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

PubMed

Mishra, Sundeep

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

The Prescription Drug User Fee Act: Cause for Concern?

PubMed

Gabay, Michael

2018-04-01

The Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) was originally enacted into law in 1992. PDUFA provides the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with needed revenue in the form of various fees paid by drug and biologic manufacturers. The FDA utilizes this revenue to streamline the review and approval process for medications. Since the enactment of PDUFA, the median approval time for priority new drug applications and biologics license applications has reduced significantly. The FDA views PDUFA as a successful program that provides a consistent revenue stream to the agency, improves access to medications for patients, and allows industry to have a more predictable product review timeline. However, critics of PDUFA cite concerns including the potential for a lack of FDA independence and medication safety issues involving drugs approved after the existence of PDUFA.

Verification of performance specifications for a US Food and Drug Administration-approved molecular microbiology test: Clostridium difficile cytotoxin B using the Becton, Dickinson and Company GeneOhm Cdiff assay.

PubMed

Schlaberg, Robert; Mitchell, Michael J; Taggart, Edward W; She, Rosemary C

2012-01-01

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved diagnostic tests based on molecular genetic technologies are becoming available for an increasing number of microbial pathogens. Advances in technology and lower costs have moved molecular diagnostic tests formerly performed for research purposes only into much wider use in clinical microbiology laboratories. To provide an example of laboratory studies performed to verify the performance of an FDA-approved assay for the detection of Clostridium difficile cytotoxin B compared with the manufacturer's performance standards. We describe the process and protocols used by a laboratory for verification of an FDA-approved assay, assess data from the verification studies, and implement the assay after verification. Performance data from the verification studies conducted by the laboratory were consistent with the manufacturer's performance standards and the assay was implemented into the laboratory's test menu. Verification studies are required for FDA-approved diagnostic assays prior to use in patient care. Laboratories should develop a standardized approach to verification studies that can be adapted and applied to different types of assays. We describe the verification of an FDA-approved real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for the detection of a toxin gene in a bacterial pathogen.

21 CFR 314.160 - Approval of an application or abbreviated application for which approval was previously refused...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... of an applicant, FDA may, on the basis of new data, approve an application or abbreviated application which it had previously refused, suspended, or withdrawn approval. FDA will publish a notice in the...

21 CFR 314.160 - Approval of an application or abbreviated application for which approval was previously refused...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... of an applicant, FDA may, on the basis of new data, approve an application or abbreviated application which it had previously refused, suspended, or withdrawn approval. FDA will publish a notice in the...

21 CFR 314.160 - Approval of an application or abbreviated application for which approval was previously refused...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... of an applicant, FDA may, on the basis of new data, approve an application or abbreviated application which it had previously refused, suspended, or withdrawn approval. FDA will publish a notice in the...

21 CFR 314.160 - Approval of an application or abbreviated application for which approval was previously refused...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... of an applicant, FDA may, on the basis of new data, approve an application or abbreviated application which it had previously refused, suspended, or withdrawn approval. FDA will publish a notice in the...

21 CFR 314.160 - Approval of an application or abbreviated application for which approval was previously refused...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... of an applicant, FDA may, on the basis of new data, approve an application or abbreviated application which it had previously refused, suspended, or withdrawn approval. FDA will publish a notice in the...

78 FR 65334 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-31

... information, including certain labeling information, to FDA for approval to market a product in interstate... and in a form that FDA can process, review, and archive. This requirement is in addition to the....12(b) in table 1 of this document. In July 1997, FDA revised Form FDA 356h ``Application to Market a...

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

PubMed

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

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates high-risk medical devices such as cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and cardiac resynchronization therapy devices, via the premarket approval (PMA) process, during which manufacturers submit clinical data demonstrating safety and effectiveness. Subsequent changes to approved high-risk devices are implemented via "supplements," which may not require additional clinical testing. To characterize the prevalence and characteristics of changes to CIEDs made through the PMA supplement process. Using the FDA's PMA database, we reviewed all CIEDs approved as original PMAs or supplements from 1979 through 2012. For each supplement, we collected the date approved, type of supplement (panel-track, 180-day, real-time, special, and 30-day notice), and the nature of the changes. We calculated the number of supplements approved per PMA and analyzed trends relating to different supplement regulatory categories over time. For supplements approved via the 180-day regulatory pathway, which often involve significant design changes, from 2010-2012, we identified how often additional clinical data were collected. From 1979-2012, the FDA approved 77 original and 5829 supplement PMA applications for CIEDs, with a median of 50 supplements per original PMA (interquartile range [IQR], 23-87). Excluding manufacturing changes that do not alter device design, the number of supplements approved each year was stable around a mean (SD) of 2.6 (0.9) supplements per PMA per year. Premarket approvals remained active via successive supplements over a median period of 15 years (IQR, 8-20), and 79% of the 77 original PMAs approved during our study period were the subject of at least 1 supplement in 2012. Thirty-seven percent of approved supplements involved a change to the device's design. Among 180-day supplements approved from 2010-2012, 23% (15/64) included new clinical data to support safety and effectiveness. Many CIED models currently used by clinicians were approved via the PMA supplement process, not as original PMAs. Most new device models are deemed safe and effective without requiring new clinical data, reinforcing the importance of rigorous postapproval surveillance of these devices.

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.

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.

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

PubMed

Casey, Martin F; Mechanick, Jeffrey I

2014-09-01

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

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 316.34 - FDA recognition of exclusive approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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.

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 ...

21 CFR 314.105 - Approval of an application and an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...) FDA will approve an application and issue the applicant an approval letter on the basis of draft... labeling changes exactly as directed, and upon the applicant submitting to FDA a copy of the final printed...

21 CFR 314.105 - Approval of an application and an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...) FDA will approve an application and issue the applicant an approval letter on the basis of draft... labeling changes exactly as directed, and upon the applicant submitting to FDA a copy of the final printed...

21 CFR 314.105 - Approval of an application and an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...) FDA will approve an application and issue the applicant an approval letter on the basis of draft... labeling changes exactly as directed, and upon the applicant submitting to FDA a copy of the final printed...

21 CFR 314.105 - Approval of an application and an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...) FDA will approve an application and issue the applicant an approval letter on the basis of draft... labeling changes exactly as directed, and upon the applicant submitting to FDA a copy of the final printed...

21 CFR 314.105 - Approval of an application and an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...) FDA will approve an application and issue the applicant an approval letter on the basis of draft... labeling changes exactly as directed, and upon the applicant submitting to FDA a copy of the final printed...

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

PubMed

Leonard, Elizabeth Weeks

2009-01-01

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

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 reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

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.

Frequency and level of evidence used in recommendations by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines beyond approvals of the US Food and Drug Administration: retrospective observational study.

PubMed

Wagner, Jeffrey; Marquart, John; Ruby, Julia; Lammers, Austin; Mailankody, Sham; Kaestner, Victoria; Prasad, Vinay

2018-03-07

To determine the differences between recommendations by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCNN) guidelines and Food and Drug Administration approvals of anticancer drugs, and the evidence cited by the NCCN to justify recommendations where differences exist. Retrospective observational study. National Comprehensive Cancer Network and FDA. 47 new molecular entities approved by the FDA between 2011 and 2015. Comparison of all FDA approved indications (new and supplemental) with all NCCN recommendations as of 25 March 2016. When the NCCN made recommendations beyond the FDA's approvals, the recommendation was classified and the cited evidence noted. 47 drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2011 and 2015 for adult hematologic or solid cancers were examined. These 47 drugs were authorized for 69 FDA approved indications, whereas the NCCN recommended these drugs for 113 indications, of which 69 (62%) overlapped with the 69 FDA approved indications and 44 (39%) were additional recommendations. The average number of recommendations beyond the FDA approved indications was 0.92. 23% (n=10) of the additional recommendations were based on evidence from randomized controlled trials, and 16% (n=7) were based on evidence from phase III studies. During 21 months of follow-up, the FDA granted approval to 14% (n=6) of the additional recommendations. The NCCN frequently recommends beyond the FDA approved indications even for newer, branded drugs. The strength of the evidence cited by the NCCN supporting such recommendations is weak. Our findings raise concern that the NCCN justifies the coverage of costly, toxic cancer drugs based on weak evidence. 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.

78 FR 310 - Draft Revision of Guidance for Industry on Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-03

...ApprovalProcess/FormsSubmissionRequirements/ElectronicSubmissions/ucm253101.htm , http://www.regulations.../Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmissionRequirements/ElectronicSubmissions/ucm253101.htm , http...), in a format that FDA can process, review, and archive. Currently, the Agency can process, review, and...

No longer "if," but "when": the coming abbreviated approval pathway for follow-on biologics.

PubMed

Kelly, Jeremiah J; David, Michael

2009-01-01

Abbreviated approval of follow-on biologics involves answering complex scientific, legal, and policy questions. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) asserts that it lacks the statutory authority to approve follow-on versions of biologics licensed under Section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA). Despite persuasive arguments to the contrary the one hundred and tenth Congress entertained four legislative proposals to give FDA this authority, each markedly different. It is no longer a question of "if," but "when" FDA will receive authority to review and license abbreviated applications for follow-on biologics. Any legislation in the one hundred and eleventh Congress must determine: (1) if FDA should be granted authority to develop an abbreviated pathway through rulemaking or guidance; (2) if human clinical trials should be mandatory or discretionary; (3) the feasibility of interchangeability determinations in light of patient safety concerns; (4) the duration of marketing exclusivity for associated products; (5) which products are eligible for follow-on approval; and (6) the degree to which uniformity is achievable between the FD&C Act and the PHSA. This paper recommends the one hundred and eleventh Congress strike a balance between patient safety, incentives for product innovation, price competition, and the need for a flexible, transparent process that capitalizes on FDA's growing expertise with follow-on biologics approvals under Section 505(b)(2) of the FD&C Act.

78 FR 27115 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Expanded Access to Investigational Drugs for Treatment Use...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-09

... a more transparent process by increasing awareness and knowledge of expanded access programs and the... regulations. Consistent with the goal of making expanded access processes more transparent, FDA is providing... (IRB) review and approval required for individual patient expanded access?'' In the draft guidance, FDA...

Companion diagnostics: a regulatory perspective from the last 5 years of molecular companion diagnostic approvals.

PubMed

Roscoe, Donna M; Hu, Yun-Fu; Philip, Reena

2015-01-01

Companion diagnostics are essential for the safe and effective use of the corresponding therapeutic products. The US FDA has approved a number of companion diagnostics used to select cancer patients for treatment with contemporaneously approved novel therapeutics. The processes of co-development and co-approval of a therapeutic product and its companion diagnostic have been a learning experience that continues to evolve. Using several companion diagnostics as examples, this article describes the challenges associated with the scientific, clinical and regulatory hurdles faced by FDA and industry alike. Taken together, this discussion is intended to assist manufacturers toward a successful companion diagnostics development plan.

21 CFR 314.107 - Effective date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or abbreviated new drug application under...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... application for a drug product becomes effective on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 for... on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 if the applicant certifies under § 314.50(i...

21 CFR 314.107 - Effective date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or abbreviated new drug application under...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... application for a drug product becomes effective on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 for... on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 if the applicant certifies under § 314.50(i...

21 CFR 314.107 - Effective date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or abbreviated new drug application under...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... application for a drug product becomes effective on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 for... on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 if the applicant certifies under § 314.50(i...

21 CFR 314.107 - Effective date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or abbreviated new drug application under...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... application for a drug product becomes effective on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 for... on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 if the applicant certifies under § 314.50(i...

21 CFR 314.107 - Effective date of approval of a 505(b)(2) application or abbreviated new drug application under...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... application for a drug product becomes effective on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 for... on the date FDA issues an approval letter under § 314.105 if the applicant certifies under § 314.50(i...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.125 - Refusal to approve an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... the application under section 505(d) of the act, if: (1) FDA sends the applicant a complete response... question of whether the application is approvable; and (3) FDA finds that any of the reasons given in...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.125 - Refusal to approve an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... the application under section 505(d) of the act, if: (1) FDA sends the applicant a complete response... question of whether the application is approvable; and (3) FDA finds that any of the reasons given in...

21 CFR 314.125 - Refusal to approve an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... the application under section 505(d) of the act, if: (1) FDA sends the applicant a complete response... question of whether the application is approvable; and (3) FDA finds that any of the reasons given in...

21 CFR 314.125 - Refusal to approve an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... the application under section 505(d) of the act, if: (1) FDA sends the applicant a complete response... question of whether the application is approvable; and (3) FDA finds that any of the reasons given in...

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 812.42 - FDA and IRB approval.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.125 - Refusal to approve an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... the application under section 505(d) of the act, if: (1) FDA sends the applicant a complete response... question of whether the application is approvable; and (3) FDA finds that any of the reasons given in...

21 CFR 814.45 - Denial of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.45 Denial of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order denying approval of a PMA if the applicant fails to follow the... information before the agency, FDA determines that any of the grounds for denying approval of a PMA specified...

21 CFR 814.45 - Denial of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.45 Denial of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order denying approval of a PMA if the applicant fails to follow the... information before the agency, FDA determines that any of the grounds for denying approval of a PMA specified...

21 CFR 814.45 - Denial of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.45 Denial of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order denying approval of a PMA if the applicant fails to follow the... information before the agency, FDA determines that any of the grounds for denying approval of a PMA specified...

Off-label use of medical products in radiation therapy: Summary of the Report of AAPM Task Group No. 121

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

Thomadsen, Bruce R.; Thompson, Heaton H. II; Jani, Shirish K.

Medical products (devices, drugs, or biologics) contain information in their labeling regarding the manner in which the manufacturer has determined that the products can be used in a safe and effective manner. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves medical products for use for these specific indications which are part of the medical product's labeling. When medical products are used in a manner not specified in the labeling, it is commonly referred to as off-label use. The practice of medicine allows for this off-label use to treat individual patients, but the ethical and legal implications for such unapproved use canmore » be confusing. Although the responsibility and, ultimately, the liability for off-label use often rests with the prescribing physician, medical physicists and others are also responsible for the safe and proper use of the medical products. When these products are used for purposes other than which they were approved, it is important for medical physicists to understand their responsibilities. In the United States, medical products can only be marketed if officially cleared, approved, or licensed by the FDA; they can be used if they are not subject to or specifically exempt from FDA regulations, or if they are being used in research with the appropriate regulatory safeguards. Medical devices are either cleared or approved by FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Drugs are approved by FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and biological products such as vaccines or blood are licensed under a biologics license agreement by FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. For the purpose of this report, the process by which the FDA eventually clears, approves, or licenses such products for marketing in the United States will be referred to as approval. This report summarizes the various ways medical products, primarily medical devices, can legally be brought to market in the United States, and includes a discussion of the approval process, along with manufacturers' responsibilities, labeling, marketing and promotion, and off-label use. This is an educational and descriptive report and does not contain prescriptive recommendations. This report addresses the role of the medical physicist in clinical situations involving off-label use. Case studies in radiation therapy are presented. Any mention of commercial products is for identification only; it does not imply recommendations or endorsements of any of the authors or the AAPM. The full report, containing extensive background on off-label use with several appendices, is available on the AAPM website (http://www.aapm.org/pubs/reports/).« less

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

PubMed

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

2014-02-01

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

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.

21 CFR 314.127 - Refusal to approve an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA... application. (a) FDA will refuse to approve an abbreviated application for a new drug under section 505(j) of... FDA with respect to the active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, or strength that is...

21 CFR 314.127 - Refusal to approve an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA... application. (a) FDA will refuse to approve an abbreviated application for a new drug under section 505(j) of... FDA with respect to the active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, or strength that is...

21 CFR 314.127 - Refusal to approve an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA... application. (a) FDA will refuse to approve an abbreviated application for a new drug under section 505(j) of... FDA with respect to the active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, or strength that is...

21 CFR 314.127 - Refusal to approve an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA... application. (a) FDA will refuse to approve an abbreviated application for a new drug under section 505(j) of... FDA with respect to the active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, or strength that is...

21 CFR 314.127 - Refusal to approve an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA... application. (a) FDA will refuse to approve an abbreviated application for a new drug under section 505(j) of... FDA with respect to the active ingredient, route of administration, dosage form, or strength that is...

Case studies with new excipients: development, implementation and regulatory approval.

PubMed

Koo, Otilia M Y; Varia, Sailesh A

2011-07-01

The purpose of this article is to describe the process whereby new excipients become accepted and to describe three case studies to illustrate the process. New excipients are defined according to the 2005 FDA Guidance on Nonclinical Safety Evaluation of New Excipients. The requirements for safety data submission for new excipients used in different classes of products for different durations are outlined in the guidance. Currently, the development of new excipients is linked to the development and approval of new drug products that contain them. New excipients that are used in US-approved drug products become listed in the FDA Inactive Ingredients Guide (IIG) database. Thereafter, US Pharmacopeia monographs for the new excipients are proposed. New excipients are reviewed and become accepted in the same way in Europe and Japan, except that there is no equivalent IIG database. Therefore, the focus of this article will be on the FDA review process. Three case studies, polyoxyl 15 hydroxystearate, sulfobutyl ether cyclodextrin and silicified microcrystalline cellulose, are used to illustrate how new excipients are accepted and implemented.

FDA Approves Lutathera for Neuroendocrine Tumors

Cancer.gov

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

The 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.

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

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-06-01

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

21 CFR 1.391 - Who approves a detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... Fda Order A Detention? § 1.391 Who approves a detention order? An authorized FDA representative, i.e., the FDA District Director in whose district the article of food involved is located or an FDA official...

21 CFR 1.391 - Who approves a detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... Fda Order A Detention? § 1.391 Who approves a detention order? An authorized FDA representative, i.e., the FDA District Director in whose district the article of food involved is located or an FDA official...

21 CFR 1.391 - Who approves a detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... Fda Order A Detention? § 1.391 Who approves a detention order? An authorized FDA representative, i.e., the FDA District Director in whose district the article of food involved is located or an FDA official...

21 CFR 1.391 - Who approves a detention order?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... Fda Order A Detention? § 1.391 Who approves a detention order? An authorized FDA representative, i.e., the FDA District Director in whose district the article of food involved is located or an FDA official...

Compounding and Extralabel Use of Drugs in Exotic Animal Medicine.

PubMed

Powers, Lauren V; Davidson, Gigi

2018-05-01

Extralabel drug use is the use of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug in a manner different from what is stipulated on the approved label. Compounding is the process of preparing a medication in a manner not indicated on the label to create a formulation specifically tailored to the needs of an individual patient. Extralabel drug use and compounding are vital aspects of safe and effective drug delivery to patients in exotic animal practice. There are few FDA-approved drugs for exotic animal species, and many approved drugs for other species are not available in suitable formulations for use in exotic animals. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Recent drug approvals from the US FDA and EMEA: what the future holds.

PubMed

Pevarello, Paolo

2009-04-01

The decreased productivity of the pharmaceutical industry in terms of new medical entities approved by the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) on a yearly basis has long been debated. This review will analyze overall new drug applications (NDAs) approved by both the FDA and EMEA in 2007, with the aim of finding trends (also looking at the past) that can be used to predict what the future may be. After a general introduction to the regulatory terminology, NDA approvals in 2007 are divided into categories (new applications of old medicines, metabolites, enantiomers and prodrugs, biological products, natural products and small organic molecule new molecular entities) and discussed. General aspects of the NDA approvals, such as historical trends, the length of the drug-discovery process, geography, differences among therapeutic areas, and the relative role of biotech and pharma industries are also outlined. From this analysis, a perspective is gained on some aspects that will probably influence future drug approvals. The conclusion is that 2007 may represent an inflexion point, in terms of quality if not quantity of new approvals, and that the future may be brighter than previously forecast.

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.

IDAAPM: integrated database of ADMET and adverse effects of predictive modeling based on FDA approved drug data.

