimize diagnostic nuclear medicine exposure to the embryo, fetus, and breastfeeding infant. The final recommendations, prepared by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), include the agency's rationale for the recommendations as well as the endorsement of the recommendations by several professional organizations. The final recommendations are being published in a pamphlet that is being made available to interested persons.

  12. 78 FR 6824 - Considerations Regarding Food and Drug Administration Review and Regulation of Drugs for the...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-01-31

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

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

    Cancer.gov

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

  14. 76 FR 34715 - Draft Guidance for Industry; Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-06-14

    ... Nanotechnology; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and... ``Considering Whether an FDA-Regulated Product Involves the Application of Nanotechnology''. This guidance is... nanomaterials or otherwise involve the application of nanotechnology. The points to consider are intended to be...

  15. 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

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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.

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. 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...

  12. 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

  13. 78 FR 15017 - Guidance for Industry: What You Need To Know About Administrative Detention of Foods; Small...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-03-08

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0643... Compliance Guide; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a guidance for industry entitled...

  14. 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.

  15. Use of data mining at the Food and Drug Administration.

    PubMed

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

    2016-03-01

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

  16. 75 FR 32490 - Issues in the Development of Medical Products for the Prophylaxis and/or Treatment of Acute...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-08

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0001..., HHS. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing... name, address, telephone, and fax number) to [email protected]fda.hhs.gov . Persons without access to the...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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.

  3. 7 CFR 330.108 - Authority to issue administrative instructions.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE FEDERAL PLANT PEST REGULATIONS; GENERAL; PLANT PESTS; SOIL, STONE, AND QUARRY PRODUCTS; GARBAGE General Provisions § 330.108 Authority to issue... plant pests into the United States or interstate. In addition, whenever the Deputy Administrator shall...

  4. Potential reduction exposure products and FDA tobacco and regulation: a CNS call to action.

    PubMed

    Heath, Janie; Andrews, Jeannette; Balkstra, Cindy R

    2004-01-01

    A new generation of tobacco harm reduction products is stirring controversy and confusion among healthcare providers. These products, known as "potential reduction exposure products" (PREPs), can be described in terms of reported scientific evidence, as "the good, the bad, and the ugly." On the good side, there is sufficient scientific evidence to support the use of Commit, a new over-the-counter nicotine lozenge PREP, approved for smoking cessation. On the bad side, there is no scientific evidence to support the use of Ariva, another over-the-counter nicotine lozenge PREP, marketed as an alternative to cigarettes when smoking is restricted. On the ugly side, both of these PREPs are nicotine delivery systems with "candy-like" appearances; however, one (Commit) has the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and the other (Ariva) does not. This article provides an overview of PREPs and strategies to help clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) address tobacco harm reduction issues.

  5. Food and Drug Administration Regulation of Diabetes-Related mHealth Technologies

    PubMed Central

    Brooke, M. Jason; Thompson, Bradley Merrill

    2013-01-01

    mHealth smartphone applications (apps) offer great promise for managing people with diabetes, as well as those with prediabetes. But to realize that potential, industry needs to get clarity from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the scope of its regulatory oversight. Certain smartphone apps, when properly understood, simply help people live healthier lives, assisting with dietary choices, monitoring exercise, and recording other factors important to overall health. The manufacturers of such apps, in an effort to promote their products but also to educate customers, might wish to explain how using the app can help reduce the risk of developing diabetes. Right now, though, the mere mention of the disease “diabetes” would cause the app to be regulated by the FDA. Such regulation, we submit, discourages the kind of education and motivational messages that our country needs to stem the tide of this disease. Further, should the app simply receive data from a blood glucose meter and graph that data for easier comprehension by the patient, the app would become a class II medical device that requires FDA clearance. Again, we submit that such simple software functionality should not be so discouraged. In this article, we identify the issues that we believe need to be clarified by the FDA in order to unleash the potential of mHealth technology in the diabetes space. PMID:23566984

  6. Trends in internet search activity, media coverage, and patient-centered health information after the FDA safety communications on surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse.

    PubMed

    Stone, Benjamin V; Forde, James C; Levit, Valerie B; Lee, Richard K; Te, Alexis E; Chughtai, Bilal

    2016-11-01

    In July 2011, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a safety communication regarding serious complications associated with surgical mesh for pelvic organ prolapse, prompting increased media and public attention. This study sought to analyze internet search activity and news article volume after this FDA warning and to evaluate the quality of websites providing patient-centered information. Google Trends™ was utilized to evaluate search engine trends for the term "pelvic organ prolapse" and associated terms between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2014. Google News™ was utilized to quantify the number of news articles annually under the term "pelvic organ prolapse." The search results for the term "pelvic organ prolapse" were assessed for quality using the Health On the Net Foundation (HON) certification. There was a significant increase in search activity from 37.42 in 2010 to 57.75 in 2011, at the time of the FDA communication (p = 0.021). No other annual interval had a statistically significant increase in search activity. The single highest monthly search activity, given the value of 100, was August 2011, immediately following the July 2011 notification, with the next highest value being 98 in July 2011. Linear regression analysis of news articles per year since the FDA communication revealed r 2  = 0.88, with a coefficient of 186. Quality assessment demonstrated that 42 % of websites were HON-certified, with .gov sites providing the highest quality information. Although the 2011 FDA safety communication on surgical mesh was associated with increased public and media attention, the quality of relevant health information on the internet remains of poor quality. Future quality assurance measures may be critical in enabling patients to play active roles in their own healthcare.

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

    PubMed Central

    Laughren, Thomas; Levin, Robert

    2006-01-01

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

  8. 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

    , selection of clinical research operations contractor, data capturing and management, and annual reporting of results to FDA were successfully completed. Protocol 002-A was completed and sample and data analysis is currently in progress. Protocol 002-B is currently in progress at Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center and Protocol 002-C has been submitted to the FDA and will be implemented at the same contractor site as 002-A. An annual report was filed as required by FDA on the results of Protocol 002-A. Once all the three Phase II protocols are completed, a New Drug Administration application will be filed with FDA for Phase III clinical assessment and approval for marketing of the formulation. A commercial vendor will be identified for this phase. This is critical for making this available for treatment of SMS in astronauts and military personnel on duty. Once approved by FDA, INSCOP can be also used by civilian population for motion sickness associated with recreational travel and other ailments that require treatment with anticholinergic drugs.

  9. 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.

  10. 78 FR 36711 - Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act Title VII-Drug Supply Chain; Standards for...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-06-19

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

  11. 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

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

    PubMed

    1998-05-18

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the regulations for delegations of authority to reflect a new delegation that authorizes the Division Directors, Office of Device Evaluation (ODE), Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) to approve, disapprove, or withdraw approval of product development protocols and applications for premarket approval for medical devices.

  13. 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.

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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.

  4. Controversial Issues in Public School Administration: Outline for an Inclusive Institute.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Bruno-Jofre, Rosa; Young, Jonathan

    During 1993-94 the educational administration faculty at the University of Manitoba (Canada) became involved in a self-study process to examine issues of equality and inclusivity in relation to the masters program. This paper describes an elective course for students enrolled in the Educational Administration Master's Program at the University of…

  5. 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...

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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.

  11. Critical Issues that Face Tertiary Education Institutions and Administration.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Williams, Gareth

    1983-01-01

    Issues of the university's role in social and economic progress, educational demand, employment needs and patterns, changes in instructional methods, research, and managing change without growth are discussed. The need to extract long-term policy needs from the multiplicity of short-term administrative demands is examined. (MSE)

  12. 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.

  13. 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

  14. FDA's Approach to Regulating Biosimilars.

    PubMed

    Lemery, Steven J; Ricci, M Stacey; Keegan, Patricia; McKee, Amy E; Pazdur, Richard

    2017-04-15

    The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation (BPCI) Act, enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act, created a new licensure pathway for biological products demonstrated to be biosimilar with or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed biological product (the "reference product"). The FDA's approach to the regulation of biosimilars is based on the requirements set forth in the BPCI Act. A biosimilar product is highly similar to the reference product, notwithstanding minor differences in clinically inactive components, and there are no clinically meaningful differences between products in terms of safety, purity, and potency. The foundation of a biosimilar development program is an analytic similarity assessment that directly compares the structural/physiochemical and functional properties of the proposed biosimilar with the reference product. Data from clinical studies, which include an assessment of immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, are used to assess for clinically meaningful differences and not to independently establish the safety and effectiveness of the biosimilar. Like all products that the FDA regulates, the FDA requires that biosimilar products meet the agency's rigorous standards of safety and efficacy for approval. That means patients and health care professionals are able to rely upon the safety and effectiveness of biosimilar products in the same manner as for the reference product. Clin Cancer Res; 23(8); 1882-5. ©2016 AACR . ©2016 American Association for Cancer Research.

  15. 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.

  16. 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.

  17. FDA Approves Immunotherapy for a Cancer that Affects Infants and Children | Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research

    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

  18. 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.

  19. Measurement issues associated with using survey data matched with administrative data from the Social Security Administration.

    PubMed

    Davies, Paul S; Fisher, T Lynn

    2009-01-01

    Researchers using survey data matched with administrative data benefit from the rich demographic and economic detail available from survey data combined with detailed programmatic data from administrative records. The research benefits of using these matched data are too numerous to mention. But there are drawbacks as well, and those drawbacks have received less systematic attention from researchers. We focus on survey data matched with administrative data from the Social Security Administration and address the strengths and weaknesses of each in four specific areas: (1) program participation and benefits, (2) disability and health information, (3) earnings, and (4) deferred compensation. We discuss the implications of these strengths and weaknesses for decisions that researchers must make regarding the appropriate data source and definition for the concepts in question. From this discussion, some general conclusions are drawn about measurement issues associated with using matched survey and administrative data for research, policy evaluation, and statistics.

  20. Food and Drug Administration Evaluation and Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

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

    2011-01-01

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

  1. Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration as a Tobacco Regulator

    PubMed Central

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

    2017-01-01

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

  2. Radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies (for the radiology administrator).

    PubMed

    Wahl, R

    1992-11-01

    Cheaper, faster, safer, these are not the attributes of 1993 automobiles, but criteria for new diagnostic tests in medicine. To achieve these characteristics, medicine is increasingly looking to biotechnology for answers. And the mother of all biotechnology is monoclonal antibody research. In past issues, Administrative Radiology published articles discussing the role of biotechnology in the development of radiopharmaceuticals used in nuclear medicine. In this issue, Richard Wahl, M.D., reviews, in plain talk, the current status and prospects for diagnostic imaging with radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies. Are there any such procedures of value today? Are there any that are FDA approved? Will there ever be such agents that are either useful or approved? If so, will any insurance carrier pay for them? For the answers to these and other "hot" questions, the reader is encouraged to continue on and read this month's Technology Review section.

  3. 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.

  4. 75 FR 32483 - Prescription Drug User Fee Act; Meetings on Reauthorization; Request for Notification of...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-08

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0128... participation. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing this notice to request that public... academic experts--notify FDA of their intent to participate in periodic consultation meetings on...

  5. 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.

  6. 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.

  7. 17 CFR 3.63 - Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. A copy of any order issued pursuant to... 17 Commodity and Securities Exchanges 1 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. 3.63 Section 3.63 Commodity and Securities Exchanges COMMODITY...

  8. 17 CFR 3.63 - Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-04-01

    ... order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. A copy of any order issued pursuant to... 17 Commodity and Securities Exchanges 1 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. 3.63 Section 3.63 Commodity and Securities Exchanges COMMODITY...

  9. 17 CFR 3.63 - Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-04-01

    ... order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. A copy of any order issued pursuant to... 17 Commodity and Securities Exchanges 1 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. 3.63 Section 3.63 Commodity and Securities Exchanges COMMODITY...