PubMed

Legehar, Ashenafi; Xhaard, Henri; Ghemtio, Leo

2016-01-01

The disposition of a pharmaceutical compound within an organism, i.e. its Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Excretion, Toxicity (ADMET) properties and adverse effects, critically affects late stage failure of drug candidates and has led to the withdrawal of approved drugs. Computational methods are effective approaches to reduce the number of safety issues by analyzing possible links between chemical structures and ADMET or adverse effects, but this is limited by the size, quality, and heterogeneity of the data available from individual sources. Thus, large, clean and integrated databases of approved drug data, associated with fast and efficient predictive tools are desirable early in the drug discovery process. We have built a relational database (IDAAPM) to integrate available approved drug data such as drug approval information, ADMET and adverse effects, chemical structures and molecular descriptors, targets, bioactivity and related references. The database has been coupled with a searchable web interface and modern data analytics platform (KNIME) to allow data access, data transformation, initial analysis and further predictive modeling. Data were extracted from FDA resources and supplemented from other publicly available databases. Currently, the database contains information regarding about 19,226 FDA approval applications for 31,815 products (small molecules and biologics) with their approval history, 2505 active ingredients, together with as many ADMET properties, 1629 molecular structures, 2.5 million adverse effects and 36,963 experimental drug-target bioactivity data. IDAAPM is a unique resource that, in a single relational database, provides detailed information on FDA approved drugs including their ADMET properties and adverse effects, the corresponding targets with bioactivity data, coupled with a data analytics platform. It can be used to perform basic to complex drug-target ADMET or adverse effects analysis and predictive modeling. IDAAPM is freely accessible at http://idaapm.helsinki.fi and can be exploited through a KNIME workflow connected to the database.Graphical abstractFDA approved drug data integration for predictive modeling.

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, health economists, academia, and others. The multistakeholder group represented the key professionals and entities affected by the federal laws and FDA regulations that restrict the sharing of preapproval information and the collective credibility necessary for proposing this new communication process. Forum participants primarily focused on 6 items of discussion: (1) creating and defining new terms for how biopharmaceutical manufacturers may provide clinical and economic information 12-18 months before FDA approval; (2) defining the clinical and scientific standards that this information should meet; (3) determining which entities should have access to this information and the value to each; (4) the format and process by which this information should be disseminated; (5) developing definitions for existing terms referenced in current laws, regulations, or guidance documents that would need to be modernized to align with the identified new term; and (6) providing safeguards to prevent this information from reaching unintended entities. Forum participants selected "preapproval information exchange" (PIE) as the correct term to describe this proposed new communication process and to be inclusive of data from pivotal phase III clinical trials, pharmaco-economic data, and patient-reported outcomes, as well as other relevant items, including anticipated indications, place in therapy, and routes of administration. Stakeholders agreed that PIE should be truthful, non-misleading, and include a broad range of information to meet the needs of population health decision makers and health care technology evolution. Recipients of PIE would be limited to population health decision makers who need this information for coverage decisions. The format and process for PIE disseminated should allow for a bidirectional exchange between manufacturers and population health decision makers but should not be proscribed in legislation. Furthermore, new legislative language may be beneficial, since PIE is a novel category of information. New legislation could provide a safe harbor and clarity that PIE does not violate preapproval promotion and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and its regulations. The AMCP Partnership Forum on Enabling the Exchange of Clinical and Economic Data Pre-FDA Approval and the development of this proceedings document were supported by AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Intarcia Therapeutics, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, National Pharmaceutical Council, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Precision for Value, Sanofi, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, U.S.A., and Xcenda. All sponsors participated in the forum and in revising and approving the manuscript.

Food Irradiation Research and Technology

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Food Irradiation is a safe and effective U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved process that can be used to disinfest or delay the maturation of fruits and vegetables, improve the microbiological safety of shellfish, eggs, raw meat and poultry, spices, and seeds used for sprouting. FDA ap...

Food irradiation research and technology

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Food Irradiation is a safe and effective U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved process that can be used to disinfest or delay the maturation of fruits and vegetables, improve the microbiological safety of shellfish, eggs, raw meat and poultry, spices, and seeds used for sprouting. FDA ap...

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.

Food irradiation—US regulatory considerations

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Morehouse, Kim M.

2002-03-01

The use of ionizing radiation in food processing has received increased interest as a means of reducing the level of foodborne pathogens. This overview discusses the regulatory issues connected with the use of this technology in the United States. Several recent changes in the FDA's review process are discussed. These include the current policy that utilizes an expedited review process for petitions seeking approval of additives and technologies intended to reduce pathogen levels in food, and the recent USDA rule that eliminates the need for a separate rulemaking process by USDA for irradiation of meat and poultry. Recently promulgated rules and pending petitions before the FDA associated with the use of ionizing radiation for the treatment of foods are also discussed along with the current FDA labeling requirements for irradiated foods and the 1999 advanced notice of proposed rule on labeling. Another issue that is presented is the current status of the approval of packaging materials intended for food contact during irradiation treatment of foods.

21 CFR 814.46 - Withdrawal of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.46 Withdrawal of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order withdrawing approval of a PMA if, from any information available to the agency, FDA determines that: (1) Any of the grounds under section 515(e)(1) (A)-(G) of the act...

21 CFR 814.46 - Withdrawal of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.46 Withdrawal of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order withdrawing approval of a PMA if, from any information available to the agency, FDA determines that: (1) Any of the grounds under section 515(e)(1) (A)-(G) of the act...

21 CFR 814.46 - Withdrawal of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.46 Withdrawal of approval of a PMA. (a) FDA may issue an order withdrawing approval of a PMA if, from any information available to the agency, FDA determines that: (1) Any of the grounds under section 515(e)(1) (A)-(G) of the act...

75 FR 47599 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Generic Food and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-06

... premarket notification and review process. FDA's regulations governing application for agency approval to...-3520), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each... collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this...

Ionizing Solutions to Future Processor Demands for Safe Food

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Food Irradiation is a safe and effective U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved process that can be used to disinfest or delay the maturation of fruits and vegetables, improve the microbiological safety of shellfish, eggs, raw meat and poultry, spices, and seeds used for sprouting. FDA ap...

2017 in review: FDA approvals of new molecular entities.

PubMed

Kinch, Michael S; Griesenauer, Rebekah H

2018-05-08

An overview of drugs approved by the FDA in 2017 reflected a reversion to the mean after a low number of NME approvals in 2016. This reversal was largely driven by the largest number of biologics-based NMEs recorded to date, which offset an average number of small-molecule approvals. Oncology indications continued to dominate followed by novel treatments for infectious, immunologic and neurologic diseases. From a mechanistic standpoint, the industry has continued a trend of target diversification, reflecting advances in scientific understanding of disease processes. Finally, 2017 continued a period of relatively few mergers and acquisitions, which broke a more-than-a-decade-long decline in the number of organizations contributing to research and development. Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

PubMed Central

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

2013-01-01

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

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

PubMed

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

Some new drug applications fail because of inadequate drug performance and others are not approved because the information submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is unsatisfactory to make that determination. Resubmission of failed applications is costly, delaying marketing approval and the availability of new drugs to patients. To identify the reasons that FDA marketing approval for new drugs was delayed or denied. A retrospective review of FDA documents and extraction of data were performed. We examined all drug applications first submitted to the FDA between 2000 and 2012 for new molecular entities (NMEs), which are active ingredients never before marketed in the United States in any form. Using FDA correspondence and reviews, we investigated the reasons NMEs failed to obtain FDA approval. Reasons for delayed FDA approval or nonapproval of NME applications. Of the 302 identified NME applications, 151 (50%) were approved when first submitted and 222 (73.5%) were ultimately approved. Seventy-one applications required 1 or more resubmissions before approval, with a median delay to approval of 435 days following the first unsuccessful submission. Of the unsuccessful first-time applications, 24 (15.9%) included uncertainties related to dose selection, 20 (13.2%) choice of study end points that failed to adequately reflect a clinically meaningful effect, 20 (13.2%) inconsistent results when different end points were tested, 17 (11.3%) inconsistent results when different trials or study sites were compared, and 20 (13.2%) poor efficacy when compared with the standard of care. The frequency of safety deficiencies was similar among never-approved drugs compared with those with delayed approval (43 of 80 never approved [53.8%] vs 37 of 71 eventually approved [52.1%]; difference, 1.7% [95% CI, -14.86% to 18.05%]; P = .87). However, efficacy deficiencies were significantly more frequent among the never-approved drugs than among those with delayed approvals (61 of 80 never approved [76.3%] vs 28 of 71 eventually approved [39.4%]; difference, 36.9% [95% CI, 20.25% to 50.86%]; P < .001). Several potentially preventable deficiencies, including failure to select optimal drug doses and suitable study end points, accounted for significant delays in the approval of new drugs. Understanding the reasons for previous failures is helpful to improve the efficiency of clinical development for new drugs.

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.

"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.

Development and approval of vaccines in the United States.

PubMed

Botstein, P

1986-01-01

In the United States, vaccines and the establishments in which they are manufactured are required to be licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before the vaccine can be marketed. This licensing process, as well as the development and investigation of vaccines, is regulated by the FDA's Office of Biologics Research and Review. An application for licensing must contain information supporting the safety, effectiveness, purity and potency of the product. These are data obtained during the investigational phase and then submitted by a commercial sponsor for review and approval. Inspections, surveillance and laboratory testing are performed by the FDA before and after issuance of a license for marketing. The procedures and policies in the investigational and licensing phases of vaccine development are described.

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.

21 CFR 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.150 Withdrawal of approval of an... abbreviated application for a new drug on a finding that there is an imminent hazard to the public health. FDA...

21 CFR 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.150 Withdrawal of approval of an... abbreviated application for a new drug on a finding that there is an imminent hazard to the public health. FDA...

21 CFR 814.47 - Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.47 Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA. (a) Scope. (1) This section describes the procedures that FDA will follow in... the original PMA, as well as any PMA supplement(s), for a medical device. (2) FDA will issue an order...

21 CFR 814.47 - Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.47 Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA. (a) Scope. (1) This section describes the procedures that FDA will follow in... the original PMA, as well as any PMA supplement(s), for a medical device. (2) FDA will issue an order...

21 CFR 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.150 Withdrawal of approval of an... abbreviated application for a new drug on a finding that there is an imminent hazard to the public health. FDA...

21 CFR 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.150 Withdrawal of approval of an... abbreviated application for a new drug on a finding that there is an imminent hazard to the public health. FDA...

21 CFR 814.47 - Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.47 Temporary suspension of approval of a PMA. (a) Scope. (1) This section describes the procedures that FDA will follow in... the original PMA, as well as any PMA supplement(s), for a medical device. (2) FDA will issue an order...

21 CFR 314.150 - Withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.150 Withdrawal of approval of an... abbreviated application for a new drug on a finding that there is an imminent hazard to the public health. FDA...

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

PubMed

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

2016-06-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advisory committees influence decisions relating to the regulatory approval of drugs in the United States. Outside of the field of oncology, prosponsor voting bias has been observed among members with financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs). To explore factors associated with Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) recommendations and the influence ODAC members' FCOIs on the drug approval process. Retrospective analysis of 82 ODAC meeting transcripts between January 2000 and December 2014. Analysis was restricted to meetings at which votes were cast relating to oncologic drugs. The influence of methodology of trials supporting approval and frequency and type of self-reported FCOIs of voting members was explored using logistic regression. ODAC recommendation for drug approval and subsequent FDA approval. Eighty-two transcripts of ODAC meetings between January 2000 and December 2014 were available for analysis. During the time period analyzed, ODAC members voted on 68 applications in 79 meetings (the remaining 3 meetings included voting questions regarding postmarketing safety or trial design). There was agreement between ODAC recommendations and final FDA approval; FDA approval was received for all 41 drugs that ODAC recommended approval. Additionally, the FDA approved 7 out of 41 agents that were not recommended for approval by ODAC (κ = 0.83). In 51 of 79 meetings, more than 1 trial was available to support the indication of a particular drug, and favorable ODAC recommendations were more likely when this was the case (odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 95% CI, 1.19-2.78; P = .01). Availability of randomized data did not appear to be important with selected single-arm phase 2 trials leading to recommendations for approval, especially in rare diseases. There has been a significant reduction in FCOIs over time (31 of 77 voting members [40%] in 2000 vs 0 of 20 voting members in 2014 [0%]; P < .001). Recommendations for approval were made in 28 of 47 meetings with members reporting FCOIs while among meetings with no reported FCOIs, recommendations for approval were made in 13 of 35 meetings (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97-1.46; P = .10). No significant association between ODAC recommendations and FDA approval was observed for members with FCOIs with the sponsor (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 0.97-1.46; P = .19 and OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 0.84-14.35; P = .09, respectively) compared with members with FCOIs with competitors (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.78-1.44; P = .72 and OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28; P = .69, respectively). Availability of multiple trials is associated with higher odds of ODAC recommendation and drug approval. Availability of randomized data appears less important. Declaration of FCOIs among ODAC members was frequent during the time period of interest but has decreased significantly over time. There is no apparent association between FCOIs and ODAC recommendations and subsequent FDA approval.

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

PubMed

KuKanich, Butch; Warner, Matt; Hahn, Kevin

2017-02-01

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

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 severity of in-effect and possible patterns of emerging resistance and to convey this in any necessary updated labeling. It also indicates that as part of that process, practitioners should return to a more conservative testing schedule.

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.

21 CFR 314.170 - Adulteration and misbranding of an approved drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on... subject to the adulteration and misbranding provisions in sections 501, 502, and 503 of the act. FDA is...

21 CFR 314.170 - Adulteration and misbranding of an approved drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on... subject to the adulteration and misbranding provisions in sections 501, 502, and 503 of the act. FDA is...

21 CFR 314.170 - Adulteration and misbranding of an approved drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on... subject to the adulteration and misbranding provisions in sections 501, 502, and 503 of the act. FDA is...

21 CFR 314.170 - Adulteration and misbranding of an approved drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on... subject to the adulteration and misbranding provisions in sections 501, 502, and 503 of the act. FDA is...

21 CFR 314.170 - Adulteration and misbranding of an approved drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on... subject to the adulteration and misbranding provisions in sections 501, 502, and 503 of the act. FDA is...

21 CFR 314.152 - Notice of withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.152 Notice of... Administration withdraws approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug, FDA will publish a...

21 CFR 314.152 - Notice of withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.152 Notice of... Administration withdraws approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug, FDA will publish a...

21 CFR 314.152 - Notice of withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.152 Notice of... Administration withdraws approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug, FDA will publish a...

21 CFR 314.152 - Notice of withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.152 Notice of... Administration withdraws approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug, FDA will publish a...

21 CFR 314.152 - Notice of withdrawal of approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.152 Notice of... Administration withdraws approval of an application or abbreviated application for a new drug, FDA will publish a...

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.

Gore offers to help drug companies pursue research.

PubMed

1996-03-08

A meeting convened between Vice President Al Gore and executives of leading pharmaceutical companies to determine means of accelerating efforts to develop vaccines, therapeutics, and microbicides for people with HIV. Gore explained that the administration will work with pharmaceutical companies to determine the long-term effectiveness of drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), work with international groups to increase investment in vaccine development, help develop new microbicides for women with HIV, and identify promising areas of AIDS research. According to advocates, the Clinton Administration has made great strides in improving and accelerating the FDA's drug approval process. The next goal of the pharmaceutical research agenda should be to include consumer advocates in the decision-making process.

Incentives for orphan drug research and development in the United States.

PubMed

Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Szeinbach, Sheryl L; Visaria, Jay

2008-12-16

The Orphan Drug Act (1983) established several incentives to encourage the development of orphan drugs (ODs) to treat rare diseases and conditions. This study analyzed the characteristics of OD designations, approvals, sponsors, and evaluated the effective patent and market exclusivity life of orphan new molecular entities (NMEs) approved in the US between 1983 and 2007. Primary data sources were the FDA Orange Book, the FDA Office of Orphan Drugs Development, and the US Patent and Trademark Office. Data included all orphan designations and approvals listed by the FDA and all NMEs approved by the FDA during the study period. The FDA listed 1,793 orphan designations and 322 approvals between 1983 and 2007. Cancer was the main group of diseases targeted for orphan approvals. Eighty-three companies concentrated 67.7% of the total orphan NMEs approvals. The average time from orphan designation to FDA approval was 4.0 +/- 3.3 years (mean +/- standard deviation). The average maximum effective patent and market exclusivity life was 11.7 +/- 5.0 years for orphan NME. OD market exclusivity increased the average maximum effective patent and market exclusivity life of ODs by 0.8 years. Public programs, federal regulations, and policies support orphan drugs R&D. Grants, research design support, FDA fee waivers, tax incentives, and orphan drug market exclusivity are the main incentives for orphan drug R&D. Although the 7-year orphan drug market exclusivity provision had a positive yet relatively modest overall effect on effective patent and market exclusivity life, economic incentives and public support mechanisms provide a platform for continued orphan drug development for a highly specialized market.

Innovating by developing new uses of already-approved drugs: trends in the marketing approval of supplemental indications.

PubMed

DiMasi, Joseph A

2013-06-01

Much of the literature on trends and factors affecting biopharmaceutical innovation has focused overwhelmingly on the development and approval of never-before approved drugs and biologics. Little attention has been paid to new uses for already-approved compounds, which can be an important form of innovation. This paper aimed to determine and analyze recent trends in the number and type of new or modified US indication approvals for drugs and biologics. We also examine regulatory approval-phase times for new-use efficacy supplements and compare them to approval-phase times for original-use approvals over the same period. We developed a data set of efficacy supplements approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1998 to 2011 that includes information on the type, approval-phase time (time from submission to the FDA of an application for marketing approval to approval of the application), and FDA therapeutic-significance rating for the approved application, which we obtained from an FDA Web site. This data set was merged with a Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (CSDD) data set of US new drug and biologics approvals. We developed descriptive statistics on trends in the number and type of new-use efficacy supplements, on US regulatory approval-phase times for the supplements, and on original new drug and biologics approvals over the study period and for the time from original- to new-use approval. The total number of new-use efficacy-supplement approvals did not exhibit a marked trend, but the number of new pediatric-indication approvals increased substantially. Approval-phase times for new-use supplements varied by therapeutic class and FDA therapeutic-significance rating. Mean approval-phase times were highest for central nervous system compounds (13.8 months) and lowest for antineoplastics (8.9 months). The mean time from original to supplement approval was substantially longer for new pediatric indications than for other new uses. Mean approval-phase time during the study period for applications that received a standard review rating from the FDA was substantially shorter for supplements compared to original uses, but the differences for applications that received a priority review rating from the FDA were negligible. Development of and regulatory approval for new uses of already-approved drugs and biologics is an important source of innovation by biopharmaceutical firms. Despite rising development costs, the output of new-use approvals has remained stable in recent years, driven largely by the pursuit of new pediatric indications. FDA approval-phase times have generally declined substantially for all types of applications since the mid-1990s following legislation that provided a new source of income for the agency. However, while the resources needed to review supplemental applications are likely lower in general than for original-use approvals, the approval-phase times for important new uses are no lower than for important original-use applications. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Regulatory withdrawal of medicines marketed with uncertain benefits: the bevacizumab case study.

PubMed

Vitry, Agnes; Nguyen, Tuan; Entwistle, Vikky; Roughead, Elizabeth

2015-01-01

Withdrawal of conditional regulatory approval or subsidization of new medicines when subsequent evidence does not confirm early trial results may not be well understood or accepted by the public. We present a case study of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)'s decision to withdraw the indication of bevacizumab for the treatment of advanced breast cancer and include an analysis of the reactions of stakeholders with a view to identifying opportunities for improving risk management for new medicines with conditional approval or funding. We drew on a range of information sources, including FDA documents, medical journals and media reports, to describe the evidentiary basis of the FDA decisions. We analysed the reactions and perspectives of the stakeholders. In 2008 bevacizumab was granted conditional approval for treatment of advanced breast cancer by the FDA pending submission of supplementary satisfactory evidence. In 2011 the FDA decision to withdraw the indication was met with a hostile reaction from many clinicians and cancer survivors. There were different interpretations of the therapeutic value of bevacizumab with strong beliefs among cancer survivors that the medicine was effective and potential harm was manageable. High expectations of the public may have been encouraged by overly positive media reports and limited understanding by the public of the complexity of the scientific evaluation of new medicines and of the regulatory processes. Improving understanding and acceptance of approval or coverage schemes conditional to evidence development may require the development of risk management plans by regulatory and funding institutions. They may include a range of strategies such as requirements for formal patient acknowledgment of the conditional availability of the medicine, 'black-triangle' equivalent labels that identify full approval is based on pending evidence, and ongoing communication with the media, public and health professionals.