  10. 17 CFR 3.63 - Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-04-01

    ... order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. A copy of any order issued pursuant to... 17 Commodity and Securities Exchanges 1 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. 3.63 Section 3.63 Commodity and Securities Exchanges COMMODITY...

  11. 17 CFR 3.63 - Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-04-01

    ... order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. A copy of any order issued pursuant to... 17 Commodity and Securities Exchanges 1 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Service of order issued by an Administrative Law Judge or the Commission. 3.63 Section 3.63 Commodity and Securities Exchanges COMMODITY...

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

    PubMed

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

    2007-01-01

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

  13. Technology and Education: Issues in Administration, Policy and Applications in K12 Schools. (Advances in Educational Administration, Volume 8)

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Tettegah, Sharon Y., Ed.; Hunter, Richard C, Ed.

    2006-01-01

    In today's society where most students own MP3 players, engage in constant instant messaging and downloading from the Internet, more than ever school administrators and staff should be aware of issues in administration, policy, and applications. This book provides a comprehensive presentation of current policies and practices of technology in…

  14. 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...

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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

  20. 21 CFR 880.5440 - Intravascular administration set.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 8 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Intravascular administration set. 880.5440 Section 880.5440 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES... Compounding Systems; Final Guidance for Industry and FDA Reviewers.” Pharmacy compounding systems classified...

  1. 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.

  2. In and across bureaucracy: structural and administrative issues for the tobacco endgame.

    PubMed

    Isett, Kimberley R

    2013-05-01

    This article assesses the structural choices for the proposed tobacco endgame strategies. I focus on the issues associated with particular structural choices for the location of the implementation. Specifically, I discuss issues related to implementation of the endgame within a specific single agency, and issues related to a more widespread, broad implementation involving several agencies. Where appropriate, I provide examples of how the dynamics discussed would apply to particular endgame strategies. Issues related to design, administration, authority and finances are raised.

  3. In and across bureaucracy: structural and administrative issues for the tobacco endgame

    PubMed Central

    Isett, Kimberley R

    2013-01-01

    This article assesses the structural choices for the proposed tobacco endgame strategies. I focus on the issues associated with particular structural choices for the location of the implementation. Specifically, I discuss issues related to implementation of the endgame within a specific single agency, and issues related to a more widespread, broad implementation involving several agencies. Where appropriate, I provide examples of how the dynamics discussed would apply to particular endgame strategies. Issues related to design, administration, authority and finances are raised. PMID:23591514

  4. 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.

  5. NCI and FDA to Study Cancer Proteogenomics Together | Office of Cancer Clinical Proteomics Research

    Cancer.gov

    The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Office of Cancer Clinical Proteomics Research (OCCPR), part of the National Institutes of Health, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in proteogenomic regulatory science.  This will allow the agencies to share information that will accelerate the development of proteogenomic technologies and biomarkers, as it relates to precision medicine in cancer.

  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. Research misconduct identified by the US Food and Drug Administration: out of sight, out of mind, out of the peer-reviewed literature.

    PubMed

    Seife, Charles

    2015-04-01

    Every year, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspects several hundred clinical sites performing biomedical research on human participants and occasionally finds evidence of substantial departures from good clinical practice and research misconduct. However, the FDA has no systematic method of communicating these findings to the scientific community, leaving open the possibility that research misconduct detected by a government agency goes unremarked in the peer-reviewed literature. To identify published clinical trials in which an FDA inspection found significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices, to describe violations, and to determine whether the violations are mentioned in the peer-reviewed literature. Cross-sectional analysis of publicly available documents, dated from January 1, 1998, to September 30, 2013, describing FDA inspections of clinical trial sites in which significant evidence of objectionable conditions or practices was found. For each inspection document that could be linked to a specific published clinical trial, the main measure was a yes/no determination of whether there was mention in the peer-reviewed literature of problems the FDA had identified. Fifty-seven published clinical trials were identified for which an FDA inspection of a trial site had found significant evidence of 1 or more of the following problems: falsification or submission of false information, 22 trials (39%); problems with adverse events reporting, 14 trials (25%); protocol violations, 42 trials (74%); inadequate or inaccurate recordkeeping, 35 trials (61%); failure to protect the safety of patients and/or issues with oversight or informed consent, 30 trials (53%); and violations not otherwise categorized, 20 trials (35%). Only 3 of the 78 publications (4%) that resulted from trials in which the FDA found significant violations mentioned the objectionable conditions or practices found during the inspection. No corrections, retractions, expressions

  10. 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

  11. 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 ...

  12. 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 ...

  13. FDA Approves Immunotherapy for a Cancer that Affects Infants and Children | Poster

    Cancer.gov

    By Frank Blanchard, Staff Writer The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently 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 Institute’s (NCI) Biopharmaceutical Development Program (BDP) at the Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research produced ch14.18 for the NCI-sponsored clinical trials that proved the drug’s effectiveness against the disease.

  14. 75 FR 32952 - Draft Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; “‘Harmful and Potentially...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-06-10

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

  15. 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.

  16. 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.

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. School Transportation Issues, Laws and Concerns: Implications for Future Administrators

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Durick, Jody M.

    2010-01-01

    Nearly all building administrators are confronted with a variety of transportation issues. Challenges, concerns and questions can arise from various aspects, including student misbehaviors, transportation laws and its implications at the school level, to importance and implementation of a school bus safety program. As new and upcoming future…

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

    PubMed

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

    2007-01-01

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

  4. FDA-EPA Public Health Guidance on Fish Consumption: A Case Study on Informal Interagency Cooperation in "Shared Regulatory Space".