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.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Labeling for Products Approved by the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products of the US Food and Drug Administration (2010-2014).

PubMed

Gnanasakthy, Ari; DeMuro, Carla; Clark, Marci; Haydysch, Emily; Ma, Esprit; Bonthapally, Vijayveer

2016-06-01

To review the use of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data in medical product labeling granted by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for new molecular entities and biologic license applications by the FDA Office of Hematology and Oncology Products (OHOP) between January 2010 and December 2014, to elucidate challenges faced by OHOP for approving PRO labeling, and to understand challenges faced by drug manufacturers to include PRO end points in oncology clinical trials. FDA Drug Approval Reports by Month were reviewed to obtain the number of new molecular entities and biologic license applications approved from 2010 to 2014. Drugs approved by the FDA OHOP during this period were selected for further review, focusing on brand and generic name; approval date; applicant; indication; PRO labeling describing treatment benefit, measures, end point status, and significant results; FDA reviewer feedback on PRO end points; and study design of registration trials. First in class, priority review, fast track, orphan drug, or accelerated approval status was retrieved for selected oncology drugs from 2011 to 2014. Descriptive analyses were performed by using Microsoft Excel 2010. Of 160 drugs approved by the FDA (2010-2014), 40 were approved by OHOP. Three (7.5%) of the 40 received PRO-related labeling (abiraterone acetate, ruxolitinib phosphate, and crizotinib). Compared with nononcology drugs (2011-2014), oncology drugs were more likely to be orphan and first in class. The majority of oncology drug reviews by FDA were fast track, priority, or accelerated. Although symptoms and functional decrements are common among patients with cancer, PRO labeling is rare in the United States, likely because of logistical hurdles and oncology study design. Recent developments within the FDA OHOP to capture PROs in oncology studies for the purpose of product labeling are encouraging. © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

78 FR 35273 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; General Licensing...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-12

..., to FDA for approval to market a product in interstate commerce. The container and package labeling... be in electronic format and in a form that FDA can process, review, and archive. This requirement is... 356h ``Application to Market a New Drug, Biologic, or an Antibiotic Drug for Human Use'' to harmonize...

Evolution of pharmacological obesity treatments: focus on adverse side-effect profiles.

PubMed

Krentz, A J; Fujioka, K; Hompesch, M

2016-06-01

Pharmacotherapy directed toward reducing body weight may provide benefits for both curbing obesity and lowering the risk of obesity-associated comorbidities; however, many weight loss medications have been withdrawn from the market because of serious adverse effects. Examples include pulmonary hypertension (aminorex), cardiovascular toxicity, e.g. flenfluramine-induced valvopathy, stroke [phenylpropanolamine (PPA)], excess non-fatal cardiovascular events (sibutramine), and neuro-psychiatric issues (rimonabant; approved in Europe, but not in the USA). This negative experience has helped mould the current drug development and approval process for new anti-obesity drugs. Differences between the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency, however, in perceptions of risk-benefit considerations for individual drugs have resulted in discrepancies in approval and/or withdrawal of weight-reducing medications. Thus, two drugs recently approved by the FDA, i.e. lorcaserin and phentermine + topiramate extended release, are not available in Europe. In contrast, naltrexone sustained release (SR)/bupropion SR received FDA approval, and liraglutide 3.0 mg was recently approved in both the USA and Europe. Regulatory strategies adopted by the FDA to manage the potential for uncommon but potentially serious post-marketing toxicity include: (i) risk evaluation and mitigation strategy programmes; (ii) stipulating post-marketing safety trials; (iii) considering responder rates and limiting cumulative exposure by discontinuation if weight loss is not attained within a reasonable timeframe; and (iv) requiring large cardiovascular outcome trials before or after approval. We chronicle the adverse effects of anti-obesity pharmacotherapy and consider how the history of high-profile toxicity issues has shaped the current regulatory landscape for new and future weight-reducing drugs. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

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.

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.

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

A safety review of the medications used to treat atopic dermatitis.

PubMed

Shukla, Shweta; Feldman, Steven R; Strowd, Lindsay C

2018-02-01

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common disease in children and adults which causes severe physical discomfort and psychosocial distress. Recently novel therapies for AD have been FDA approved for use which creates the need to review the safety surrounding current FDA approved AD medications. Areas covered: Published clinical studies involving topical and oral FDA approved medications for AD are included in this review. Authors used PubMed research database to search for clinical trials involving AD patients. Expert opinion: AD is a common disease which currently has limited FDA approved medications. Given the chronicity of this disease, medications are needed which control disease while minimizing side effects to allow for long term use. Newer approved medications show promise but safety data is limited given their relatively new utilization for AD.

Who's guarding what? A poststructural feminist analysis of gardasil discourses.

PubMed

Thompson, Marie

2010-03-01

In May 2006 the Gardasil vaccine was approved for implementation in the United States to prohibit the spread of four strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV) that can lead to cervical cancer. Through a poststructural feminist reading, I critique ideologies at play throughout the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval hearing for this vaccine. I explore the conditions that gave rise to the adoption of the Gardasil vaccine as evidenced in the hearing transcript, and probe contradictions between choices the FDA enacted for the feminine body with those recommendations from lead scientists of Merck that urged the inclusion of males in the vaccination process. Along the way, I respond to appeals from scholars to address matters of health policy formation and implementation as critical and underexplored dimensions of health communication. I offer a vision that makes way for proactive engagement of males in reproductive and sexual health, particularly as the FDA delayed vaccine approval for males until 2009.

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.

Therapeutic vaccines in renal cell carcinoma.

PubMed

Schwaab, Thomas; Ernstoff, Marc S

2011-07-01

Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) is a lethal disease. The advent of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has changed the disease process, yet the majority of patients will develop treatment-resistant disease. IL-2 based immunotherapy in mRCC is the only US FDA-approved treatment with curative results. Immunotherapeutic vaccine approaches to mRCC have been under investigation for several decades with mixed results. The recent FDA-approval of the first cellular immunotherapy in prostate cancer (Provenge(®)) has reinvigorated the search for similar vaccines approaches in mRCC. This review introduces the concepts and different features required for a successful anticancer vaccine approach.

Preapproval and postapproval availability of published comparative efficacy research on biological agents.

PubMed

Thomas, Rachel Hutchins; Freeman, Maisha Kelly; Hughes, Peter J

2013-07-15

Preapproval and postapproval availability of published comparative efficacy studies on biological agents approved between 2000 and 2010 was investigated. Approval packages published on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website were examined for all biological agents approved between 2000 and 2010 to determine if comparative efficacy studies were available at the time of FDA approval. The availability of comparative efficacy studies published subsequent to approval was determined by searching PubMed for randomized, active-controlled experimental or observational study designs that measured efficacy as the primary endpoint and were relevant to the original FDA-approved indication. From 2000 to 2010, 107 biological agents were approved by FDA. Of the biological agents with alternative treatments, 54.6% had comparative efficacy data available at the time of approval. Although standard-reviewed biological agents were more likely to have comparative efficacy trials included in the FDA approval packages than priority-reviewed biological agents, statistically significant differences are unlikely. Subsequent to approval, 58.1% of biological agents had at least one published comparative efficacy trial, representing a 3.5% absolute increase in the availability of comparative efficacy studies since the time of approval. Vaccines and biological agents in the hematologic diseases, oncology, and miscellaneous diseases classes had fewer published postapproval comparative efficacy studies per agent compared with the overall group of biological agents. Nearly half of all biological agents approved for marketing between 2000 and 2010 lacked publicly accessible, active-controlled efficacy studies at the time of drug approval; a slightly greater proportion of biological agents had comparative efficacy data published subsequent to their approval.

Measuring clinical trial transparency: an empirical analysis of newly approved drugs and large pharmaceutical companies

PubMed Central

Miller, Jennifer E; Wilenzick, Marc; Ritcey, Nolan; Ross, Joseph S; Mello, Michelle M

2017-01-01

Objectives To define a series of clinical trial transparency measures and apply them to large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and their 2014 FDA-approved drugs. Design Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of all clinical trials supporting 2014 Food and Drugs Administration (FDA)-approved new drug applications (NDAs) for novel drugs sponsored by large companies. Data sources Data from over 45 sources, including Drugs@FDA.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov, corporate and international registries; PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, corporate press releases, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings and personal communications with drug manufacturers. Outcome measures Trial registration, results reporting, clinical study report (CSR) synopsis sharing, biomedical journal publication, and FDA Amendments Acts (FDAAA) compliance, analysed on the drug level. Results The FDA approved 19 novel new drugs, sponsored by 11 large companies, involving 553 trials, in 2014. We analysed 505 relevant trials. Per drug, a median of 100% (IQR 86%–100%) of trials in patients were registered, 71% (IQR 57%–100%) reported results or shared a CSR synopsis, 80% (70%–100%) were published and 96% (80%–100%) were publicly available in some form by 13 months after FDA approval. Disclosure rates were lower at FDA approval (65%) and improved significantly by 6 months post FDA approval. Per drug, a median of 100% (IQR 75%–100%) of FDAAA-applicable trials were compliant. Half of reviewed drugs had publicly disclosed results for all trials in patients in our sample. One trial was uniquely registered in a corporate registry, and not ClinicalTrials.gov; 0 trials were uniquely registered in international registries. Conclusions Among large pharmaceutical companies and new drugs, clinical trial transparency is high based on several standards, although opportunities for improvement remain. Transparency is markedly higher for trials in patients than among all trials supporting drug approval, including trials in healthy volunteers. Ongoing efforts to publicly track companies’ transparency records and recognise exemplary companies may encourage further progress. PMID:29208616

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

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-10-01

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

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

PubMed

Hui, Yuk Fung

2003-01-01

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

Incremental Revisions across the Life Span of Ophthalmic Devices after Initial Food and Drug Administration Premarket Approval, 1979-2015.

PubMed

Gopal, Anand D; Rathi, Vinay K; Teng, Christopher C; Del Priore, Lucian; Ross, Joseph S

2017-08-01

To characterize the frequency, nature, and regulatory mechanisms by which ophthalmic devices are iteratively modified after initial Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Premarket Approval (PMA). Retrospective cross-sectional analysis using publicly available FDA data. Ophthalmic devices initially approved via the FDA's PMA pathway between January 1, 1979 and December 31, 2015. We used the FDA's PMA Database to identify and characterize initial approvals and subsequent postmarket modifications to Class III ophthalmic devices. The FDA Recalls Database was used to identify associated safety events. Median iterated life span (timespan across which modifications occurred after initial PMA) and median number of supplements approved per device, by device type, and overall, stratified by regulatory pathway and modification type. Between 1979 and 2015, the FDA approved 168 original ophthalmic devices via the PMA pathway and 2813 subsequent modifications. More than one third (n = 64; 38%) of original approvals were intraocular lenses. Overall, devices underwent a median of 11 postmarket modifications (interquartile range [IQR], 3-24.8) across a median 10.0-year iterated life span (IQR, 4.1-16.7). The majority of devices (n = 144; 86%) underwent more than 1 postapproval modification, including more than 1 design modification (n = 84; 50%). The median number of changes altering device design or labeling was 3.5 (IQR, 1-9). Although manufacturing alterations (n = 834 of 2813; 30%) were the most frequent type of revision, changes involving device design (n = 667; 24%) and labeling (n = 417; 15%) were common. Recalled devices underwent more frequent postapproval modifications per year (median, 1.4; IQR, 0.7-2.3; mean, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-1.9) in the period preceding recall than did nonrecalled devices (median, 0.5; IQR, 0.2-1.1; mean, 0.8; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-1.0) across their market approval period (P < 0.001). Most ophthalmic devices approved via the FDA's PMA pathway have undergone extensive revisions, including serial design and labeling changes, since their initial approvals, often without supporting clinical data. Ophthalmologists should take into consideration that cumulative revisions may render the clinical evidence that supported an original FDA approval less relevant to newer device models. Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Contrasting clinical evidence for market authorisation of cardio-vascular devices in Europe and the USA: a systematic analysis of 10 devices based on Austrian pre-reimbursement assessments.

PubMed

Wild, Claudia; Erdös, Judit; Zechmeister, Ingrid

2014-11-04

European medical device regulation is under scrutiny and will be re-regulated with stricter rules concerning requirements for clinical evidence for high-risk medical devices. It is the aim of this study to analyse the differences between Europe and USA in dealing with risks and benefits of new cardio-vascular devices. Since no information is available on clinical data used by the Notified Body for CE-marking, data from Austrian pre-reimbursement assessments close to European market approval were used as proxy and compared with clinical data available at time of market approval by FDA in the USA. 10 cardio-vascular interventions with 27 newly CE approved medical devices were analysed. The time lag between market authorisation in Europe and in the USA is 3 to 7 years. Only 7 CE-marked devices also hold a FDA market approval, 7 further devices are in FDA approved ongoing efficacy trials. For 4 of the CE-marked devices the FDA market application or the approval-trial was either suspended due to efficacy or safety concerns or the approval was denied. Evidence available at time of CE-marking are most often case-series or small feasibility RCTs, while large RCTs and only in rare cases prospective cohort studies are the basis of FDA approvals. Additionally, the FDA often requires post-approval studies for high-risk devices. Market authorisation based on mature clinical data deriving from larger RCTs and longer follow-ups do not only change the perspective on the risk-benefit ratio, but also secures real patient benefit and safety and assures payers of investing only in truly innovative devices.

Fixed-Dose Combination Drug Approvals, Patents and Market Exclusivities Compared to Single Active Ingredient Pharmaceuticals.

PubMed

Hao, Jing; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique

2015-01-01

Fixed-dose combinations (FDC) contain two or more active ingredients. The effective patent and exclusivity life of FDC compared to single active ingredient has not been assessed. Trends in FDA approved FDC in the period 1980-2012 and time lag between approval of FDC and single active ingredients in the combination were assessed, and the effective patent and exclusivity life of FDC was compared with their single active ingredients. New molecular entities (NMEs), new therapeutic biologics license applications (BLAs) and FDC data were collected from the FDA Orange Book and Drugs@FDA. Analysis included FDC containing one or more NMEs or BLAs at first FDA approval (NMEs-FDC) and only already marketed drugs (Non-NMEs-FDC). Descriptive, Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon Rank Sum analyses were performed. During the study period, the FDA approved 28 NMEs-FDC (3.5% of NMEs) and 117 non-NMEs-FDC. FDC approvals increased from 12 in the 1980s to 59 in the 2000s. Non-NMEs-FDC entered the market at a median of 5.43 years (interquartile range 1.74, 10.31) after first FDA approval of single active ingredients in the combination. The Non-NMEs-FDC entered the market at a median of 2.33 years (-7.55, 2.39) before approval of generic single active ingredient. Non-NME-FDC added a median of 9.70 (2.75, 16.24) years to the patent and exclusivity life of the single active ingredients in the combination. FDC approvals significantly increased over the last twenty years. Pharmaceutical companies market FDC drugs shortly before the generic versions of the single ingredients enter the market extending the patent and exclusivity life of drugs included in the combination.

Electrophoresis operations in space

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Richman, D. W.

1982-01-01

Application of electrophoresis in space processing is described. Spaceborne experiments in areas such as biological products and FDA approved drugs are discussed. These experiments will be carried on shuttle payloads.

Just a Spoonful of Sugar Will Land You Six Feet Underground: Should the Food and Drug Administration Revoke Added Sugar's GRAS Status?

PubMed

Card, Melissa Marie; Abela, John Francis

2015-01-01

This article assesses whether added sugar meets FDA's standard to be generally recognized as safe ("GRAS"). If added sugar is not GRAS, then manufacturers are subject to premarket approval prior to using added sugar in their products. This article advocates that FDA should issue a Federal Register notice determining that added sugar is not GRAS, allowing FDA to regulate the amount of added sugar used in processed foods, decreasing the health adversities that stem from added sugar consumption.

21 CFR 314.93 - Petition to request a change from a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... listed combination drug, must first obtain permission from FDA to submit such an abbreviated application... petition that is permitted under paragraph (a) of this section is submitted, FDA will approve or disapprove...

21 CFR 314.93 - Petition to request a change from a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... listed combination drug, must first obtain permission from FDA to submit such an abbreviated application... petition that is permitted under paragraph (a) of this section is submitted, FDA will approve or disapprove...

21 CFR 314.60 - Amendments to an unapproved application, supplement, or resubmission.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW...) FDA generally assumes that when an original application, supplement to an approved application, or... the “initial review cycle.”) FDA may instead defer review of the amendment until the subsequent review...

21 CFR 814.40 - Time frames for reviewing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.40 Time frames for... the applicant does not submit a major amendment, FDA will review the PMA and, after receiving the report and recommendation of the appropriate FDA advisory committee, send the applicant an approval order...

21 CFR 314.60 - Amendments to an unapproved application, supplement, or resubmission.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW...) FDA generally assumes that when an original application, supplement to an approved application, or... the “initial review cycle.”) FDA may instead defer review of the amendment until the subsequent review...

21 CFR 814.40 - Time frames for reviewing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.40 Time frames for... the applicant does not submit a major amendment, FDA will review the PMA and, after receiving the report and recommendation of the appropriate FDA advisory committee, send the applicant an approval order...

21 CFR 314.60 - Amendments to an unapproved application, supplement, or resubmission.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW...) FDA generally assumes that when an original application, supplement to an approved application, or... the “initial review cycle.”) FDA may instead defer review of the amendment until the subsequent review...

21 CFR 314.93 - Petition to request a change from a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... listed combination drug, must first obtain permission from FDA to submit such an abbreviated application... petition that is permitted under paragraph (a) of this section is submitted, FDA will approve or disapprove...

21 CFR 814.40 - Time frames for reviewing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.40 Time frames for... the applicant does not submit a major amendment, FDA will review the PMA and, after receiving the report and recommendation of the appropriate FDA advisory committee, send the applicant an approval order...

21 CFR 314.60 - Amendments to an unapproved application, supplement, or resubmission.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW...) FDA generally assumes that when an original application, supplement to an approved application, or... the “initial review cycle.”) FDA may instead defer review of the amendment until the subsequent review...

Assessing the potential clinical impact of reciprocal drug approval legislation on access to novel therapeutics in the USA: a cohort study.

PubMed

Larochelle, Matthieu; Downing, Nicholas S; Ross, Joseph S; David, Frank S

2017-02-08

To quantify the potential effect of reciprocal approval legislation on access to clinically impactful therapeutics in the USA. A cohort study. New therapeutics approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA) and/or Health Canada between 2000 and 2010. Characteristics of new therapeutics approved by the EMA and/or Health Canada before the FDA, including mechanistic novelty, likely clinical impact, size of the affected population and FDA review outcome. From 2001 to 2010, 282 drugs were approved in the USA, Europe or Canada, including 172 (61%) first approved in the USA, 24 (9%) never approved in the USA, and 86 (30%) approved in the USA after Europe and/or Canada. Of the 110 new drugs approved in Europe and/or Canada before the USA, 37 (34%) had a novel mechanisms of action compared with drugs already approved by the FDA, but only 10 (9%) were for conditions lacking alternate available therapies in the USA at the time of ex-US approval-of which the majority (9/10; 90%) were indicated for rare diseases. 12 of the 37 agents with novel mechanisms of action approved first in Europe and/or Canada (32%) had their initial FDA submissions rejected for safety reasons-including 2 drugs that were ultimately withdrawn from the market in Europe due to safety concerns. If enacted, reciprocal approval legislation would most likely benefit only a small number of US patients receiving treatment for rare diseases, and the benefit may be somewhat mitigated by an increased exposure to harms. 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/.