    PubMed

    Holden, Mark

    2015-01-01

    This article is a case study on how administrative agencies interact with each other in cases of shared regulatory jurisdiction. The theoretical literature on the topic of overlapping jurisdiction both (1) makes predictions about how agencies are expected to behave when they share jurisdiction, and (2) in recent iterations argues that overlapping jurisdiction can confer unique policymaking benefits. Through the lens of that theoretical literature, this article examines the relations between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding the public health risks posed by mercury in fish. It concludes that the FDA-EPA case study (1) corroborates the extant theoretical accounts of how agencies behave in cases of overlapping jurisdiction, (2) supports the conclusion of the recent scholarship that overlapping jurisdiction can confer unique policy benefits, and (3) reveals a few wrinkles not given adequate treatment in the extant literature.

  5. 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/

  6. 10 CFR 35.7 - FDA, other Federal, and State requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2011-01-01 2011-01-01 false FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. 35.7 Section....7 FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. Nothing in this part relieves the licensee from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing radioactive drugs or devices. ...

  7. 10 CFR 35.7 - FDA, other Federal, and State requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

    2010-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2010-01-01 2010-01-01 false FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. 35.7 Section....7 FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. Nothing in this part relieves the licensee from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing radioactive drugs or devices. ...

  8. 10 CFR 35.7 - FDA, other Federal, and State requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

    2012-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2012-01-01 2012-01-01 false FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. 35.7 Section....7 FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. Nothing in this part relieves the licensee from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing radioactive drugs or devices. ...

  9. 10 CFR 35.7 - FDA, other Federal, and State requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

    2014-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2014-01-01 2014-01-01 false FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. 35.7 Section....7 FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. Nothing in this part relieves the licensee from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing radioactive drugs or devices. ...

  10. 10 CFR 35.7 - FDA, other Federal, and State requirements.

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-01-01

    ... 10 Energy 1 2013-01-01 2013-01-01 false FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. 35.7 Section....7 FDA, other Federal, and State requirements. Nothing in this part relieves the licensee from complying with applicable FDA, other Federal, and State requirements governing radioactive drugs or devices. ...

  11. US Food and Drug Administration Perspectives on Clinical Mass Spectrometry.

    PubMed

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

    2016-01-01

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

  12. 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.

  13. 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.

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

    PubMed

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

    2016-10-01

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

  15. 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.

  16. 77 FR 39245 - Sami Arshak Yanikian: Debarment Order

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-07-02

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0063] Sami Arshak Yanikian: Debarment Order AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an order under the Federal Food, Drug, and...

  17. Implementation Issues of a Standards-Based Teacher Evaluation System: Perceptions of Campus Administrators

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    Nixon, Lisa

    2013-01-01

    The purpose of this mixed methods study was to determine the key implementation issues of a standards-based teacher evaluation system as perceived by campus administrators. The 80 campus administrators that participated in this study were from six public school districts located in southeastern Texas that serve students in grades Kindergarten…

  18. 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.

  19. Brief report on the United States Food and Drug Administration Blood Products Advisory Committee recommendations for management of donors and units testing positive for hepatitis B virus DNA.

    PubMed

    Lucey, C

    2006-11-01

    This article briefly recounts the 21st July 2005, Blood Products Advisory Committee (BPAC) meeting concerning recommendations for management of donors and units testing positive for hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA. The author attended the meeting. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) web site was used for meeting materials, and handouts were collected at the meeting to provide narrative information. Two European experts assisted with HBV subject matter. The proceedings of the advisory committee, the issue briefing materials, and testing algorithms are presented. BPAC voted concurrence with the FDA algorithm for Management of Donors and Units Testing Positive for Hepatitis B Virus DNA.

  20. 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...

  1. 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...

  2. 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...

  3. 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...

  4. 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...

  5. 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.

  6. 78 FR 14304 - Adrian Vela: Debarment Order

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-03-05

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0777] Adrian Vela: Debarment Order AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an order under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the...

  7. 77 FR 26766 - Karen L. Blyth: Debarment Order

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-05-07

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0880] Karen L. Blyth: Debarment Order AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an order under the Federal Food, Drug, and...

  8. 77 FR 26765 - David H.M. Phelps: Debarment Order

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-05-07

    ... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0879] David H.M. Phelps: Debarment Order AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an order under the Federal Food, Drug, and...

  9. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics in drug development and regulatory decision making: report of the first FDA-PWG-PhRMA-DruSafe Workshop.

    PubMed

    Lesko, Lawrence J; Salerno, Ronald A; Spear, Brian B; Anderson, Donald C; Anderson, Timothy; Brazell, Celia; Collins, Jerry; Dorner, Andrew; Essayan, David; Gomez-Mancilla, Baltazar; Hackett, Joseph; Huang, Shiew-Mei; Ide, Susan; Killinger, Joanne; Leighton, John; Mansfield, Elizabeth; Meyer, Robert; Ryan, Stephen G; Schmith, Virginia; Shaw, Peter; Sistare, Frank; Watson, Mark; Worobec, Alexandra

    2003-04-01

    The use of pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics in the drug development process, and in the assessment of such data submitted to regulatory agencies by industry, has generated significant enthusiasm as well as important reservations within the scientific and medical communities. This situation has arisen because of the increasing number of exploratory and confirmatory investigations into variations in RNA expression patterns and DNA sequences being conducted in the preclinical and clinical phases of drug development, and the uncertainty surrounding the acceptance of these data by regulatory agencies. This report summarizes the outcome of a workshop cosponsored by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Pharmacogenetics Working Group (PWG), the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), and the PhRMA Preclinical Safety Committee (DruSafe). The specific aim of the workshop was to identify key issues associated with the application of pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics, including the feasibility of a regulatory "safe harbor" for exploratory genome-based data, and to provide a forum for industry-regulatory agency dialogue on these important issues.

  10. 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.

  11. A tale of two citizens: a State Attorney General and a hematologist facilitate translation of research into US Food and Drug Administration actions--a SONAR report.

    PubMed

    Chen, Brian; Restaino, John; Norris, LeAnn; Xirasagar, Sudha; Qureshi, Zaina P; McKoy, June M; Lopez, Isaac S; Trenery, Alyssa; Murday, Alanna; Kahn, Adam; Mattison, Donald R; Ray, Paul; Sartor, Oliver; Bennett, Charles L

    2012-11-01

    Pharmaceutical safety is a public health issue. In 2005, the Connecticut Attorney General (AG) raised concerns over adverse drug reactions in off-label settings, noting that thalidomide was approved to treat a rare illness, but more than 90% of its use was off label. A hematologist had reported thalidomide with doxorubicin or dexamethasone was associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates of 25%. We review US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and manufacturer responses to a citizen petition filed to address these thalidomide safety issues. Case study. The AG petitioned the FDA requesting thalidomide-related safety actions. Coincidentally, the manufacturer submitted a supplemental New Drug Approval (sNDA), requesting approval to treat multiple myeloma with thalidomide-dexamethasone. FDA safety officers reviewed the petition and the literature and noted that VTE risks with thalidomide were not appropriately addressed in the existing package insert. In the sNDA application, the manufacturer reported thalidomide-associated toxicities for multiple myeloma were primarily somnolence and neurotoxicity, and a proposed package insert did not focus on VTE risks. In October, the FDA informed the Oncology Drug Division that VTE risks with thalidomide were poorly addressed in the existing label. After reviewing this memorandum, an Oncology Drug Division reviewer informed the manufacturer that approval of the sNDA would be delayed until several thalidomide-associated VTE safety actions, including revisions of the package insert, were implemented. The manufacturer and FDA agreed on these actions, and the sNDA was approved. New approaches addressing off-label safety are needed. The conditions that facilitated the successful response to this citizen petition are uncommon.

  12. 77 FR 43846 - Food and Drug Administration Pediatric Medical Devices Workshop; Notice of Workshop

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-07-26

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

  13. 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

  14. New FDA-Approved Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis.

    PubMed

    English, Clayton; Aloi, Joseph J

    2015-04-01

    Interferon injectables and glatiramer acetate have served as the primary disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS) since their introduction in the 1990s and are first-line treatments for relapsing-remitting forms of MS (RRMS). Many new drug therapies were launched since early 2010, expanding the drug treatment options considerably in a disease state that once had a limited treatment portfolio. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the safety profile and efficacy data of disease-modifying agents for MS approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2010 to the present and provide cost and available pharmacoeconomic data about each new treatment. Peer-reviewed clinical trials, pharmacoeconomic studies, and relevant pharmacokinetic/pharmacologic studies were identified from MEDLINE (January 2000-December 2014) by using the search terms multiple sclerosis, fingolimod, teriflunomide, alemtuzumab, dimethyl fumarate, pegylated interferon, peginterferon beta-1a, glatiramer 3 times weekly, and pharmacoeconomics. Citations from available articles were also reviewed for additional references. The databases publically available at www.clinicaltrials.gov and www.fda.gov were searched for unpublished studies or studies currently in progress. A total of 5 new agents and 1 new dosage formulation were approved by the FDA for the treatment of RRMS since 2010. Peginterferon beta-1a and high-dose glatiramer acetate represent 2 new effective injectable options for MS that reduce burden of administration seen with traditional interferon and low-dose glatiramer acetate. Fingolimod, teriflunomide, and dimethyl fumarate represent new oral agents available for MS, and their efficacy in reducing annualized relapse rates is 48% to 55%, 22% to 36.3%, and 44% to 53%, respectively, compared with placebo. Alemtuzumab is a biologic given over a 2-year span that reduced annualized relapse rates by 55% in treatment-naive patients and by 49% in patients

  15. 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.

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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...

  1. 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/.

  2. 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.

  3. 75 FR 16345 - Administrative Practices and Procedures; Good Guidance Practices; Technical Amendment

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-04-01

    .... FDA-1999-N-3539] (formerly Docket No. 1999N-4783) Administrative Practices and Procedures; Good Guidance Practices; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule... Subjects in 21 CFR Part 10 Administrative practice and procedure, News media. 0 Therefore, under the...

  4. The US FDA and animal cloning: risk and regulatory approach.

    PubMed

    Rudenko, Larisa; Matheson, John C

    2007-01-01

    The Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Center for Veterinary Medicine issued a voluntary request to producers of livestock clones not to introduce food from clones or their progeny into commerce until the agency had assessed whether production of cattle, swine, sheep, or goats by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) posed any unique risks to the animal(s) involved in the process, humans, or other animals by consuming food from those animals, compared with any other assisted reproductive technology (ART) currently in use. Following a comprehensive review, no anomalies were observed in animals produced by cloning that have not also been observed in animals produced by other ARTs and natural mating. Further systematic review on the health of, and composition of meat and milk from, cattle, swine, and goat clones and the progeny of cattle and sheep did not result in the identification of any food-consumption hazards. The agency therefore concluded that food from cattle, swine, and goat clones was as safe to eat as food from animals of those species derived by conventional means. The agency also concluded that food from the progeny of the clone of any species normally consumed for food is as safe to eat as those animals. The article also describes the methodology used by the agency to analyze data and draw these conclusions, the plans the agency has proposed to manage any identified risks, and the risk communication approaches the agency has used.

  5. 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)

  6. 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...

  7. 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...

  8. 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...

  9. 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...

  10. 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...

  11. FDA advisory committees meet January 26 on Salk HIV-1 immunogen.

    PubMed

    1995-01-06

    Two advisory committees of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will meet to consider future trials of the HIV-1 immunogen developed by Dr. Jonas Salk. The Immune Response Corporation has already conducted several studies of the immunogen, and has found improvement in various immunological and other blood tests, and no adverse effects. However, the studies have not been large enough to show conclusively that the treatment has clinical benefit in delaying disease progression. The new, larger trials are intended to demonstrate a delay in disease progression and validate the use of blood-test markers of disease progression for studying an immune-based treatment.