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

PubMed

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

2012-08-01

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

75 FR 63189 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Investigational New Drug Applications-Determining Whether Human...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-10-14

... obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they... information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is... VIII of the draft guidance, ``Process for Addressing Inquiries Concerning the Application of the IND...

FDA Expands Abiraterone Approval for Prostate Cancer

Cancer.gov

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

Assessing the potential clinical impact of reciprocal drug approval legislation on access to novel therapeutics in the USA: a cohort study

PubMed Central

Larochelle, Matthieu; Downing, Nicholas S; Ross, Joseph S; David, Frank S

2017-01-01

Objective To quantify the potential effect of reciprocal approval legislation on access to clinically impactful therapeutics in the USA. Design A cohort study. Setting New therapeutics approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA) and/or Health Canada between 2000 and 2010. Main outcome measures Characteristics of new therapeutics approved by the EMA and/or Health Canada before the FDA, including mechanistic novelty, likely clinical impact, size of the affected population and FDA review outcome. Results From 2001 to 2010, 282 drugs were approved in the USA, Europe or Canada, including 172 (61%) first approved in the USA, 24 (9%) never approved in the USA, and 86 (30%) approved in the USA after Europe and/or Canada. Of the 110 new drugs approved in Europe and/or Canada before the USA, 37 (34%) had a novel mechanisms of action compared with drugs already approved by the FDA, but only 10 (9%) were for conditions lacking alternate available therapies in the USA at the time of ex-US approval—of which the majority (9/10; 90%) were indicated for rare diseases. 12 of the 37 agents with novel mechanisms of action approved first in Europe and/or Canada (32%) had their initial FDA submissions rejected for safety reasons—including 2 drugs that were ultimately withdrawn from the market in Europe due to safety concerns. Conclusions If enacted, reciprocal approval legislation would most likely benefit only a small number of US patients receiving treatment for rare diseases, and the benefit may be somewhat mitigated by an increased exposure to harms. PMID:28179418

Measuring clinical trial transparency: an empirical analysis of newly approved drugs and large pharmaceutical companies.

PubMed

Miller, Jennifer E; Wilenzick, Marc; Ritcey, Nolan; Ross, Joseph S; Mello, Michelle M

2017-12-05

To define a series of clinical trial transparency measures and apply them to large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and their 2014 FDA-approved drugs. Cross-sectional descriptive analysis of all clinical trials supporting 2014 Food and Drugs Administration (FDA)-approved new drug applications (NDAs) for novel drugs sponsored by large companies. Data from over 45 sources, including Drugs@FDA.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov, corporate and international registries; PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, corporate press releases, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings and personal communications with drug manufacturers. Trial registration, results reporting, clinical study report (CSR) synopsis sharing, biomedical journal publication, and FDA Amendments Acts (FDAAA) compliance, analysed on the drug level. The FDA approved 19 novel new drugs, sponsored by 11 large companies, involving 553 trials, in 2014. We analysed 505 relevant trials. Per drug, a median of 100% (IQR 86%-100%) of trials in patients were registered, 71% (IQR 57%-100%) reported results or shared a CSR synopsis, 80% (70%-100%) were published and 96% (80%-100%) were publicly available in some form by 13 months after FDA approval. Disclosure rates were lower at FDA approval (65%) and improved significantly by 6 months post FDA approval. Per drug, a median of 100% (IQR 75%-100%) of FDAAA-applicable trials were compliant. Half of reviewed drugs had publicly disclosed results for all trials in patients in our sample. One trial was uniquely registered in a corporate registry, and not ClinicalTrials.gov; 0 trials were uniquely registered in international registries. Among large pharmaceutical companies and new drugs, clinical trial transparency is high based on several standards, although opportunities for improvement remain. Transparency is markedly higher for trials in patients than among all trials supporting drug approval, including trials in healthy volunteers. Ongoing efforts to publicly track companies' transparency records and recognise exemplary companies may encourage further progress. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

21 CFR 514.80 - Records and reports concerning experience with approved new animal drugs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... and 2301? How can I get them? Can I use computer-generated equivalents? 514.80(d) Reporting forms. How... provided on the forms. Computer-generated equivalents of Form FDA 1932 or Form FDA 2301, approved by FDA... Medicine, Division of Surveillance (HFV-210), 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855-2764. (e) Records to...

21 CFR 514.80 - Records and reports concerning experience with approved new animal drugs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... and 2301? How can I get them? Can I use computer-generated equivalents? 514.80(d) Reporting forms. How... provided on the forms. Computer-generated equivalents of Form FDA 1932 or Form FDA 2301, approved by FDA... Medicine, Division of Surveillance (HFV-210), 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855-2764. (e) Records to...

21 CFR 514.80 - Records and reports concerning experience with approved new animal drugs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... and 2301? How can I get them? Can I use computer-generated equivalents? 514.80(d) Reporting forms. How... provided on the forms. Computer-generated equivalents of Form FDA 1932 or Form FDA 2301, approved by FDA... Medicine, Division of Surveillance (HFV-210), 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855-2764. (e) Records to...

21 CFR 514.80 - Records and reports concerning experience with approved new animal drugs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... and 2301? How can I get them? Can I use computer-generated equivalents? 514.80(d) Reporting forms. How... provided on the forms. Computer-generated equivalents of Form FDA 1932 or Form FDA 2301, approved by FDA... Medicine, Division of Surveillance (HFV-210), 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855-2764. (e) Records to...

21 CFR 514.80 - Records and reports concerning experience with approved new animal drugs.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... and 2301? How can I get them? Can I use computer-generated equivalents? 514.80(d) Reporting forms. How... provided on the forms. Computer-generated equivalents of Form FDA 1932 or Form FDA 2301, approved by FDA... Medicine, Division of Surveillance (HFV-210), 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855-2764. (e) Records to...

21 CFR 314.94 - Content and format of an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... the application are required, an archival copy, a review copy, and a field copy. FDA will maintain... application based on an approved petition under § 10.30 of this chapter or § 314.93, a reference to FDA...

21 CFR 314.70 - Supplements and other changes to an approved application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications... application. (1)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, the applicant must notify FDA... of change, the applicant must notify FDA about the change in a supplement under paragraph (b) or (c...

21 CFR 314.94 - Content and format of an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... the application are required, an archival copy, a review copy, and a field copy. FDA will maintain... application based on an approved petition under § 10.30 of this chapter or § 314.93, a reference to FDA...

21 CFR 314.70 - Supplements and other changes to an approved application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications... application. (1)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, the applicant must notify FDA... of change, the applicant must notify FDA about the change in a supplement under paragraph (b) or (c...

Postmarket Safety Events Among Novel Therapeutics Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration Between 2001 and 2010

PubMed Central

Downing, Nicholas S.; Shah, Nilay D.; Aminawung, Jenerius A.; Pease, Alison M.; Zeitoun, Jean-David; Krumholz, Harlan M.

2017-01-01

Importance Postmarket safety events of novel pharmaceuticals and biologics occur when new safety risks are identified after initial regulatory approval of these therapeutics. These safety events can change how novel therapeutics are used in clinical practice and inform patient and clinician decision making. Objectives To characterize the frequency of postmarket safety events among novel therapeutics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to examine whether any novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval were associated with increased risk. Design and Setting Cohort study of all novel therapeutics approved by the FDA between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2010, followed up through February 28, 2017. Exposures Novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval, including drug class, therapeutic area, priority review, accelerated approval, orphan status, near–regulatory deadline approval, and regulatory review time. Main Outcomes and Measures A composite of (1) withdrawals due to safety concerns, (2) FDA issuance of incremental boxed warnings added in the postmarket period, and (3) FDA issuance of safety communications. Results From 2001 through 2010, the FDA approved 222 novel therapeutics (183 pharmaceuticals and 39 biologics). There were 123 new postmarket safety events (3 withdrawals, 61 boxed warnings, and 59 safety communications) during a median follow-up period of 11.7 years (interquartile range [IQR], 8.7-13.8 years), affecting 71 (32.0%) of the novel therapeutics. The median time from approval to first postmarket safety event was 4.2 years (IQR, 2.5-6.0 years), and the proportion of novel therapeutics affected by a postmarket safety event at 10 years was 30.8% (95% CI, 25.1%-37.5%). In multivariable analysis, postmarket safety events were statistically significantly more frequent among biologics (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.06-3.52; P = .03), therapeutics indicated for the treatment of psychiatric disease (IRR = 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.06; P < .001), those receiving accelerated approval (IRR = 2.20; 95% CI, 1.15-4.21; P = .02), and those with near–regulatory deadline approval (IRR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.19-3.05; P = .008); events were statistically significantly less frequent among those with regulatory review times less than 200 days (IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.87; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance Among 222 novel therapeutics approved by the FDA from 2001 through 2010, 32% were affected by a postmarket safety event. Biologics, psychiatric therapeutics, and accelerated and near–regulatory deadline approval were statistically significantly associated with higher rates of events, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of the safety of novel therapeutics throughout their life cycle. PMID:28492899

Postmarket Safety Events Among Novel Therapeutics Approved by the US Food and Drug Administration Between 2001 and 2010.

PubMed

Downing, Nicholas S; Shah, Nilay D; Aminawung, Jenerius A; Pease, Alison M; Zeitoun, Jean-David; Krumholz, Harlan M; Ross, Joseph S

2017-05-09

Postmarket safety events of novel pharmaceuticals and biologics occur when new safety risks are identified after initial regulatory approval of these therapeutics. These safety events can change how novel therapeutics are used in clinical practice and inform patient and clinician decision making. To characterize the frequency of postmarket safety events among novel therapeutics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to examine whether any novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval were associated with increased risk. Cohort study of all novel therapeutics approved by the FDA between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2010, followed up through February 28, 2017. Novel therapeutic characteristics known at the time of FDA approval, including drug class, therapeutic area, priority review, accelerated approval, orphan status, near-regulatory deadline approval, and regulatory review time. A composite of (1) withdrawals due to safety concerns, (2) FDA issuance of incremental boxed warnings added in the postmarket period, and (3) FDA issuance of safety communications. From 2001 through 2010, the FDA approved 222 novel therapeutics (183 pharmaceuticals and 39 biologics). There were 123 new postmarket safety events (3 withdrawals, 61 boxed warnings, and 59 safety communications) during a median follow-up period of 11.7 years (interquartile range [IQR], 8.7-13.8 years), affecting 71 (32.0%) of the novel therapeutics. The median time from approval to first postmarket safety event was 4.2 years (IQR, 2.5-6.0 years), and the proportion of novel therapeutics affected by a postmarket safety event at 10 years was 30.8% (95% CI, 25.1%-37.5%). In multivariable analysis, postmarket safety events were statistically significantly more frequent among biologics (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 1.93; 95% CI, 1.06-3.52; P = .03), therapeutics indicated for the treatment of psychiatric disease (IRR = 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.06; P < .001), those receiving accelerated approval (IRR = 2.20; 95% CI, 1.15-4.21; P = .02), and those with near-regulatory deadline approval (IRR = 1.90; 95% CI, 1.19-3.05; P = .008); events were statistically significantly less frequent among those with regulatory review times less than 200 days (IRR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.24-0.87; P = .02). Among 222 novel therapeutics approved by the FDA from 2001 through 2010, 32% were affected by a postmarket safety event. Biologics, psychiatric therapeutics, and accelerated and near-regulatory deadline approval were statistically significantly associated with higher rates of events, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring of the safety of novel therapeutics throughout their life cycle.

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-22

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

FDA Approves Apalutamide for Prostate Cancer

Cancer.gov

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

U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval summary: Eltrombopag for the treatment of pediatric patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia.

PubMed

Ehrlich, Lori A; Kwitkowski, Virginia E; Reaman, Gregory; Ko, Chia-Wen; Nie, Lei; Pazdur, Richard; Farrell, Ann T

2017-12-01

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved eltrombopag for pediatric patients with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenia (ITP) ages ≥6 on June 11, 2015, and ages ≥1 on August 24, 2015. Approval was based on the FDA review of two randomized trials that included 159 pediatric patients with chronic ITP who had an insufficient response to corticosteroids, immunoglobulins, or splenectomy. This manuscript describes the basis for approval of these applications. The FDA concluded that eltrombopag has shown efficacy and a favorable benefit to risk profile for pediatric patients with chronic ITP. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Biomarkers as drug development tools: discovery, validation, qualification and use.

PubMed

Kraus, Virginia B

2018-06-01

The 21st Century Cures Act, approved in the USA in December 2016, has encouraged the establishment of the national Precision Medicine Initiative and the augmentation of efforts to address disease prevention, diagnosis and treatment on the basis of a molecular understanding of disease. The Act adopts into law the formal process, developed by the FDA, of qualification of drug development tools, including biomarkers and clinical outcome assessments, to increase the efficiency of clinical trials and encourage an era of molecular medicine. The FDA and European Medicines Agency (EMA) have developed similar processes for the qualification of biomarkers intended for use as companion diagnostics or for development and regulatory approval of a drug or therapeutic. Biomarkers that are used exclusively for the diagnosis, monitoring or stratification of patients in clinical trials are not subject to regulatory approval, although their qualification can facilitate the conduct of a trial. In this Review, the salient features of biomarker discovery, analytical validation, clinical qualification and utilization are described in order to provide an understanding of the process of biomarker development and, through this understanding, convey an appreciation of their potential advantages and limitations.

A review of radiation countermeasures focusing on injury-specific medicinals and regulatory approval status: part II. Countermeasures for limited indications, internalized radionuclides, emesis, late effects, and agents demonstrating efficacy in large animals with or without FDA IND status.

PubMed

Singh, Vijay K; Garcia, Melissa; Seed, Thomas M

2017-09-01

The threat of a radiological/nuclear event is a critical concern for all government agencies involved in national security and public health preparedness. Countermeasures that are safe, easily administered, and effective at diminishing or eliminating adverse health effects to individuals and the overall public health impact of radiation exposure are urgently needed. Radiation countermeasures included in this three-part series have been classified under various subheadings based specifically on their developmental stages for United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. We have included FDA-approved agents for acute radiation syndrome (ARS) in part I. This is part II in which we have reviewed FDA-approved agents for limited indications, internalized radionuclides, emesis, late effects, radiomitigators available in the strategic national stockpile (SNS), agents with FDA investigational new drug (IND) status, and those with NHP efficacy data without FDA IND. Agents discussed in part III are those agents that have been peer reviewed, published, and have demonstrated significant survival benefits in animal models of ARS. Agents investigated in in vitro models only or studied in animal models without peer-reviewed publications have not been included. The dearth of FDA-approved radiation countermeasures has prompted intensified research for a new generation of radiation countermeasures. A number of promising radiation countermeasures are currently moving forward with continued support and effort by both governmental agencies and by publicly and privately held pharmaceutical companies. There is a limited number of countermeasures which are progressing well following the Animal Rule and may get approved in the near future, thus serving to close the gap of this critically important, unmet radiobiomedical need.

Regulatory Aspects of Optical Methods and Exogenous Targets for Cancer Detection

PubMed Central

Tummers, Willemieke S.; Warram, Jason M.; Tipirneni, Kiranya E.; Fengler, John; Jacobs, Paula; Shankar, Lalitha; Henderson, Lori; Ballard, Betsy; Pogue, Brian W.; Weichert, Jamey P.; Bouvet, Michael; Sorger, Jonathan; Contag, Christopher H.; Frangioni, John V.; Tweedle, Michael F.; Basilion, James P.; Gambhir, Sanjiv S.; Rosenthal, Eben L.

2017-01-01

Considerable advances in cancer-specific optical imaging have improved the precision of tumor resection. In comparison to traditional imaging modalities, this technology is unique in its ability to provide real-time feedback to the operating surgeon. Given the significant clinical implications of optical imaging, there is an urgent need to standardize surgical navigation tools and contrast agents to facilitate swift regulatory approval. Because fluorescence-enhanced surgery requires a combination of both device and drug, each may be developed in conjunction, or separately, which are important considerations in the approval process. This report is the result of a one-day meeting held on May 4, 2016 with officials from the National Cancer Institute, the FDA, members of the American Society of Image-Guided Surgery, and members of the World Molecular Imaging Society, which discussed consensus methods for FDA-directed human testing and approval of investigational optical imaging devices as well as contrast agents for surgical applications. The goal of this workshop was to discuss FDA approval requirements and the expectations for approval of these novel drugs and devices, packaged separately or in combination, within the context of optical surgical navigation. In addition, the workshop acted to provide clarity to the research community on data collection and trial design. Reported here are the specific discussion items and recommendations from this critical and timely meeting. PMID:28428283

Biologics as countermeasures for acute radiation syndrome: where are we now?

PubMed

Singh, Vijay K; Romaine, Patricia L P; Newman, Victoria L

2015-04-01

Despite significant scientific advances toward the development of a safe, nontoxic and effective radiation countermeasure for acute radiation syndrome (ARS) over the past six decades, no drug has been approved by the US FDA. Several biologics are currently under development as radiation countermeasures for ARS, of which three have received FDA Investigational New Drug (IND) status for clinical investigation. Presently, two of these agents, entolimod (CBLB502) and HemaMax (recombinant human IL-12) are progressing with large animal studies and clinical trials. Neupogen (G-CSF, filgrastim) has recently been recommended for approval by an FDA Advisory Committee. Filgrastim, GM-CSF (Leukine, sargramostim), and PEGylated G-CSF (Neulasta) have high potential and well-documented therapeutic effects in countering myelosuppression and may receive full licensing approval by the FDA in the future. The former two biologics are available in the US Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) for use in the event of nuclear or radiological emergency. The Emergency Use Authorization (EAU) application for entolimod may be filed soon with the FDA. Biologics are attractive agents that are progressing along the path for FDA approval, to fill the unmet need for ARS countermeasures.

The Use of Published Clinical Study Reports to Support U.S. Food and Drug Administration Approval of Imaging Agents.

PubMed

Rieves, Dwaine; Jacobs, Paula

2016-12-01

Pharmaceutical companies typically perform prospective, multicenter phase 3 clinical studies to support approval of a new imaging agent by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In uncommon situations, the FDA has approved imaging agents based solely, or in large part, on the clinical study experience described in published reports, including reports of exploratory (i.e., phase 1 or 2) studies performed at a single clinical site. We performed a survey of published reports to assess the potential of the reported information to support FDA approval of a commonly cited investigational imaging agent. Our survey revealed critical data limitations in most publications, all of which reported exploratory clinical studies. Here we summarize the precedent for FDA approval of imaging agents using effectiveness data from publications, FDA guidance, and our experience in reviewing publications. We also present a key-data checklist for investigators to consider in the design, conduct, and reporting of exploratory clinical studies for publication. We encourage editors and peer reviewers to consider requiring these key data when reviewing these reports for publication. © 2016 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Inc.

The rise (and decline?) of biotechnology.

PubMed

Kinch, Michael S

2014-11-01

Since the 1970s, biotechnology has been a key innovator in drug development. An analysis of FDA-approved therapeutics demonstrates pharmaceutical companies outpace biotechs in terms of new approvals but biotechnology companies are now responsible for earlier-stage activities (patents, INDs or clinical development). The number of biotechnology organizations that contributed to an FDA approval began declining in the 2000s and is at a level not seen since the 1980s. Whereas early biotechnology companies had a decade from first approval until acquisition, the average acquisition of a biotechnology company now occurs months before their first FDA approval. The number of hybrid organizations that arise when pharmaceutical companies acquire biotechnology is likewise declining, raising questions about the sustainability of biotechnology. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

FDA Approves First Immunotherapy for Lymphoma

Cancer.gov

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

FDA Approves First Therapeutic Cancer Vaccine

Cancer.gov

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-26

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

78 FR 54899 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Specification of the Unique Facility Identifier System for Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-06

... 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of... collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing this notice of the... submission process functions most efficiently and effectively when the information is provided in a...

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.

Quality investigation of hydroxyprogesterone caproate active pharmaceutical ingredient and injection

PubMed Central

Chollet, John L.; Jozwiakowski, Michael J.

2012-01-01

The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of hydroxyprogesterone caproate (HPC) active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) sources that may be used by compounding pharmacies, compared to the FDA-approved source of the API; and to investigate the quality of HPC injection samples obtained from compounding pharmacies in the US, compared to the FDA-approved product (Makena®). Samples of API were obtained from every source confirmed to be an original manufacturer of the drug for human use, which were all companies in China that were not registered with FDA. Eight of the ten API samples (80%) did not meet the impurity specifications required by FDA for the API used in the approved product. One API sample was found to not be HPC at all; additional laboratory testing showed that it was glucose. Thirty samples of HPC injection obtained from com pounding pharmacies throughout the US were also tested, and eight of these samples (27%) failed to meet the potency requirement listed in the USP monograph for HPC injection and/or the HPLC assay. Sixteen of the thirty injection samples (53%) exceeded the impurity limit setforthe FDA-approved drug product. These results confirm the inconsistency of compounded HPC Injections and suggest that the risk-benefit ratio of using an unapproved compounded preparation, when an FDA-approved drug product is available, is not favorable. PMID:22329865

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/

New aquaculture drugs under FDA review

USGS Publications Warehouse

Bowker, James D.; Gaikowski, Mark P.

2012-01-01

Only eight active pharmaceutical ingredients available in 18 drug products have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in aquaculture. The approval process can be lengthy and expensive, but several new drugs and label claims are under review. Progress has been made on approvals for Halamid (chloramine-T), Aquaflor (florfenicol) and 35% PeroxAid (hydrogen peroxide) as therapeutic drugs. Data are also being generated for AQUI-S 20E, a fish sedative.

Frequency and Severity of Neutropenia Associated with Food and Drug Administration Approved and Compounded Formulations of Lomustine in Dogs with Cancer.

PubMed

Burton, J H; Stanley, S D; Knych, H K; Rodriguez, C O; Skorupski, K A; Rebhun, R B

2016-01-01

Compounded lomustine is used commonly in veterinary patients. However, the potential variability in these formulations is unknown and concern exists that compounded formulations of drugs may differ in potency from Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved products. The initial objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency and severity of neutropenia in dogs treated with compounded or FDA-approved formulations of lomustine. Subsequent analyses aimed to determine the potency of lomustine obtained from several compounding pharmacies. Thirty-seven dogs treated with FDA-approved or compounded lomustine. Dogs that received compounded or FDA-approved lomustine and had pretreatment and nadir CBCs performed were eligible for inclusion. Variables assessed included lomustine dose, neutrophil counts, and severity of neutropenia. Lomustine 5 mg capsules from 5 compounding sources were tested for potency using high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet (UV) detection. Twenty-one dogs received FDA-approved lomustine and 16 dogs were treated with lomustine prescribed from a single compounding pharmacy. All dogs treated with FDA-approved lomustine were neutropenic after treatment; 15 dogs (71%) developed grade 3 or higher neutropenia. Four dogs (25%) given compounded lomustine became neutropenic, with 2 dogs (12.5%) developing grade 3 neutropenia. The potency of lomustine from 5 compounding pharmacies ranged from 50 to 115% of the labeled concentration, with 1 sample within ±10% of the labeled concentration. These data support broader investigation into the potency and consistency of compounded chemotherapy drugs and highlight the potential need for greater oversight of these products. Copyright © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine.

FDA Expands Approval of Venetoclax for CLL

Cancer.gov

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

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.

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

PubMed

Lee, Samuel; Abd-Elsayed, Alaa

2016-09-01

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

78 FR 24425 - Assay Migration Studies for In Vitro Diagnostic Devices; Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-25

... approach to gain FDA approval of Class III or certain licensed in vitro diagnostic devices in cases when a... approach to gain FDA approval of Class III or certain licensed in vitro diagnostic devices in cases when a... fulfilled in order for a sponsor to utilize the migration study approach in support of the change. The FDA...

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

Accounting for heterogeneous treatment effects in the FDA approval process.

PubMed

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

2012-01-01

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-23

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

76 FR 12975 - Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; CERVARIX

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-09

... in situ; and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 1. Subsequent to this approval, the Patent and... testing phase and approval phase as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B). FDA recently approved for...) from MedImmune, LLC., and the Patent and Trademark Office requested FDA's assistance in determining...

21 CFR 314.153 - Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application. 314.153 Section 314.153 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...

21 CFR 314.153 - Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application. 314.153 Section 314.153 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...

21 CFR 314.153 - Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2013-04-01 2013-04-01 false Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application. 314.153 Section 314.153 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...

21 CFR 314.153 - Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application. 314.153 Section 314.153 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...

21 CFR 314.153 - Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 5 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false Suspension of approval of an abbreviated new drug application. 314.153 Section 314.153 Food and Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA...

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.

Price analysis of multiple sclerosis disease-modifying therapies marketed in the United States.

PubMed

Bin Sawad, Aseel; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Turkistani, Fatema

2016-11-01

This study assessed trends in the average wholesale price (AWP) at the market entry of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) approved by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the period 1987-2014. DMT regulatory information was derived from the FDA website. The AWPs per unit at market entry data were derived from the Red Book (Truven Health Analytics Inc.). The AWP history for each DMT was collected from its date of approval to 31 December 2014. The FDA approved label defined daily dose (DDD) for adult patients was obtained from FDA approved labels. The AWP per DDD and the AWP/DDD per year of therapy were computed. Descriptive statistics, Wilcoxon tests, t-test, and multiple linear regression were performed. The statistical significance level was set at 0.05. The FDA approved 12 multiple sclerosis (MS) DMTs, including five new drug applications (NDAs) and seven biologic license applications (BLAs) as of 31 December 2014. The FDA granted orphan designation to five DMTs. There was one DMT approved by the FDA in the 1980s, three in the 1990s, three in 2000s, and five in the period 2010-2014. The market entry inflation-adjusted AWP per DDD was $10.23 for the first DMT (mitoxantrone hydrochloride) that was approved in the 1980s. The median market entry inflation-adjusted AWP per DDD was $12.41 (interquartile range [IQR] = 4.51) for DMTs approved in the 1990s, $71.26 (IQR = 58.35) in the 2000s, and $172.56 (IQR = 84.97) in the period 2010-2014. The median AWP per DDD was statistically significantly different (p = 0.011) for orphan (median = $41.82, IQR = 56.077) compared to non-orphan drugs (median = $171.32, IQR = 199.29). Year of market entry was positively associated with DMT prices at US market entry (p = 0.01). The AWP per DDD for DMTs at market entry increased substantially over time. The increase in DMTs prices exceeded the general consumer price index.

Progress in the Fight Against Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria? A Review of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-Approved Antibiotics, 2010-2015.

PubMed

Deak, Dalia; Outterson, Kevin; Powers, John H; Kesselheim, Aaron S

2016-09-06

A weak antibiotic pipeline and the increase in drug-resistant pathogens have led to calls for more new antibiotics. Eight new antibiotics were approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between January 2010 and December 2015: ceftaroline, fidaxomicin, bedaquiline, dalbavancin, tedizolid, oritavancin, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-avibactam. This study evaluates the development course and pivotal trials of these antibiotics for their innovativeness, development process, documented patient outcomes, and cost. Data sources were FDA approval packages and databases (January 2010 to December 2015); the Red Book (Truven Health Analytics); Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations (FDA); and supplementary information from company filings, press releases, and media reports. Four antibiotics were approved for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection. Seven had similar mechanisms of action to those of previously approved drugs. Six were initially developed by small to midsized companies, and 7 are currently marketed by 1 of 3 large companies. The drugs spent a median of 6.2 years in clinical trials (interquartile range [IQR], 5.4 to 8.8 years) and 8 months in FDA review (IQR, 7.5 to 8 months). The median number of patients enrolled in the pivotal trials was 666 (IQR, 553 to 739 patients; full range, 44 to 1005 patients), and median trial duration was 18 months (IQR, 15 to 22 months). Seven drugs were approved on the basis of pivotal trials evaluating noninferiority. One drug demonstrated superiority on an exploratory secondary end point, 2 showed decreased efficacy in patients with renal insufficiency, and 1 showed increased mortality compared with older drugs. Seven of the drugs are substantially more expensive than their trial comparators. Limitations are that future research may show benefit to patients, new drugs from older classes may show superior effectiveness in specific patient populations, and initial U.S. prices for each new antibiotic were obtained from public sources. Recently marketed antibiotics are more expensive but have been approved without evidence of clinical superiority.

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

PubMed

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

2017-04-01

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

78 FR 52776 - Documents to Support Submission of an Electronic Common Technical Document; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-26

... obtain the documents at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmission...BloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm . Dated: August 20, 2013...

76 FR 66311 - Draft Documents To Support Submission of an Electronic Common Technical Document; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-10-26

.../DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmissionRequirements/ElectronicSubmissions/ucm253101.htm , http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm , or http...

78 FR 10181 - Documents To Support Submission of an Electronic Common Technical Document; Availability

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-13

... obtain the documents at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmission...BloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm . Dated: February 8, 2013...

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...

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.102 - Communications between FDA and applicants.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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...

78 FR 18233 - Medical Devices; Technical Amendment

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-26

... the right column: Section Remove Add 814.20 http://www.fda.gov/ http://www.fda.gov/ cdrh/devadvice.../ PremarketApproval PMA/default.htm. 822.7 http://www.fda.gov/ http://www.fda.gov/ cdrh/ombudsman/ AboutFDA/ dispute.html. CentersOffices/ OfficeofMedicalPr oductsandTobacco/ CDRH/ CDRHOmbudsman/ default.htm. 822.15...

FDA Expands Approval of Brentuximab for Hodgkin Lymphoma

Cancer.gov

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

78 FR 950 - Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-07

..., FDA- 2012-M-0965, FDA-2012-M-0968, FDA-2012-M-1011, and FDA-2012-M-1013] Medical Devices; Availability...\\ February 16, 2011. Adjustable Gastric Banding System. P100049, FDA-2012-M-0893....... Torax Medical, Inc.... Trabecular Micro- Bypass Stent and Inserter. P110007, FDA-2012-M-0734....... Abbott Medical Healon[supreg...

Some Non-FDA Approved Uses for Neuromodulation in Treating Autonomic Nervous System Disorders: A Discussion of the Preliminary Support.

PubMed

Lee, Samuel; Abd-Elsayed, Alaa

2016-12-01

Neuromodulation, including cavernous nerve stimulation, gastric electrical stimulation, deep brain stimulation, and vagus nerve stimulation, has been used with success in treating several functional disease conditions. The FDA has approved the use of neuromodulation for a few indications. We discuss in our review article the evidence of using neuromodulation for treating some important disorders involving the autonomic nervous system that are not currently FDA approved. This was a review article that included a systematic online web search for human clinical studies testing the efficacy of neuromodulation in treating erectile dysfunction, gastroparesis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, obesity, asthma, and heart failure. Our review includes all feasibility studies, nonrandomized clinical trials, and randomized controlled trials. Our systematic literature search found 3, 4, 5, 4, 1, and 4 clinical studies relating to erectile dysfunction, gastroparesis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, obesity, asthma, and heart failure, respectively. This review article shows preliminary support based on clinical studies that neuromodulation can be of benefit for patients with important autonomic nervous system disease conditions that are not currently approved by the FDA. All of these investigational uses are encouraging; further studies are necessary and warranted for all indications discussed in this review before achieving FDA approval. © 2016 International Neuromodulation Society.

Characteristics of Clinical Studies Used for US Food and Drug Administration Approval of High-Risk Medical Device Supplements.

PubMed

Zheng, Sarah Y; Dhruva, Sanket S; Redberg, Rita F

2017-08-15

High-risk medical devices often undergo modifications, which are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through various kinds of premarket approval (PMA) supplements. There have been multiple high-profile recalls of devices approved as PMA supplements. To characterize the quality of the clinical studies and data (strength of evidence) used to support FDA approval of panel-track supplements (a type of PMA supplement pathway that is used for significant changes in a device or indication for use and always requires clinical data). Descriptive study of clinical studies supporting panel-track supplements approved by the FDA between April 19, 2006, and October 9, 2015. Panel-track supplement approval. Methodological quality of studies including randomization, blinding, type of controls, clinical vs surrogate primary end points, use of post hoc analyses, and reporting of age and sex. Eighty-three clinical studies supported the approval of 78 panel-track supplements, with 71 panel-track supplements (91%) supported by a single study. Of the 83 studies, 37 (45%) were randomized clinical trials and 25 (30%) were blinded. The median number of patients per study was 185 (interquartile range, 75-305), and the median follow-up duration was 180 days (interquartile range, 84-270 days). There were a total of 150 primary end points (mean [SD], 1.8 [1.2] per study), and 57 primary end points (38%) were compared with controls. Of primary end points with controls, 6 (11%) were retrospective controls and 51 (89%) were active controls. One hundred twenty-one primary end points (81%) were surrogate end points. Thirty-three studies (40%) did not report age and 25 (30%) did not report sex for all enrolled patients. The FDA required postapproval studies for 29 of 78 (37%) panel-track supplements. Among clinical studies used to support FDA approval of high-risk medical device modifications, fewer than half were randomized, blinded, or controlled, and most primary outcomes were based on surrogate end points. These findings suggest that the quality of studies and data evaluated to support approval by the FDA of modifications of high-risk devices should be improved.

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.

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.

77 FR 8884 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Quality Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity to a...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-15

... information (e.g., characterization, adventitious agent safety, process controls, and specifications) for the... Manufacturing Process Assessment of Physiochemical Properties Functional Activities Receptor Binding and... 351(k) application. FDA will also seek OMB approval for this information collection. In addition, this...

Regulatory Aspects of Optical Methods and Exogenous Targets for Cancer Detection.

PubMed

Tummers, Willemieke S; Warram, Jason M; Tipirneni, Kiranya E; Fengler, John; Jacobs, Paula; Shankar, Lalitha; Henderson, Lori; Ballard, Betsy; Pogue, Brian W; Weichert, Jamey P; Bouvet, Michael; Sorger, Jonathan; Contag, Christopher H; Frangioni, John V; Tweedle, Michael F; Basilion, James P; Gambhir, Sanjiv S; Rosenthal, Eben L

2017-05-01

Considerable advances in cancer-specific optical imaging have improved the precision of tumor resection. In comparison to traditional imaging modalities, this technology is unique in its ability to provide real-time feedback to the operating surgeon. Given the significant clinical implications of optical imaging, there is an urgent need to standardize surgical navigation tools and contrast agents to facilitate swift regulatory approval. Because fluorescence-enhanced surgery requires a combination of both device and drug, each may be developed in conjunction, or separately, which are important considerations in the approval process. This report is the result of a one-day meeting held on May 4, 2016 with officials from the National Cancer Institute, the FDA, members of the American Society of Image-Guided Surgery, and members of the World Molecular Imaging Society, which discussed consensus methods for FDA-directed human testing and approval of investigational optical imaging devices as well as contrast agents for surgical applications. The goal of this workshop was to discuss FDA approval requirements and the expectations for approval of these novel drugs and devices, packaged separately or in combination, within the context of optical surgical navigation. In addition, the workshop acted to provide clarity to the research community on data collection and trial design. Reported here are the specific discussion items and recommendations from this critical and timely meeting. Cancer Res; 77(9); 2197-206. ©2017 AACR . ©2017 American Association for Cancer Research.

78 FR 22554 - Document to Support Submission of an Electronic Common Technical Document-Specifications for File...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-16

... documents at either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/FormsSubmissionRequirements...Vaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm . Dated: April 10, 2013. Leslie Kux...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

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

21 CFR 314.106 - Foreign data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of...

21 CFR 314.106 - Foreign data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of...

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...

21 CFR 314.106 - Foreign data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

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

21 CFR 314.106 - Foreign data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of...

21 CFR 314.106 - Foreign data.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated... without the need for an on-site inspection by FDA or, if FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Failure of...

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

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

42 CFR 405.203 - FDA categorization of investigational devices.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

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

21 CFR 314.151 - Withdrawal of approval of an abbreviated new drug application under section 505(j)(5) of the act.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.151 Withdrawal...

21 CFR 314.151 - Withdrawal of approval of an abbreviated new drug application under section 505(j)(5) of the act.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.151 Withdrawal...

21 CFR 314.151 - Withdrawal of approval of an abbreviated new drug application under section 505(j)(5) of the act.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.151 Withdrawal...

21 CFR 314.151 - Withdrawal of approval of an abbreviated new drug application under section 505(j)(5) of the act.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.151 Withdrawal...

21 CFR 314.151 - Withdrawal of approval of an abbreviated new drug application under section 505(j)(5) of the act.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.151 Withdrawal...

Adverse drug event monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Ahmad, Syed Rizwanuddin

2003-01-01

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

Adverse Drug Event Monitoring at the Food and Drug Administration

PubMed Central

Ahmad, Syed Rizwanuddin

2003-01-01

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

Annual update: drugs, diagnostics and devices.

PubMed

Berardinelli, Candace; Kupecz, Deborah

2003-03-01

As NPs continue to play an important role in health care as administers of prescriptions, the value of reviewing the latest Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approvals for new drugs and devices is immeasurable. In 2002, the FDA approved several new drugs and devices, as well as monitored previously approved drugs for adverse reactions and untoward events. This article provides a brief review of relevant primary care topics.

Resistance to synthetic blood penetration of National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health-approved N95 filtering facepiece respirators and surgical N95 respirators

PubMed Central

Rengasamy, Samy; Sbarra, Deborah; Nwoko, Julian; Shaffer, Ronald

2015-01-01

Background Surgical N95 filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs), certified by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as a respirator and cleared by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a surgical mask, are often used to protect from the inhalation of infectious aerosols and from splashes/sprays of body fluids in health care facilities. A shortage of respirators can be expected during a pandemic. The availability of surgical N95 FFRs can potentially be increased by incorporating FDA clearance requirements in the NIOSH respirator approval process. Methods Fluid resistance of NIOSH-approved N95 FFRs, and FDA-cleared surgical N95 FFRs and surgical masks was tested using the ASTM F1862 method at 450 and 635 cm/sec velocities and compared with the results from a third-party independent laboratory. Blood penetration through different layers of filter media of masks were also analyzed visually. Results Four N95 FFR models showed no test failures at both velocities. The penetration results obtained in the NIOSH laboratory were comparable to those from the third-party independent laboratory. The number of respirator samples failing the test increased with increasing test velocity. Conclusions The results indicate that several NIOSH-approved N95 FFR models would likely pass FD clearance requirements for resistance to synthetic blood penetration. PMID:26231551

Marketing approval for the lithotripter.

PubMed

Nightingale, S L; Young, F E

1986-01-01

In December 1984, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted Dornier Systems (FRG) approval to market the external shock wave lithotripter (ESWL) in the USA. The Medical Device Amendments of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act require that the FDA evaluate the safety and effectiveness of medical devices intended for commercial distribution in the U.S. Such evaluation includes basic scientific studies, animal testing, and investigational studies in human subjects, culminating in a judgment concerning acceptable risks in terms of anticipated benefits, and whether the device is effective for its intended use. Prior to human studies in West Germany, Dornier had evaluated the destruction of stones of varying composition, measured the rate and energy of stone destruction, and tested blood samples and lymphocyte cultures exposed to shock waves. In addition, studies in both rats and dogs had demonstrated the feasibility of the technique and evidence of safety. Such data are provided by manufacturers when applying for an investigational device exemption (IDE) from the FDA, which permits clinical studies in humans; such studies also require the approval of an Institutional Review Board. The FDA approved Dornier's IDE, allowing human investigational use of the ESWL in facilities in the U.S., conducted concurrently with similar studies in West Germany. Upon completion of clinical trials, data acquired in vitro, in laboratory animals, and in human investigations are submitted to the FDA for a premarked approval application (PMAA). The Agency was given 6 months to make a decision, taking into consideration the recommendation of an advisory panel of experts from outside the Agency who had reviewed the same data. In its evaluation of the ESWL for safety and effectiveness, the FDA considered the question of alternative practices and procedures to treat nephrolithiasis, including percutaneous nephrolithotomy and open surgical procedures, and the adverse effects of such procedures. Clinical data available at the time of review for approval included reports of treatment of 667 patients in West German centers, and 327 patients treated in three U.S. facilities. Dornier and the FDA initiated discussions concerning the labeling of the device and a postmarketing surveillance plan. These were completed and marketing approval for the ESWL was granted.