  12. Statistical innovations in the medical device world sparked by the FDA.

    PubMed

    Campbell, Gregory; Yue, Lilly Q

    2016-01-01

    The world of medical devices while highly diverse is extremely innovative, and this facilitates the adoption of innovative statistical techniques. Statisticians in the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have provided leadership in implementing statistical innovations. The innovations discussed include: the incorporation of Bayesian methods in clinical trials, adaptive designs, the use and development of propensity score methodology in the design and analysis of non-randomized observational studies, the use of tipping-point analysis for missing data, techniques for diagnostic test evaluation, bridging studies for companion diagnostic tests, quantitative benefit-risk decisions, and patient preference studies.

  13. 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

  14. 78 FR 35937 - Food and Drug Administration Decisions for Investigational Device Exemption Clinical...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-06-14

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

  15. FDA perspective on objective performance goals and clinical trial design for evaluating catheter-based treatment of critical limb ischemia.

    PubMed

    Kumar, Allison; Brooks, Steven S; Cavanaugh, Kenneth; Zuckerman, Bram

    2009-12-01

    The article by Conte et al.(1) on behalf of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) in this issue of the Journal of Vascular Surgery provides guidelines for improving the consistency and interpretability of clinical trials intended to evaluate treatment options for patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). This article identifies a number of key challenges with conducting and comparing CLI trials, including the wide spectrum of clinical presentations that CLI encompasses, the use of disparate eligibility criteria and endpoint measurements, and logistical and economic considerations that can limit study initiation and completion. The authors propose definitions for a number of performance goals derived from historical surgical literature as a means of reducing the negative impact of these factors. The current editorial reviews aspects of this proposal from the perspective of the authors in terms of their understanding of the statutory obligations of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate the marketing of cardiovascular devices based on valid scientific evidence.

  16. How Many Batches Are Needed for Process Validation under the New FDA Guidance?

    PubMed

    Yang, Harry

    2013-01-01

    The newly updated FDA Guidance for Industry on Process Validation: General Principles and Practices ushers in a life cycle approach to process validation. While the guidance no longer considers the use of traditional three-batch validation appropriate, it does not prescribe the number of validation batches for a prospective validation protocol, nor does it provide specific methods to determine it. This potentially could leave manufacturers in a quandary. In this paper, I develop a Bayesian method to address the issue. By combining process knowledge gained from Stage 1 Process Design (PD) with expected outcomes of Stage 2 Process Performance Qualification (PPQ), the number of validation batches for PPQ is determined to provide a high level of assurance that the process will consistently produce future batches meeting quality standards. Several examples based on simulated data are presented to illustrate the use of the Bayesian method in helping manufacturers make risk-based decisions for Stage 2 PPQ, and they highlight the advantages of the method over traditional Frequentist approaches. The discussions in the paper lend support for a life cycle and risk-based approach to process validation recommended in the new FDA guidance. The newly updated FDA Guidance for Industry on Process Validation: General Principles and Practices ushers in a life cycle approach to process validation. While the guidance no longer considers the use of traditional three-batch validation appropriate, it does not prescribe the number of validation batches for a prospective validation protocol, nor does it provide specific methods to determine it. This potentially could leave manufacturers in a quandary. In this paper, I develop a Bayesian method to address the issue. By combining process knowledge gained from Stage 1 Process Design (PD) with expected outcomes of Stage 2 Process Performance Qualification (PPQ), the number of validation batches for PPQ is determined to provide a high level of

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

    PubMed

    Carpentier, Francesca Renee Dillman

    2016-02-09

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

  18. 78 FR 55728 - Society of Clinical Research Associates-Food and Drug Administration: Food and Drug...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-09-11

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

  19. Quality assurance in nuclear medicine facilities; availability of final recommendations--FDA. Notice.

    PubMed

    1985-05-13

    The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of final recommendations prepared by its Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) on quality assurance programs in nuclear medicine facilities. The final recommendations include the agency's rationale for the recommendations as well as references that can be used as well as references that can be used as guides in conducting quality control monitoring. These final recommendations are available as a technical report in CDRH's radiation recommendations series. They are intended to encourage and promote the development of voluntary quality assurance programs in nuclear medicine facilities.

  20. 32 CFR Appendix C to Part 22 - Administrative Requirements and Issues To Be Addressed in Award Terms and Conditions

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

    2013-07-01

    ... 32 National Defense 1 2013-07-01 2013-07-01 false Administrative Requirements and Issues To Be Addressed in Award Terms and Conditions C Appendix C to Part 22 National Defense Department of Defense... AND ADMINISTRATION Pt. 22, App. C Appendix C to Part 22—Administrative Requirements and Issues To Be...

  1. A review of the progress and pitfalls of FDA policy process: Planning a pathway for pharmaceutical interventions for hearing loss development.

    PubMed

    Hammill, Tanisha L

    2017-06-01

    The Federal Food and Drug Administration, or FDA is generally considered a powerful gatekeeper, able to deliver or withhold life-saving cures and create or destroy economic windfalls. As the decades go by, and technologies, diseases, public health demands, and politics evolve, we can identify patterns of change, action and inter-action among some of these traditional stakeholders in the FDA's policy sphere. A careful examination of this agency's colorful history can shed light on central features of the agency's policy process, which has been quite receptive to its stakeholders and adaptive to change over the decades and, in turn, show the way for development in lanes which do not fit neatly into the current paradigms offered by the agency. This paper will explore the history of FDA policy process, through examination of seminal moments in FDA history, the prominent actors and focusing events within them, and the outcomes of those events, in an attempt to illuminate a pattern of behavior or processes by which a struggling field of pharmaceutical development such as interventions for hearing loss can advance. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

  2. 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.