21 CFR 314.103 - Dispute resolution.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.103 Dispute resolution. (a) General. FDA is committed to resolving differences between applicants and FDA reviewing divisions with respect to technical requirements for applications or abbreviated...

21 CFR 314.103 - Dispute resolution.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.103 Dispute resolution. (a) General. FDA is committed to resolving differences between applicants and FDA reviewing divisions with respect to technical requirements for applications or abbreviated...

21 CFR 314.103 - Dispute resolution.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.103 Dispute resolution. (a) General. FDA is committed to resolving differences between applicants and FDA reviewing divisions with respect to technical requirements for applications or abbreviated...

21 CFR 314.103 - Dispute resolution.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.103 Dispute resolution. (a) General. FDA is committed to resolving differences between applicants and FDA reviewing divisions with respect to technical requirements for applications or abbreviated...

21 CFR 314.103 - Dispute resolution.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.103 Dispute resolution. (a) General. FDA is committed to resolving differences between applicants and FDA reviewing divisions with respect to technical requirements for applications or abbreviated...

Aripiprazole for irritability associated with autistic disorder in children and adolescents aged 6–17 years

PubMed Central

Blankenship, Kelly; Erickson, Craig A; Stigler, Kimberly A; Posey, David J; McDougle, Christopher J

2011-01-01

Aripiprazole was recently US FDA-approved to treat irritability in children and adolescents with autistic disorder aged 6–17 years. There are currently only two psychotropics approved by the FDA to treat irritability in the autistic population. This drug profile will discuss available studies of aripiprazole in individuals with pervasive developmental disorders, two of which led to its recent FDA approval. We will discuss the efficacy, as well as the safety and tolerability of the drug documented in these studies. In addition, the chemistry, pharmacokinetics, metabolism and mechanism of action of aripiprazole will be reviewed. PMID:21359119

Overcoming obstacles to repurposing for neurodegenerative disease

PubMed Central

Shineman, Diana W; Alam, John; Anderson, Margaret; Black, Sandra E; Carman, Aaron J; Cummings, Jeffrey L; Dacks, Penny A; Dudley, Joel T; Frail, Donald E; Green, Allan; Lane, Rachel F; Lappin, Debra; Simuni, Tanya; Stefanacci, Richard G; Sherer, Todd; Fillit, Howard M

2014-01-01

Repurposing Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drugs for a new indication may offer an accelerated pathway for new treatments to patients but is also fraught with significant commercial, regulatory, and reimbursement challenges. The Alzheimer’s Drug Discovery Foundation (ADDF) and the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research (MJFF) convened an advisory panel in October 2013 to understand stakeholder perspectives related to repurposing FDA-approved drugs for neurodegenerative diseases. Here, we present opportunities on how philanthropy, industry, and government can begin to address these challenges, promote policy changes, and develop targeted funding strategies to accelerate the potential of FDA-approved repurposed drugs. PMID:25356422

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

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

PubMed

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

2015-08-11

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves high-risk medical devices, those that support or sustain human life or present potential unreasonable risk to patients, via the Premarket Approval (PMA) pathway. The generation of clinical evidence to understand device safety and effectiveness is shifting from predominantly premarket to continual study throughout the total product life cycle. To characterize the clinical evidence generated for high-risk therapeutic devices over the total product life cycle. All clinical studies of high-risk therapeutic devices receiving initial market approval via the PMA pathway in 2010 and 2011 identified through ClinicalTrials.gov and publicly available FDA documents as of October 2014. Studies were characterized by type (pivotal, studies that served as the basis of FDA approval; FDA-required postapproval studies [PAS]; or manufacturer/investigator-initiated); premarket or postmarket; status (completed, ongoing, or terminated/unknown); and design features, including enrollment, comparator, and longest duration of primary effectiveness end point follow-up. In 2010 and 2011, 28 high-risk therapeutic devices received initial marketing approval via the PMA pathway. We identified 286 clinical studies of these devices: 82 (28.7%) premarket and 204 (71.3%) postmarket, among which there were 52 (18.2%) nonpivotal premarket studies, 30 (10.5%) pivotal premarket studies, 33 (11.5%) FDA-required PAS, and 171 (59.8%) manufacturer/investigator-initiated postmarket studies. Six of 33 (18.2%) PAS and 20 of 171 (11.7%) manufacturer/investigator-initiated postmarket studies were reported as completed. No postmarket studies were identified for 5 (17.9%) devices; 3 or fewer were identified for 13 (46.4%) devices overall. Median enrollment was 65 patients (interquartile range [IQR], 25-111), 241 patients (IQR, 147-415), 222 patients (IQR, 119-640), and 250 patients (IQR, 60-800) for nonpivotal premarket, pivotal, FDA-required PAS, and manufacturer/investigator-initiated postmarket studies, respectively. Approximately half of all studies used no comparator (pivotal: 13/30 [43.3%]; completed postmarket: 16/26 [61.5%]; ongoing postmarket: 70/153 [45.8%]). Median duration of primary effectiveness end point follow-up was 3.0 months (IQR, 3.0-12.0), 9.0 months (IQR, 0.3-12.0), and 12.0 months (IQR, 7.0-24.0) for pivotal, completed postmarket, and ongoing postmarket studies, respectively. Among high-risk therapeutic devices approved via the FDA PMA pathway, total product life cycle evidence generation varied in both the number and quality of premarket and postmarket studies, with approximately 13% of initiated postmarket studies completed between 3 and 5 years after FDA approval.

Is It a Cosmetic, a Drug, or Both? (or Is It Soap?)

MedlinePlus

... of product. Firms sometimes violate the law by marketing a cosmetic with a drug claim or by marketing a drug as if it were a cosmetic, ... that FDA approve a pharmaceutical for sale and marketing in the United States. FDA only approves an ...

21 CFR 314.54 - Procedure for submission of an application requiring investigations for approval of a new...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.54... effectiveness of the drug product. (iii) Identification of the listed drug for which FDA has made a finding of...

21 CFR 314.54 - Procedure for submission of an application requiring investigations for approval of a new...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.54... effectiveness of the drug product. (iii) Identification of the listed drug for which FDA has made a finding of...

21 CFR 314.54 - Procedure for submission of an application requiring investigations for approval of a new...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.54... effectiveness of the drug product. (iii) Identification of the listed drug for which FDA has made a finding of...

21 CFR 314.54 - Procedure for submission of an application requiring investigations for approval of a new...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.54... effectiveness of the drug product. (iii) Identification of the listed drug for which FDA has made a finding of...

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.

Interchangeability, Safety and Efficacy of Modified-Release Drug Formulations in the USA: The Case of Opioid and Other Nervous System Drugs.

PubMed

Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Hansen, Richard

2016-04-01

Modified-release drugs may provide clinical advantages compared to immediate-release forms and improve convenience to the patient and health outcomes. Concerns have been raised regarding interchangeability, efficacy, and safety of modified-release formulations. This study analyses all US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved modified-release formulations and market trends, and illustrates how bioequivalence and safety of generic modified-release products compare to their respective brand name drugs and other generic drugs with different formulation design characteristics. This study also examines major concerns related to modified-release formulations: safety of opioids and bioequivalence of generic bupropion and methylphenidate. Study data were derived from the FDA electronic versions of the FDA's Orange Book (OB) and the FDA safety communications web page. Medicare Part D utilization and expenditures data were extracted from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. In May 2015, 276 (11.9 %) of the 2325 active ingredients and fixed-dose combinations listed in the FDA's Orange Book had at least one modified-release form approved by the FDA. The number of approvals increased over time; 52.5 % of modified releases were approved in the period 2000-May 2015. The FDA required a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) to ensure that the benefits of extended-release opioids outweighed its risks of overdose and abuse. The REMS involved 16 new drug applications and 25 abbreviated new drug applications. The FDA addressed interchangeability problems with generic modified-release alternatives of bupropion and methylphenidate including lack of bioequivalence, reduced efficacy, and increased incidence of adverse events. Systematic post-marketing surveillance studies are needed to assess differences in safety, interchangeability, and efficacy of drugs with modified- and immediate-release formulations.

Developing treatments for inborn errors: incentives available to the clinician.

PubMed

Haffner, Marlene E

2004-04-01

Disorders resulting from inborn errors of metabolism (IEM) affect very small numbers of individuals. The entire population, however, of patients suffering the results of inherited metabolic disorders is large, and has been of increasing concern to patient groups and health care professionals in the United States as well as other countries throughout the world. The 1983 US Orphan Drug Act (ODA) serves to facilitate the development of drugs to treat rare diseases by providing several economic incentives. The sponsor of a product designated as an orphan by the Food & Drugs Administration (FDA) Office of Orphan Products Development (OPD) qualifies for tax credits on clinical trial expenses, the award of grant funding by FDA, through the OPD, and 7 years of marketing exclusivity for a designated drug, or biological product that receives FDA market approval. Orphan drug legislation in the US has benefited victims of IEM by encouraging development of drugs for metabolic deficiencies affecting populations that otherwise would be ignored. America's solution to the orphan drug problem has had worldwide impact. The success of this legislation was a factor leading to the 1993 orphan drug law in Japan; the 1997 implementation of a process whereby most FDA-approved orphan drugs and biological products will be similarly approved in Australia; and, in 1999, regulation on orphan medicinal products in the European Union (EU). Today, international support for rare disease research is providing stimulus and motivation to overcome the financial barriers and encourage development of treatment for very rare diseases throughout the world.

Approving cancer treatments based on endpoints other than overall survival: an analysis of historical data using the PACE Continuous Innovation Indicators™ (CII).

PubMed

Brooks, Neon; Campone, Mario; Paddock, Silvia; Shortenhaus, Scott; Grainger, David; Zummo, Jacqueline; Thomas, Samuel; Li, Rose

2017-01-01

There is an active debate about the role that endpoints other than overall survival (OS) should play in the drug approval process. Yet the term 'surrogate endpoint' implies that OS is the only critical metric for regulatory approval of cancer treatments. We systematically analyzed the relationship between U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and publication of OS evidence to understand better the risks and benefits of delaying approval until OS evidence is available. Using the PACE Continuous Innovation Indicators (CII) platform, we analyzed the effects of cancer type, treatment goal, and year of approval on the lag time between FDA approval and publication of first significant OS finding for 53 treatments approved between 1952 and 2016 for 10 cancer types (n = 71 approved indications). Greater than 59% of treatments were approved before significant OS data for the approved indication were published. Of the drugs in the sample, 31% had lags between approval and first published OS evidence of 4 years or longer. The average number of years between approval and first OS evidence varied by cancer type and did not reliably predict the eventual amount of OS evidence accumulated. Striking the right balance between early access and minimizing risk is a central challenge for regulators worldwide. We illustrate that endpoints other than OS have long helped to provide timely access to new medicines, including many current standards of care. We found that many critical drugs are approved many years before OS data are published, and that OS may not be the most appropriate endpoint in some treatment contexts. Our examination of approved treatments without significant OS data suggests contexts where OS may not be the most relevant endpoint and highlights the importance of using a wide variety of fit-for-purpose evidence types in the approval process.

An Unfulfilled Promise: Changes Needed to the Drug Approval Process to Make Personalized Medicine a Reality.

PubMed

Riley, Margaret Foster

2015-01-01

The widespread availability of drugs for personalized medicine has been an aspiration since before the human genome was sequenced. Recently, there is renewed interest; personalized medicine is much in the news. Legislation has been considered with the goal of smoothing, shortening and incentivizing the approval process for therapeutic products. President Obama mentioned the need for new initiatives to achieve such goals in the State of the Union address. But most of these initiatives do not consider the fundamental changes that personalized medicine demands. It requires a statutory structure designed for the development of products applicable for small subpopulations that is very different from our current model which is designed for the development of products for large populations. The current approval process is purposely not designed to consider individual efficacy. It is designed to incentivize reduced variation in clinical trials rather than embracing variation. In addition, it is based on twentieth-century notions of disease focused on phenotype rather than on pathophysiologic pathways. Current foci on the development of companion diagnostics, orphan drugs and post-approval study are important but insufficient. FDA does not have the authority to require the type of standardization, clinical trial design and extensive data reporting and sharing that. is needed to achieve the goals for personalized medicine. In addition, FDA's current drug approval process is too lengthy and cumbersome to deal with the iterative responses personalized medicine entails. If we are serious about wanting to achieve these goals, we will need to entertain such fundamental changes in authority.

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

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.

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.

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

PubMed

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

2015-09-23

To evaluate the use of special expedited development and review pathways at the US Food and Drug Administration over the past two decades. Cohort study. FDA approved novel therapeutics between 1987 and 2014. Publicly available sources provided each drug's year of approval, their innovativeness (first in class versus not first in class), World Health Organization Anatomic Therapeutic Classification, and which (if any) of the FDA's four primary expedited development and review programs or designations were associated with each drug: orphan drug, fast track, accelerated approval, and priority review. Logistic regression models evaluated trends in the proportion of drugs associated with each of the four expedited development and review programs. To evaluate the number of programs associated with each approved drug over time, Poisson models were employed, with the number of programs as the dependent variable and a linear term for year of approval. The difference in trends was compared between drugs that were first in class and those that were not. The FDA approved 774 drugs during the study period, with one third representing first in class agents. Priority review (43%) was the most prevalent of the four programs, with accelerated approval (9%) the least common. There was a significant increase of 2.6% per year in the number of expedited review and approval programs granted to each newly approved agent (incidence rate ratio 1.026, 95% confidence interval 1.017 to 1.035, P<0.001), and a 2.4% increase in the proportion of drugs associated with at least one such program (odds ratio 1.024, 95% confidence interval 1.006 to 1.043, P=0.009). Driving this trend was an increase in the proportion of approved, non-first in class drugs associated with at least one program for drugs (P=0.03 for interaction). In the past two decades, drugs newly approved by the FDA have been associated with an increasing number of expedited development or review programs. Though expedited programs should be strictly limited to drugs providing noticeable clinical advances, this trend is being driven by drugs that are not first in class and thus potentially less innovative. © Kesselheim et al 2015.

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.650 - Termination of requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

77 FR 60442 - Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Butorphanol; Doxapram; Triamcinolone...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-10-03

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0981] Withdrawal of Approval of New Animal Drug Applications; Butorphanol; Doxapram; Triamcinolone; Tylosin AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is...

21 CFR 314.80 - Postmarketing reporting of adverse drug experiences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications... resubmit to FDA adverse drug experience reports forwarded to the applicant by FDA; however, applicants must submit all followup information on such reports to FDA. Any person subject to the reporting requirements...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.108 - New drug product exclusivity.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... investigation means that before or during the investigation, the applicant was named in Form FDA-1571 filed with FDA as the sponsor of the investigational new drug application under which the investigation was...

21 CFR 314.96 - Amendments to an unapproved abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... applicant on the same drug product formulation, unless the information has previously been submitted to FDA... and FDA determines that there may be bioequivalence issues or concerns with the product, FDA may...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.80 - Postmarketing reporting of adverse drug experiences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications... resubmit to FDA adverse drug experience reports forwarded to the applicant by FDA; however, applicants must submit all followup information on such reports to FDA. Any person subject to the reporting requirements...

21 CFR 314.80 - Postmarketing reporting of adverse drug experiences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications... resubmit to FDA adverse drug experience reports forwarded to the applicant by FDA; however, applicants must submit all followup information on such reports to FDA. Any person subject to the reporting requirements...

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

21 CFR 812.30 - FDA action on applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.96 - Amendments to an unapproved abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Abbreviated... applicant on the same drug product formulation, unless the information has previously been submitted to FDA... and FDA determines that there may be bioequivalence issues or concerns with the product, FDA may...

Safety and Efficacy of the BrainPort V100 Device in Individuals Blinded by Traumatic Injury

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-12-01

the functional performance of the BrainPort® V200 device, a non-surgical, FDA approved, sensory substitution system, in persons who are profoundly...The BrainPort V200 device is a wearable, non-surgical, FDA approved, prosthetic device intended for people who are profoundly blind. The BrainPort...BrainPort V200 electronic vision aid (described previously) has been developed under this research. FDA clearance to market the V200 in the US is expected

JCL roundtable: Risk evaluation and mitigation strategy.

PubMed

Brown, W Virgil; Bramlet, Dean A; Ross, Joyce L; Underberg, James A

Many factors enter into the decision by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve a new drug for use by physicians and other health care providers in treating diseases. Initially, the FDA authority was restricted to issues of safety and only later did the documentation of efficacy become part of the review process required for approval. However, all drugs have the potential for causing harm at some dose level to all and at lower doses in certain patients with vulnerability to the particular pharmacology of the agent. As new drugs have been designed to manage disorders that are uncommon, but of significant consequence, they may have adverse effects that are acceptable only because they are so uniquely beneficial to these specific conditions. The risk of these adverse effects may be acceptable since the benefit can outweigh the harm in most patients and the adversity can be predicted and managed. The approval of this category of drugs has grown rapidly since definition of a mechanism of action to manage and modify the risk has been provided by a process known as known as Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy or "REMS." In 2007, the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA) allowed the FDA to require postmarketing studies and the authority to mandate the implementation of a REMS for drugs with efficacy but documented potential for harm. Two relatively new drugs useful in the management of severe elevations of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol have been approved under a requirement for a REMS. These are lomitapide, an inhibitor of microsomal triglyceride transfer protein and mipomersen, an antisense oligonucleotide which reduces the synthesis of apolipoprotein B. Copyright © 2016 National Lipid Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

Trial endpoints for drug approval in oncology: Chemoprevention.

PubMed

Beitz, J

2001-04-01

As with other drugs, new drug applications for marketing approval of chemopreventive drugs must include data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that demonstrate effectiveness and safety for the intended use. This article summarizes the regulatory requirements for traditional marketing approval, as well as for approval under the accelerated approval regulations. Unlike traditional approval, accelerated approval is based on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Discussions with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the validity of trial endpoints that may serve as surrogates for clinical benefit for accelerated approval should take place as early as possible in drug development. Meetings with the FDA to discuss these issues may be requested throughout the clinical development of a new drug.

75 FR 55796 - Determination That VESANOID (Tretinoin) Capsules, 10 Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-14

...] Determination That VESANOID (Tretinoin) Capsules, 10 Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of... Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that VESANOID (tretinoin) Capsules, 10 milligrams (mg), were... approved. FDA may not approve an ANDA that does not refer to a listed drug. VESANOID (tretinoin) Capsules...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-26

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

77 FR 29665 - Determination That PITRESSIN TANNATE IN OIL (Vasopressin Tannate) Injection, 5 Pressor Units...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-18

... Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION... safety or effectiveness. This determination will allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications... suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA determines...

75 FR 14444 - Determination That DIDREX (Benzphetamine Hydrochloride) Tablets, 25 Milligrams, Were Not...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-25

... Milligrams, Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY: Food and Drug... safety or effectiveness. This determination will allow FDA to approve abbreviated new drug applications... or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-05

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

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

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

PubMed

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

2017-10-01

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

Clinical Evidence Supporting US Food and Drug Administration Premarket Approval of High-Risk Otolaryngologic Devices, 2000-2014.

PubMed

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

2017-02-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves high-risk medical devices based on premarket pivotal clinical studies demonstrating reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness and may require postapproval studies (PAS) to further inform benefit-risk assessment. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis using publicly available FDA documents to characterize industry-sponsored pivotal studies and PAS of high-risk devices used in the treatment of otolaryngologic diseases. Between 2000 and 2014, the FDA approved 23 high-risk otolaryngologic devices based on 28 pivotal studies. Median enrollment was 118 patients (interquartile range, 67-181), and median duration of longest primary effectiveness end point follow-up was 26 weeks (interquartile range, 16-96). Fewer than half were randomized (n = 13, 46%), blinded (n = 12, 43%), or controlled (n = 10, 36%). The FDA required 23 PASs for 16 devices (70%): almost two-thirds (n = 15, 65%) monitored long-term performance, and roughly one-third (n = 8, 35%) focused on subgroups. Otolaryngologists should be aware of limitations in the strength of premarket evidence when considering the use of newly approved devices.

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

PubMed

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

2017-10-01

Hundreds of drug products are currently marketed in the United States without approval from the FDA. The 2006 Unapproved Drugs Initiative (UDI) requires manufacturers to remove these drug products from the market or obtain FDA approval by demonstrating evidence of safety and efficacy. Once the FDA acts against an unapproved drug, fewer manufacturers remain in the market, potentially enabling drug price increases and greater susceptibility to drug shortages. There is a need for systematic study of the UDI's effect on prices and shortages of all targeted drugs. To examine the clinical evidence for approval and association with prices and shortages of previously unapproved prescription drugs after being addressed by the UDI. Previously unapproved prescription drugs that faced UDI regulatory action or with at least 1 product that received FDA approval through manufacturers' voluntary compliance with the UDI between 2006 and 2015 were identified. The clinical evidence was categorized as either newly conducted clinical trials or use of previously published literature and/or bioequivalence studies to demonstrate safety and efficacy. We determined the change in average wholesale price, presence of shortage, and duration of shortage for each drug during the 2 years before and after UDI regulatory action or approval through voluntary compliance. Between 2006 and 2015, 34 previously unapproved prescription drugs were addressed by the UDI. Nearly 90% of those with a drug product that received FDA approval were supported by literature reviews or bioequivalence studies, not new clinical trial evidence. Among the 26 drugs with available pricing data, average wholesale price during the 2 years before and after voluntary approval or UDI action increased by a median of 37% (interquartile range [IQR] = 23%-204%; P < 0.001). The number of drugs in shortage increased from 17 (50.0%) to 25 (73.5%) during the 2 years before and after, respectively (P = 0.046). The median shortage duration in the 2 years before and after voluntary approval or UDI action increased from 31 days (IQR = 0-339) to 217 days (IQR = 0-406; P = 0.053). The UDI was associated with higher drug prices and more frequent drug shortages when compared with the period before UDI action, while the approval process for these drugs did not necessarily require new clinical evidence to establish safety or efficacy. This project was not supported by any external grants or funds. Gupta was supported by the Yale University School of Medicine Office of Student Research at the time of this study. Dhruva is supported by the Department of Veterans Affairs as part of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Clinical Scholars program. Ross reports receiving research support through Yale University from Johnson and Johnson to develop methods of clinical trial data sharing; from Medtronic and the FDA to develop methods for postmarket surveillance of medical devices; from the FDA to establish the Yale-Mayo Clinic Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation; from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association to better understand medical technology evidence generation; from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to develop and maintain performance measures that are used for public reporting; and from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation to support the Collaboration on Research Integrity and Transparency at Yale. Fox reports travel support from Oklahoma Society of Health System Pharmacists, Premier Oncology Hematology Management Society, and SEHA-United Arab Emirates. Vizient provides some financial support to the University of Utah Drug Information Service to provide summaries of drug shortage information. Gupta and Ross were responsible for the conception and design of this work, drafted the manuscript, and conducted the statistical analysis. Gupta and Fox were responsible for acquisition of data. Ross provided supervision. All authors participated in the analysis and interpretation of the data and critically revised the manuscript for important intellectual content.

Scouting For Approval: Lessons on Medical Device Regulation in an Era of Crowdfunding from Scanadu's "Scout".

PubMed

Smith, Colleen

2015-01-01

Internet crowdfunding, a new and increasingly popular method of raising capital to develop products and businesses, has recently come into conflict with the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) regulation of medical devices. This Article examines the issues that arise when companies pre-sell medical devices via crowdfunding campaigns before gaining FDA approval of the devices. Because Internet crowdfunding has only been in use for a few years, little has been written about it academically, particularly about its interaction with FDA regulations. The rising interest in crowdfunding, coupled with the downturn in investment in the American medical device industry, make this a salient issue that is ripe for FDA review. This Article uses the crowdfunding campaign Scanadu, a medical device company, conducted in 2013 to raise money to develop its in-home diagnostic device, the "Scout," as a starting point for this analysis. Because it is extremely costly to develop a device and obtain FDA approval, medical device companies should be able to utilize crowdfunding to raise the necessary capital. However, because of the possible dangers medical devices pose, FDA needs to review the risks created by allowing companies to crowdfund medical devices and should issue guidance to help companies comply with FDA regulations while still allowing them to take advantage of the benefits of crowdfunding. This guidance should ensure the continued commitment to consumer safety that is at the core of FDA regulation.

Participation of the elderly, women, and minorities in pivotal trials supporting 2011-2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration approvals.

PubMed

Downing, Nicholas S; Shah, Nilay D; Neiman, Joseph H; Aminawung, Jenerius A; Krumholz, Harlan M; Ross, Joseph S

2016-04-14

Pivotal trials, the clinical studies that inform U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval decisions, provide the foundational evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of novel therapeutics. We determined the representation of the elderly, women, and patients from racial and ethnic minorities in pivotal trials and whether the FDA is making subgroup efficacy analyses among these subpopulations available to the public. We conducted a cross-sectional study of novel therapeutics approved by the FDA between 2011 and 2013. Using publicly available FDA documents, we collected information on the demographic characteristics of pivotal trial participants (age ≥65 years, sex [male, female], race [white, black, Asian, other], and ethnicity [Hispanic, non-Hispanic]) and determined the availability of subgroup analyses by age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We identified 86 novel therapeutic that were approved by the FDA between 2011 and 2013 for 92 indications on the basis of 206 pivotal trials. The median age of pivotal trial patients was 53.1 years (interquartile range 40.6-60.6), and the mean proportion of patients ≥65 years of age was 28.9 % (95 % CI 23.5-34.4 %). Similar proportions of pivotal trial participants were male (mean 50.3 %, 95 % CI 45.3-55.2 %) and female (mean 49.7 %, 95 % CI 44.7-54.7 %). Most participants were white (mean 79.2 %, 95 % CI 75.9-82.6 %), while the mean proportion of black patients was 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.5-9.3 %), that of Asian patients was 7.4 % (95 % CI 5.2-9.7 %), and that of patients of other races was 5.9 % (95 % CI 4.4-7.5 %). Information about ethnicity was available for only 59.8 % of indications, and where such data were available, the mean proportion of Hispanic participants was 13.3 % (95 % CI 10.3-16.3 %). FDA reviewers performed and made available subgroup efficacy analyses by age, sex, and race for at least one of the pivotal trials used as the basis of approval for over 80 % of indications. Although women are equally represented in pivotal trials supporting recent novel therapeutic approvals by the FDA, elderly patients and those from racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented. FDA reviewers generally perform subgroup efficacy analyses by age, sex, and race and make these subgroup analyses available to the public.

21 CFR 314.110 - Complete response letter to the applicant.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... response letter. FDA will send the applicant a complete response letter if the agency determines that we...) Complete review of data. A complete response letter reflects FDA's complete review of the data submitted in...

21 CFR 314.110 - Complete response letter to the applicant.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... response letter. FDA will send the applicant a complete response letter if the agency determines that we...) Complete review of data. A complete response letter reflects FDA's complete review of the data submitted in...

21 CFR 314.110 - Complete response letter to the applicant.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... response letter. FDA will send the applicant a complete response letter if the agency determines that we...) Complete review of data. A complete response letter reflects FDA's complete review of the data submitted in...

21 CFR 314.110 - Complete response letter to the applicant.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... response letter. FDA will send the applicant a complete response letter if the agency determines that we...) Complete review of data. A complete response letter reflects FDA's complete review of the data submitted in...

21 CFR 314.110 - Complete response letter to the applicant.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications... response letter. FDA will send the applicant a complete response letter if the agency determines that we...) Complete review of data. A complete response letter reflects FDA's complete review of the data submitted in...

MedWatch, the FDA Safety Information and Adverse Event Reporting Program

MedlinePlus

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

FDA Approval: Palbociclib for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Patients with Estrogen Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.

PubMed

Beaver, Julia A; Amiri-Kordestani, Laleh; Charlab, Rosane; Chen, Wei; Palmby, Todd; Tilley, Amy; Zirkelbach, Jeanne Fourie; Yu, Jingyu; Liu, Qi; Zhao, Liang; Crich, Joyce; Chen, Xiao Hong; Hughes, Minerva; Bloomquist, Erik; Tang, Shenghui; Sridhara, Rajeshwari; Kluetz, Paul G; Kim, Geoffrey; Ibrahim, Amna; Pazdur, Richard; Cortazar, Patricia

2015-11-01

On February 3, 2015, the FDA granted accelerated approval to palbociclib (IBRANCE, Pfizer Inc.), an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4 and CDK6), for use in combination with letrozole for the treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer as initial endocrine-based therapy for their metastatic disease. The approval is based on a randomized, multicenter, open-label phase I/II trial (PALOMA-1) in 165 patients randomized to palbociclib (125 mg orally daily for 21 consecutive days, followed by 7 days off treatment) plus letrozole (2.5 mg orally daily) or letrozole alone. The phase II portion of the trial was divided into two cohorts: cohort 1 enrolled 66 biomarker-unselected patients and cohort 2 enrolled 99 biomarker-positive patients. The major efficacy outcome measure was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). A large magnitude of improvement in PFS was observed in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole compared with patients receiving letrozole alone (HR, 0.488; 95% confidence interval, 0.319-0.748). Multiple sensitivity analyses were supportive of clinical benefit. The most common adverse reaction in patients receiving palbociclib plus letrozole was neutropenia. This article summarizes the FDA thought process and data supporting accelerated approval based on PALOMA-1 that may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in the ongoing and fully accrued confirmatory trial PALOMA-2. ©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

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

PubMed

Moore, Thomas J; Furberg, Curt D

2014-01-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has advanced multiple proposals to promote biomedical innovation by making new drugs available more quickly but with shorter, smaller, and more selective clinical trials and less rigorous end points. To inform the debate about appropriate standards, we studied the development times, clinical testing, postmarket follow-up, and safety risks for the new drugs approved by the FDA in 2008, when most provisions of current law, regulation, and policies were in effect. Descriptive study of the drugs classified as new molecular entities using preapproval FDA evaluation documents, agency drug information databases, prescribing information, and other primary data sources. Comparison of drugs that received standard review and those deemed sufficiently innovative to receive expedited review with regard to clinical development and FDA review time, the size and duration of efficacy trials, safety issues, and postmarket follow-up. In 2008, the FDA approved 20 therapeutic drugs, 8 with expedited review and 12 with standard review. The expedited drugs took a median of 5.1 years (range, 1.6-10.6 years) of clinical development to obtain marketing approval compared with 7.5 years (range, 4.7-19.4 years) for the standard review drugs (P = .05). The expedited drugs were tested for efficacy in a median of 104 patients receiving the active drug (range, 23-599), compared with a median of 580 patients (range, 75-1207) for standard review drugs (P = .003). Nonclinical testing showed that 6 therapeutic drugs were animal carcinogens, 5 were in vitro mutagens, and 14 were animal teratogens. Other safety concerns resulted in 5 Boxed Warnings; 8 drugs required risk management plans. The FDA required 85 postmarket commitments. By 2013, 5 drugs acquired a new or expanded Boxed Warning; 26 of 85 (31%) of the postmarketing study commitments had been fulfilled, and 8 (9%) had been submitted for agency review. For new drugs approved by the FDA in 2008, those that received expedited review were approved more rapidly than those that received standard review. However, considerably fewer patients were studied prior to approval, and many safety questions remained unanswered. By 2013, many postmarketing studies had not been completed.

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

PubMed

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

2018-04-24

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

The use of compound topical anesthetics: a review.

PubMed

Kravitz, Neal D

2007-10-01

The author reviewed the history of, federal regulations regarding, risks of and adverse drug reactions of five compound topical anesthetics: tetracaine, adrenaline/epinephrine and cocaine (TAC); lidocaine, adrenaline/epinephrine and tetracaine (LET); lidocaine, tetracaine and phenylephrine (TAC 20 percent Alternate); lidocaine, prilocaine and tetracaine (Profound); and lidocaine, prilocaine, tetracaine and phenylephrine with thickeners (Profound PET). The author reviewed clinical trials, case reports, descriptive articles, and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations and recent public advisory warnings regarding the federal approval of and risks associated with the use of compound topical anesthetics. Compound topical anesthetics are neither FDA-regulated nor -unregulated. Some compounding pharmacies bypass the new FDA drug approval process, which is based on reliable scientific data and ensures that a marketed drug is safe, effective, properly manufactured and accurately labeled. Two deaths have been attributed to the lay use of compound topical anesthetics. In response, the FDA has announced the strengthening of its efforts against unapproved drug products. Compound topical anesthetics may be an effective alternative to local infiltration for some minimally invasive dental procedures; however, legitimate concerns exist in regard to their safety. Until they become federally regulated, compound topical anesthetics remain unapproved drug products whose benefits may not outweigh their risks for dental patients.

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

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-05-01

Memantine and Newer NitroMemantine Derivatives to Treat Neurological Manifestations in Rodent Models of Tuberous Sclerosis Complex PRINCIPAL...Approved Memantine and Newer NitroMemantine Derivatives to Treat 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER W81XWH-13-1-0053 Neurological Manifestations in Rodent Models of...to investigate if administration of the FDA-approved drug, Memantine , an uncompetitive/fast off-rate antagonist of the N- methyl-D-aspartate-type

Preanalytic process linked to spuriously elevated HIV viral loads: improvement on an FDA-approved process.

PubMed

Procop, Gary W; Taege, Alan J; Starkey, Colleen; Tungsiripat, Marisa; Warner, Diane; Schold, Jesse D; Yen-Lieberman, Belinda

2017-09-01

The processing of specimens often occurs in a central processing area within laboratories. We demonstrated that plasma centrifuged in the central laboratory but allowed to remain within the primary tube following centrifugation was associated with spuriously elevated HIV viral loads compared with recentrifugation of the plasma just prior to testing. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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."

Commercial implementation of food irradiation

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Welt, M. A.

In July 1981, the first specifically designed multi-purpose irradiation facility for food irradiation was put into service by the Radiation Technology, Inc. subsidiary Process Technology, Inc. in West Memphis, Arkansas. The operational experience gained, resulted in an enhanced design which was put into commercial service in Haw River, North Carolina, by another subsidiary, Process Technology (N.C.), Inc. in October 1983. These facilities have enabled the food industry to assess the commercial viability of food irradiation. Further impetus towards commercialization of food irradiation was gained in March 1981 with the filing in the Federal Register, by the FDA, of an Advanced Proposed Notice of Rulemaking for Food Irradiation. Two years later in July 1983, the FDA approved the first food additive regulation involving food irradiation in nineteen years, when they approved the Radiation Technology, Inc. petition calling for the sanitization of spices, onion powder and garlic powder at a maximum dosage of 10 kGy. Since obtaining the spice irradiation approval, the FDA has accepted four additional petitions for filing in the Federal Register. One of the petitions which extended spice irradiation to include insect disinfestation has issued into a regulation while the remaining petitions covering the sanitization of herbs, spice blends, vegetable seasonings and dry powdery enzymes as well as the petition to irradiate hog carcasses and pork products for trichinae control at 1 kGy, are expected to issue either before the end of 1984 or early in 1985. More recently, food irradiation advocates in the United States received another vote of confidence by the announcement that a joint venture food irradiation facility to be constructed in Hawaii by Radiation Technology, is backed by a contractual committment for the processing of 40 million pounds of produce per year. Another step was taken when the Port of Salem, New Jersey announced that the Radiation Technology Model RT-4104-4048(TM) irradiation facility was chosen to interface with the only East Coast grain elevator in the United States. These factors, along with concern over the ban of EDB as a post harvest fumigant, coupled with the expected FDA action to approve the use of irradiation for the insect disinfestation of fruit and vegetables, should finally permit the commercial implementation of food irradiation to take hold in the United States.

Standards for Lithotripter Performance

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Schultheiss, Reiner; Doerffel, Michael

2008-09-01

Standards for lithotripsy have been developed by the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the FDA. In addition to the existing regulations and norms for the manufacturers, special standards were developed to address a treatment method developed in the early 1980's using extracorporeal shock waves. Initially, the FDA regulated the premarket approval process for lithotripters as a Class III device but reclassified lithotripters in 2000 to a Class II device. The corresponding guidance document for showing the substantial equivalence of new devices with predicate devices will be described in detail. The FDA guidance document is very useful in helping device manufacturers: (i) develop technical performance testing for a shock wave lithotripter within the parameters of an FDA submission, and (ii) conduct clinical performance testing via at least one clinical confirmation study with a small number of subjects. Unfortunately although the submitted data are available at the FDA they are not available in the marketplace and this causes difficulties for physicians in deciding which device to use. The results of the technical performance testing of the LithoGold™ are provided.

26 CFR 51.2T - Explanation of terms (temporary).

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... approved the drug for marketing for any indication other than the treatment of a rare disease or condition... for treatment of another rare disease or condition. If a drug has prior FDA marketing approval for the treatment of a rare disease or condition for which a section 45C credit was allowed, and the FDA...

26 CFR 51.2T - Explanation of terms (temporary).

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... approved the drug for marketing for any indication other than the treatment of a rare disease or condition... for treatment of another rare disease or condition. If a drug has prior FDA marketing approval for the treatment of a rare disease or condition for which a section 45C credit was allowed, and the FDA...

26 CFR 51.2T - Explanation of terms (temporary).

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... approved the drug for marketing for any indication other than the treatment of a rare disease or condition... for treatment of another rare disease or condition. If a drug has prior FDA marketing approval for the treatment of a rare disease or condition for which a section 45C credit was allowed, and the FDA...

78 FR 17933 - Determination That BENADRYL (diphenhydramine hydrochloride) Injection and Two Other Drug Products...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-25

... Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION... effectiveness. This determination means that FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of abbreviated... withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness, or if FDA...

75 FR 81617 - Determination That TRANDATE (Labetalol Hydrochloride) Tablets, 300 Milligrams and 400 Milligrams...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-28

... Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or Effectiveness AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION... effectiveness. This determination means that FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of abbreviated... withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness or if FDA...

Center for Cancer Research plays key role in first FDA-approved drug for treatment of Merkel cell carcinoma | Center for Cancer Research

Cancer.gov

The Center for Cancer Research’s ability to rapidly deploy integrated basic and clinical research teams at a single site facilitated the rapid FDA approval of the immunotherapy drug avelumab for metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma, a rare, aggressive form of skin cancer. Learn more...  

Captopril and losartan for mitigation of renal injury caused by single-dose total-body irradiation.

PubMed

Moulder, John E; Cohen, Eric P; Fish, Brian L

2011-01-01

It is known that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) can be used to mitigate radiation-induced renal injury. However, for a variety of reasons, these previous results are not directly applicable to the development of agents for the mitigation of injuries caused by terrorism-related radiation exposure. As part of an effort to develop an animal model that would fit the requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) "Animal Efficacy Rule", we designed new studies which used an FDA-approved ACEI (captopril) or an FDA-approved ARB (losartan, Cozaar®) started 10 days after a single total-body irradiation (TBI) at drug doses that are equivalent (on a g/m(2)/day basis) to the doses prescribed to humans. Captopril and losartan were equally effective as mitigators, with DMFs of 1.23 and 1.21, respectively, for delaying renal failure. These studies show that radiation nephropathy in a realistic rodent model can be mitigated with relevant doses of FDA-approved agents. This lays the necessary groundwork for pivotal rodent studies under the FDA Animal Efficacy Rule and provides an outline of how the FDA-required large-animal studies could be designed.

Captopril and Losartan for Mitigation of Renal Injury Caused by Single-Dose Total-Body Irradiation

PubMed Central

Moulder, John E.; Cohen, Eric P.; Fish, Brian L.