  3. Proton-pump inhibitors in patients requiring antiplatelet therapy: new FDA labeling.

    PubMed

    Johnson, David A; Chilton, Robert; Liker, Harley R

    2014-05-01

    Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are recommended for patients who require antiplatelet therapy and have a history of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Proton-pump inhibitors should also be considered for patients receiving antiplatelet therapy who have other risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding, including use of aspirin. Thus, evidence of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between PPIs and consequent impaired effectiveness of the antiplatelet agent clopidogrel has caused concern. Here, we discuss comparative studies suggesting that the extent to which a PPI reduces exposure to the active metabolite of clopidogrel and attenuates its antithrombotic effect differs among PPIs. Although a clinically meaningful effect of the interaction between PPIs and clopidogrel on cardiovascular outcomes has not been established, these studies provided the basis for recent changes in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling for several PPIs and clopidogrel. New labeling suggests that PPI use among patients taking clopidogrel be limited to pantoprazole, rabeprazole, lansoprazole, or dexlansoprazole. Because comparative studies indicate that omeprazole and esomeprazole have a greater effect on the CYP2C19-mediated conversion of clopidogrel to its active metabolite and, consequently, clopidogrel's effect on platelet reactivity, FDA labeling recommends avoiding omeprazole and esomeprazole in patients taking clopidogrel. Even a 12-hour separation of dosing does not appear to prevent drug interactions between omeprazole and clopidogrel.

  4. 76 FR 61565 - Preemption Review

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-10-05

    .... FDA-2011-N-0527] Preemption Review AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notification of preemption review. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that it has determined, after conducting a review of its existing regulations issued within the past 10 years that contain...

  5. America's People: An Imperiled Resource. National Urban Policy Issues for a New Federal Administration.

    ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

    National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, Washington, DC.

    This report seeks to identify and make policy recommendations concerning major urban issues confronting the Bush Administration. The Division of Urban Affairs of the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC) established working groups and commissioned papers on the following six key urban policy issues: (1)…

  6. 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

  7. 76 FR 61366 - Food and Drug Administration Transparency Initiative: Draft Proposals for Public Comment to...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-10-04

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

  8. A Tale of Two Citizens: A State Attorney General and a Hematologist Facilitate Translation of Research Into US Food and Drug Administration Actions—A SONAR Report

    PubMed Central

    Chen, Brian; Restaino, John; Norris, LeAnn; Xirasagar, Sudha; Qureshi, Zaina P.; McKoy, June M.; Lopez, Isaac S.; Trenery, Alyssa; Murday, Alanna; Kahn, Adam; Mattison, Donald R.; Ray, Paul; Sartor, Oliver; Bennett, Charles L.

    2012-01-01

    Purpose: Pharmaceutical safety is a public health issue. In 2005, the Connecticut Attorney General (AG) raised concerns over adverse drug reactions in off-label settings, noting that thalidomide was approved to treat a rare illness, but more than 90% of its use was off label. A hematologist had reported thalidomide with doxorubicin or dexamethasone was associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates of 25%. We review US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and manufacturer responses to a citizen petition filed to address these thalidomide safety issues. Methods: Case study. Results: The AG petitioned the FDA requesting thalidomide-related safety actions. Coincidentally, the manufacturer submitted a supplemental New Drug Approval (sNDA), requesting approval to treat multiple myeloma with thalidomide-dexamethasone. FDA safety officers reviewed the petition and the literature and noted that VTE risks with thalidomide were not appropriately addressed in the existing package insert. In the sNDA application, the manufacturer reported thalidomide-associated toxicities for multiple myeloma were primarily somnolence and neurotoxicity, and a proposed package insert did not focus on VTE risks. In October, the FDA informed the Oncology Drug Division that VTE risks with thalidomide were poorly addressed in the existing label. After reviewing this memorandum, an Oncology Drug Division reviewer informed the manufacturer that approval of the sNDA would be delayed until several thalidomide-associated VTE safety actions, including revisions of the package insert, were implemented. The manufacturer and FDA agreed on these actions, and the sNDA was approved. Conclusion: New approaches addressing off-label safety are needed. The conditions that facilitated the successful response to this citizen petition are uncommon. PMID:23598851

  9. 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.

  10. 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.

  11. 77 FR 47853 - Request for Notification From Industry Organizations Interested in Participating in Selection...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-10

    ... pediatric labeling dispute involving FDA-regulated products, (9) pediatric ethical issues including research... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0781...

  12. 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

  13. 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.

  14. FDA-Approved Natural Polymers for Fast Dissolving Tablets

    PubMed Central

    Alam, Md Tausif; Parvez, Nayyar; Sharma, Pramod Kumar

    2014-01-01

    Oral route is the most preferred route for administration of different drugs because it is regarded as safest, most convenient, and economical route. Fast disintegrating tablets are very popular nowadays as they get dissolved or facilely disintegrated in mouth within few seconds of administration without the need of water. The disadvantages of conventional dosage form, especially dysphagia (arduousness in swallowing), in pediatric and geriatric patients have been overcome by fast dissolving tablets. Natural materials have advantages over synthetic ones since they are chemically inert, non-toxic, less expensive, biodegradable and widely available. Natural polymers like locust bean gum, banana powder, mango peel pectin, Mangifera indica gum, and Hibiscus rosa-sinenses mucilage ameliorate the properties of tablet and utilized as binder, diluent, and superdisintegrants increase the solubility of poorly water soluble drug, decrease the disintegration time, and provide nutritional supplement. Natural polymers are obtained from the natural origin and they are cost efficacious, nontoxic, biodegradable, eco-friendly, devoid of any side effect, renewable, and provide nutritional supplement. It is proved from the studies that natural polymers are more safe and efficacious than the synthetic polymers. The aim of the present article is to study the FDA-approved natural polymers utilized in fast dissolving tablets. PMID:26556207

  15. 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...

  16. 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...

  17. 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...

  18. 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...

  19. 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...

  20. 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

  1. 78 FR 30317 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-05-22

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

  2. 78 FR 6332 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2013-01-30

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

  3. 77 FR 51031 - Science Board to the Food and Drug Administration; Notice of Meeting

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2012-08-23

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

  4. Radiopharmaceutical regulation and Food and Drug Administration policy.

    PubMed

    Rotman, M; Laven, D; Levine, G

    1996-04-01

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

  5. 76 FR 78933 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-12-20

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

  6. 76 FR 17138 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2011-03-28

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

  7. 75 FR 14448 - Food and Drug Administration Clinical Trial Requirements, Regulations, Compliance, and Good...

    Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

    2010-03-25

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

  8. Food and Drug Administration tobacco regulation and product judgments.

    PubMed

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

    2015-04-01

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

  9. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug administration after coronary artery bypass surgery: utilization persists despite the boxed warning.

    PubMed

    Kulik, Alexander; Bykov, Katsiaryna; Choudhry, Niteesh K; Bateman, Brian T

    2015-06-01

    In 2005, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a boxed warning against the administration of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery because of cardiovascular safety concerns. We assessed utilization rates before and after the advisory and evaluated predictors of NSAID administration following CABG. We assembled a cohort of 277,576 patients who underwent CABG from 2004 to 2010. Temporal trends in NSAID exposure were evaluated, and predictors of postoperative NSAID use were identified using generalized estimating equations. Over the study period, 92,938 CABG patients (33.5%) received NSAIDs following surgery. The frequency of NSAID administration declined steadily over time, from a peak of 38.9% in 2004 to a low of 29.0% in 2010 (p < 0.0007). Ketorolac was the most frequent NSAID prescribed, commonly on the first postoperative day. Surgery performed after the boxed warning was independently associated with a 20% lower odds of NSAID administration [odds ratio (OR): 0.80; p = 0.0003]. Other factors that predicted a lower odds of NSAID use following surgery included a history of renal disease (OR: 0.33; p < 0.0001) and liver disease (OR: 0.66; p < 0.0001), and the need for concurrent valve surgery (OR: 0.78; p < 0.0001). A mammary graft at the time of surgery increased the odds of NSAID administration (OR: 1.23; p < 0.0001). The frequency of NSAID administration after CABG has declined since the FDA advisory, yet many patients continue to receive them in recent years. Our data highlight the need for future research initiatives to further define the risks associated with NSAID use in this population. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

  10. 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

  11. 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.

  12. 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.

  13. Awareness and trust of the FDA and CDC: Results from a national sample of US adults and adolescents

    PubMed Central

    2017-01-01

    Trust in government agencies plays a key role in advancing these organizations' agendas, influencing behaviors, and effectively implementing policies. However, few studies have examined the extent to which individuals are aware of and trust the leading United States agencies devoted to protecting the public’s health. Using two national samples of adolescents (N = 1,125) and adults (N = 5,014), we examined demographic factors, with a focus on vulnerable groups, as correlates of awareness of and trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the federal government. From nine different weighted and adjusted logistic regression models, we found high levels of awareness of the existence of the FDA and CDC (ranging from 55.7% for adolescents’ awareness of the CDC to 94.3% for adults’ awareness of the FDA) and moderate levels of trust (ranging from a low of 41.8% for adults’ trust in the federal government and a high of 78.8% for adolescents’ trust of the FDA). In the adolescent and adult samples, awareness was higher among non-Hispanic Blacks and respondents with low numeracy. With respect to trust, few consistent demographic differences emerged. Our findings provide novel insights regarding awareness and trust in the federal government and specific United States public health agencies. Our findings suggest groups to whom these agencies may want to selectively communicate to enhance trust and thus facilitate their communication and regulatory agendas. PMID:28520750

  14. Awareness and trust of the FDA and CDC: Results from a national sample of US adults and adolescents.

    PubMed

    Kowitt, Sarah D; Schmidt, Allison M; Hannan, Anika; Goldstein, Adam O

    2017-01-01

    Trust in government agencies plays a key role in advancing these organizations' agendas, influencing behaviors, and effectively implementing policies. However, few studies have examined the extent to which individuals are aware of and trust the leading United States agencies devoted to protecting the public's health. Using two national samples of adolescents (N = 1,125) and adults (N = 5,014), we examined demographic factors, with a focus on vulnerable groups, as correlates of awareness of and trust in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the federal government. From nine different weighted and adjusted logistic regression models, we found high levels of awareness of the existence of the FDA and CDC (ranging from 55.7% for adolescents' awareness of the CDC to 94.3% for adults' awareness of the FDA) and moderate levels of trust (ranging from a low of 41.8% for adults' trust in the federal government and a high of 78.8% for adolescents' trust of the FDA). In the adolescent and adult samples, awareness was higher among non-Hispanic Blacks and respondents with low numeracy. With respect to trust, few consistent demographic differences emerged. Our findings provide novel insights regarding awareness and trust in the federal government and specific United States public health agencies. Our findings suggest groups to whom these agencies may want to selectively communicate to enhance trust and thus facilitate their communication and regulatory agendas.

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

    PubMed

    1998-05-12

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

  16. 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.

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. Current issues of personnel and laboratory practices in genetic testing

    PubMed Central

    Mark, Hon Fong Louie; Kelly, Thaddeus; Watson, Michael S; Hoeltge, Gerald; Miller, Wayne A; Beauregard, Laurent

    1995-01-01

    As genetic testing is an area with implications extending far beyond that of the primary patient, it is appropriately an area that is under increased scrutiny. To ensure that high quality is maintained in the delivery of genetic services, several agencies have developed standards and guidelines. The present article summarises important recommendations made by the American College of Medical Genetics (ACMG), the College of American Pathologists (CAP), the US Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as they relate to genetic testing. Some of the standards are based on voluntary compliance, whereas others have the force of regulation. They all address issues of personnel credentials, laboratory operations, and the most critical quality assurance and control measures for diagnostic laboratories from the perspective of various agencies. In most instances, the standards promulgated by these agencies are offered as minimum criteria. The exact impact of these regulations on the practice of medical genetics has yet to be established. Images PMID:8558555

  20. 21 CFR 111.610 - What records must be made available to FDA?

    Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

    2011-04-01

    ... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 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...