2011-01-01

It is known that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) can be used to mitigate radiation-induced renal injury. However, for a variety of reasons, these previous results are not directly applicable to the development of agents for the mitigation of injuries caused by terrorism-related radiation exposure. As part of an effort to develop an animal model that would fit the requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “Animal Efficacy Rule”, we designed new studies which used an FDA-approved ACEI (captopril) or an FDA-approved ARB (losartan, Cozaar®) started 10 days after a single total-body irradiation (TBI) at drug doses that are equivalent (on a g/m2/day basis) to the doses prescribed to humans. Captopril and losartan were equally effective as mitigators, with DMFs of 1.23 and 1.21, respectively, for delaying renal failure. These studies show that radiation nephropathy in a realistic rodent model can be mitigated with relevant doses of FDA-approved agents. This lays the necessary groundwork for pivotal rodent studies under the FDA Animal Efficacy Rule and provides an outline of how the FDA-required large-animal studies could be designed. PMID:21175344

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

PubMed

Halpern, Bruno; Halpern, Alfredo

2015-02-01

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

21 CFR 314.162 - Removal of a drug product from the list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.162 Removal of a drug product from the list. (a) FDA will remove a... that the withdrawal from the market has ceased or is not for safety or effectiveness reasons. (b) FDA...

21 CFR 314.162 - Removal of a drug product from the list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.162 Removal of a drug product from the list. (a) FDA will remove a... that the withdrawal from the market has ceased or is not for safety or effectiveness reasons. (b) FDA...

21 CFR 314.162 - Removal of a drug product from the list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.162 Removal of a drug product from the list. (a) FDA will remove a... that the withdrawal from the market has ceased or is not for safety or effectiveness reasons. (b) FDA...

21 CFR 314.162 - Removal of a drug product from the list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.162 Removal of a drug product from the list. (a) FDA will remove a... that the withdrawal from the market has ceased or is not for safety or effectiveness reasons. (b) FDA...

21 CFR 314.162 - Removal of a drug product from the list.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.162 Removal of a drug product from the list. (a) FDA will remove a... that the withdrawal from the market has ceased or is not for safety or effectiveness reasons. (b) FDA...

Development of Pain Endpoint Models for Use in Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials and Drug Approval

DTIC Science & Technology

2016-10-01

consensus meeting, with input from investigators in the Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, FDA Office of Oncology Drug Products, FDA Study...Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium, FDA Office of Oncology Drug Products, FDA Study Endpoint and Label Development Team, and FDA Division of...Abstract. American Society of Clinical Oncology . Chicago IL, June 1-5, 2013. INVENTIONS, PATENTS AND LICENSES None 11 REPORTABLE OUTCOMES

The Orphan Drug Act: Restoring the Mission to Rare Diseases.

PubMed

Daniel, Michael G; Pawlik, Timothy M; Fader, Amanda N; Esnaola, Nestor F; Makary, Martin A

2016-04-01

The Orphan Drug Act has fostered drug development for patients with rare cancers and other diseases; however, current data suggest that companies are gaming the system to use the law for mainstream drugs. We identify a pattern of pharmaceutical companies submitting drugs to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as orphan drugs but once approved, the drugs are used broadly off-label with the lucrative orphan drug protections and exclusivity benefits. Since the law was passed, the proportion of new FDA-approved drugs that were submitted as orphan drugs has increased with a peak last year of 41% of all FDA-approved drugs approved as orphan drugs. On the basis of the current data, we suggest that patients with rare cancers and other diseases may suffer due to dilution of the incentives and benefits. We propose reform to increase submission scrutiny, decrease benefits based on off-label use, and increase price transparency.

The impact of the written request process on drug development in childhood cancer.

PubMed

Snyder, Kristen M; Reaman, Gregory; Avant, Debbie; Pazdur, Richard

2013-04-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Modernization Act, enacted in 1997, created a pediatric exclusivity incentive allowing sponsors to qualify for an additional 6 months of marketing exclusivity after satisfying the requirements outlined in the Written Request (WR). This review evaluates the impact of the WR mechanism on the development of oncology drugs in children. A search of the FDA document archiving, reporting, and regulatory tracking system was performed for January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2010. Drugs were identified and pediatric-specific labeling information was obtained from Drugs@fda.gov and FDA Pediatric Labeling Changes Table. Fifty WRs have been issued for oncology drugs. Pediatric studies have been submitted for 14 drugs. Thirteen received pediatric exclusivity. As of December 31, 2010, labeling changes have been made for 11 drugs. Three drugs were approved for pediatric use. WRs have provided a mechanism to promote the study of drugs in pediatric malignancies. Information from studies resulting from the WRs regarding safety, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of oncology drugs has been incorporated into pediatric labeling for 11/14 of the drugs. Earlier communication and collaboration between the FDA, National Cancer Institute, clinical investigators, and commercial sponsors are envisioned to facilitate the identification and prioritization of emerging new drugs of interest for WR consideration. Since this is the only regulatory mechanism, resulting from specific legislative initiatives relevant to cancer drug development for children, efforts to enhance its impact on increasing drug approval for pediatric cancer indications are warranted. Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

PubMed

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

2009-01-01

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

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

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Saviola, James

2005-03-01

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

FDA 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.

[Twenty-year History and Future Challenges in Transparency Enhancement of Review Process for Approval: Focus on Public Release of Review Reports regarding New Drugs and Medical Devices].

PubMed

Morimoto, Kazushige; Kawasaki, Satoko; Yoshida, Yasunori

2015-01-01

For 20 years, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW, formerly Ministry of Health and Welfare (MHW)) has been trying to increase transparency of the review process for approving reports in order to promote the rational use of newly approved drugs and medical devices. The first Summary Basis of Approval (SBA) was published by MHW in 1994. In 1999, evaluation reports were prepared by MHW and the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Evaluation Center to make them available to the public. In 2005, a notice from the Chief Executive of the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) made procedures for public release of information on reviewing applications for new drugs. In 2006, 90 review reports of newly approved drugs and eight medical devices were revealed on PMDA websites. The dissemination of information by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and that of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) were studied and compared with that of the MHLW and PMDA. While common technical documents (CTD) for new drugs and summary technical documents (STED) for new medical devices have been released by PMDA, such documents are not released by the FDA and EMA. The European Public Assessment Report (EAPR) summary for the public is an interesting questionnaire approach that uses the "What," "How" and "Why" format. Finally, future proposals for the next decade are also outlined.

Development of pediatric vaccine recommendations and policies.

PubMed

Pickering, Larry K; Orenstein, Walter A

2002-07-01

A significant decrease in each vaccine-preventable disease has occurred since the introduction of the respective immunizations now included in the recommended childhood immunization schedule. The process through which a vaccine must travel from development to approval and implementation is complex. Hurdles include receiving approval from several advisory committees, government agencies, and professional organizations. At each step in the process, data regarding safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy are evaluated continuously and rigorously. Once a vaccine is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and incorporated into the recommended childhood immunization schedule, continuing issues include those that deal with supply, safety, effectiveness, and financing. The logistics of development and implementation of pediatric vaccine recommendations and policies are reviewed.

Fixed-dose combination and single active ingredient drugs: a comparative cost analysis.

PubMed

Hao, Jing; Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique

2016-01-01

Fixed-dose combination (FDC) drugs are formulations of two or more active ingredients. To assess the pricing structure and price difference of all US FDA-approved FDCs and single drugs included in the combination. Data were collected from the FDA Orange Book and Drugs@FDA. Average Wholesale Price (AWP) unit price data were derived from The Red Book. The FDA approved 117 FDC. The average AWP difference percentage between the FDC and the sum of the single drugs in the FDC is 84.9 ± 26.2%, and varied by therapeutic class (p < 0.001). The FDC AWP averaged 83.3 ± 23.4% of the single drug AWP sum when there are no generics, and 95.1 ± 42.3% (p < 0.01) when there are two generic single active ingredients in the FDC. The price difference between FDC and single active ingredients in the combination is correlated with the therapeutic class, the year of FDC approval, and the number of single ingredients in the combination that have generics.

21 CFR 314.72 - Change in ownership of an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.72... required to be kept under § 314.81, or a request for a copy of the application from FDA's files. FDA will provide a copy of the application to the new owner under the fee schedule in § 20.45 of FDA's public...

21 CFR 314.72 - Change in ownership of an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.72... required to be kept under § 314.81, or a request for a copy of the application from FDA's files. FDA will provide a copy of the application to the new owner under the fee schedule in § 20.45 of FDA's public...

21 CFR 314.72 - Change in ownership of an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.72... required to be kept under § 314.81, or a request for a copy of the application from FDA's files. FDA will provide a copy of the application to the new owner under the fee schedule in § 20.45 of FDA's public...

21 CFR 314.72 - Change in ownership of an application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.72... required to be kept under § 314.81, or a request for a copy of the application from FDA's files. FDA will provide a copy of the application to the new owner under the fee schedule in § 20.45 of FDA's public...

Nods for Atezolizumab and Nivolumab from FDA.

PubMed

2016-08-01

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

78 FR 66742 - Determination That MOBAN (Molindone Hydrochloride) Tablets (5 Milligrams, 10 Milligrams, 25...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-06

... regulatory requirements are met. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Helms Williams, Center for Drug... now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the ``Approved...

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

Taxane anticancer agents: a patent perspective

PubMed Central

Ojima, Iwao; Lichtenthal, Brendan; Lee, Siyeon; Wang, Changwei; Wang, Xin

2016-01-01

Introduction Paclitaxel and docetaxel were two epoch-making anticancer drugs and have been successfully used in chemotherapy for a variety of cancer types. In 2010, a new taxane, cabazitaxel, was approved by FDA for use in combination with prednisone for the treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. Albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab™-paclitaxel; abraxane) nanodroplet formulation was another notable invention (FDA approval 2005 for refractory, metastatic, or relapsed breast cancer). Abraxane in combination with gemcitabine for the treatment of pancreatic cancer was approved by FDA in 2013. Accordingly, there have been a huge number of patent applications dealing with taxane anticancer agents in the last five years. Thus, it is a good time to review the progress in this area and find the next wave for new developments. Area covered This review article covers the patent literature from 2010 to early 2015 on various aspects of taxane-based chemotherapies and drug developments. Expert opinion Three FDA-approved taxane anticancer drugs will continue to expand their therapeutic applications, especially through drug combinations and new formulations. Inspired by the success of abraxane, new nano-formulations are emerging. Highly potent new-generation taxanes will play a key role in the development of efficacious tumor-targeted drug delivery systems. PMID:26651178

A new chapter in pharmaceutical manufacturing: 3D-printed drug products.

PubMed

Norman, James; Madurawe, Rapti D; Moore, Christine M V; Khan, Mansoor A; Khairuzzaman, Akm

2017-01-01

FDA recently approved a 3D-printed drug product in August 2015, which is indicative of a new chapter for pharmaceutical manufacturing. This review article summarizes progress with 3D printed drug products and discusses process development for solid oral dosage forms. 3D printing is a layer-by-layer process capable of producing 3D drug products from digital designs. Traditional pharmaceutical processes, such as tablet compression, have been used for decades with established regulatory pathways. These processes are well understood, but antiquated in terms of process capability and manufacturing flexibility. 3D printing, as a platform technology, has competitive advantages for complex products, personalized products, and products made on-demand. These advantages create opportunities for improving the safety, efficacy, and accessibility of medicines. Although 3D printing differs from traditional manufacturing processes for solid oral dosage forms, risk-based process development is feasible. This review highlights how product and process understanding can facilitate the development of a control strategy for different 3D printing methods. Overall, the authors believe that the recent approval of a 3D printed drug product will stimulate continual innovation in pharmaceutical manufacturing technology. FDA encourages the development of advanced manufacturing technologies, including 3D-printing, using science- and risk-based approaches. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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

PubMed

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

2014-01-01

The actions and regulations of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are crucial to the entire population of the U.S., specifically the public who take a multitude of drugs and providers who prescribe drugs and devices. Further, the FDA is relevant to investors, specifically in regards to biotech and pharmaceutical companies involved in developing new drugs. The FDA has been criticized for a lack of independence on the one hand and excessive regulatory and expanding authority without evidence and consistency of the actions on the other hand. The FDA approved a single-entity, long-acting, hydrocodone product (Zohydro, Zogenix, San Diego, CA) on October 25, 2013, against the recommendation of the FDA's own appointed scientific advisory panel, which voted 11 to 2 against the approval of Zohydro. Subsequent to the approval, multiple consumer safety organizations, health care agencies, addiction treatment providers, professional organizations, and other groups on the frontline of the opioid addiction epidemic have expressed concern. In addition, the US Congress and various state attorneys general raised serious concerns about the approval of Zohydro, which is highly addictive and may enhance the opioid addiction epidemic. Supporters of Zohydro contend that it is necessary and essential to manage chronic pain and improve functional status with no additional risk. Over the past 15 years, prescriptions for opioids have skyrocketed with the United States consuming more than 84% of the global oxycodone and more than 99% of the hydrocodone supply. The sharp increase in opioid prescribing has led to parallel increases in opioid addiction and overdose deaths, surpassing motor vehicle injuries in the U.S. Recent studies assessing the trends of medical use and misuse of opioid analgesics from 2000 to 2011 have concluded that the present trend of the continued increase in the medical use of opioid analgesics appears to contribute to increasing misuse, resulting in multiple health consequences, despite numerous regulations enforced by multiple organizations. The approval of Zohydro and its defense from the FDA were based on a misunderstanding of the prevalence of chronic severe disabling pain. Based on inaccurate data from the Institute of Medicine, in part caused by conflicts of interest, 100 million persons have been described to suffer from severe pain - the correct number is 22.6 million. This manuscript analyzes 3 important principles of drug approval and utilization based on safety, efficacy, and medical necessity. Based on the limited literature that the authors were able to review including that which was submitted to the FDA by the manufacturers, it appears the safety, efficacy, and medical necessity were not demonstrated. In fact, the study submitted to the FDA showed a 50% pain improvement in only 48% of the patients in the treatment group and 21% of the patients in the placebo group at 85 day follow-up. This is a statistically significant result but its clinical relevance is unknown. The FDA approval decision occurring against the backdrop of the advisory panel recommendation is concerning and may result in serious consequences in the future.

Comparison of treatment effect sizes from pivotal and postapproval trials of novel therapeutics approved by the FDA based on surrogate markers of disease: a meta-epidemiological study.

PubMed

Wallach, Joshua D; Ciani, Oriana; Pease, Alison M; Gonsalves, Gregg S; Krumholz, Harlan M; Taylor, Rod S; Ross, Joseph S

2018-03-21

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) often approves new drugs based on trials that use surrogate markers for endpoints, which involve certain trade-offs and may risk making erroneous inferences about the medical product's actual clinical effect. This study aims to compare the treatment effects among pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on surrogate markers of disease with those observed among postapproval trials for the same indication. We searched Drugs@FDA and PubMed to identify published randomized superiority design pivotal trials for all novel drugs initially approved by the FDA between 2005 and 2012 based on surrogate markers as primary endpoints and published postapproval trials using the same surrogate markers or patient-relevant outcomes as endpoints. Summary ratio of odds ratios (RORs) and difference between standardized mean differences (dSMDs) were used to quantify the average difference in treatment effects between pivotal and matched postapproval trials. Between 2005 and 2012, the FDA approved 88 novel drugs for 90 indications based on one or multiple pivotal trials using surrogate markers of disease. Of these, 27 novel drugs for 27 indications were approved based on pivotal trials using surrogate markers as primary endpoints that could be matched to at least one postapproval trial, for a total of 43 matches. For nine (75.0%) of the 12 matches using the same non-continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than postapproval trials. On average, treatment effects were 50% higher (more beneficial) in the pivotal than the postapproval trials (ROR 1.5; 95% confidence interval CI 1.01-2.23). For 17 (54.8%) of the 31 matches using the same continuous surrogate markers as trial endpoints, pivotal trials had larger treatment effects than the postapproval trials. On average, there was no difference in treatment effects between pivotal and postapproval trials (dSMDs 0.01; 95% CI -0.15-0.16). Many postapproval drug trials are not directly comparable to previously published pivotal trials, particularly with respect to endpoint selection. Although treatment effects from pivotal trials supporting FDA approval of novel therapeutics based on non-continuous surrogate markers of disease are often larger than those observed among postapproval trials using surrogate markers as trial endpoints, there is no evidence of difference between pivotal and postapproval trials using continuous surrogate markers.

Adsorption of Cashew Allergens to Acid-Etched Zinc Metal Particles

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Galvanized metal surfaces are approved by the FDA for use in many food processing steps. Food allergens can cause severe reactions even in very small amounts, and surfaces contaminated with allergens could pose a serious threat. The binding of cashew allergens to zinc particles was evaluated. Whi...

FDA Approval: Ibrutinib for Patients with Previously Treated Mantle Cell Lymphoma and Previously Treated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

PubMed

de Claro, R Angelo; McGinn, Karen M; Verdun, Nicole; Lee, Shwu-Luan; Chiu, Haw-Jyh; Saber, Haleh; Brower, Margaret E; Chang, C J George; Pfuma, Elimika; Habtemariam, Bahru; Bullock, Julie; Wang, Yun; Nie, Lei; Chen, Xiao-Hong; Lu, Donghao Robert; Al-Hakim, Ali; Kane, Robert C; Kaminskas, Edvardas; Justice, Robert; Farrell, Ann T; Pazdur, Richard

2015-08-15

On November 13, 2013, the FDA granted accelerated approval to ibrutinib (IMBRUVICA capsules; Pharmacyclics, Inc.) for the treatment of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who have received at least one prior therapy. On February 12, 2014, the FDA granted accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have received at least one prior therapy. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor that received all four expedited programs of the FDA: Fast-Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review, and Accelerated Approval. Both approvals were based on overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) in single-arm clinical trials in patients with prior treatment. In MCL (N = 111), the complete and partial response rates were 17.1% and 48.6%, respectively, for an ORR of 65.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), 56.2%-74.5%]. The median DOR was 17.5 months (95% CI, 15.8-not reached). In CLL (N = 48), the ORR was 58.3% (95% CI, 43.2%-72.4%), and the DOR ranged from 5.6 to 24.2 months. The most common adverse reactions (≥ 30% in either trial) were thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, neutropenia, bruising, upper respiratory tract infection, anemia, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, peripheral edema, and nausea. ©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

77 FR 26161 - New Animal Drugs; Ceftiofur Crystalline Free Acid; Gamithromycin; Tylosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-03

... [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Ceftiofur Crystalline Free Acid; Gamithromycin; Tylosin... (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval actions for new animal drug applications (NADAs) and abbreviated new animal drug applications (ANADAs) during February 2012. FDA is also...

78 FR 25182 - New Animal Drugs; Dexmedetomidine; Lasalocid; Melengestrol; Monensin; and Tylosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-30

... [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Dexmedetomidine; Lasalocid; Melengestrol; Monensin; and... Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval actions for new animal drug applications and abbreviated new animal drug applications during March 2013. FDA...

77 FR 76862 - New Animal Drugs; Enrofloxacin; Melengestrol; Meloxicam; Pradofloxacin; Tylosin

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-12-31

..., and 558 [Docket No. FDA-2012-N-0002] New Animal Drugs; Enrofloxacin; Melengestrol; Meloxicam... Administration (FDA) is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect approval actions for new animal drug applications (NADAs) and abbreviated new animal drug applications (ANADAs) during November 2012. FDA is also...

21 CFR 314.91 - Obtaining a reduction in the discontinuance notification period.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG... manufacturer of certain products notifies FDA that it will discontinue manufacturing the product. The discontinuance notification period ends when manufacturing ceases. (b) When can FDA reduce the discontinuance...

21 CFR 314.122 - Submitting an abbreviated application for, or a 505(j)(2)(C) petition that relies on, a listed...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... petition FDA for a determination whether the drug product was withdrawn from the market for safety or...

21 CFR 314.91 - Obtaining a reduction in the discontinuance notification period.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG... manufacturer of certain products notifies FDA that it will discontinue manufacturing the product. The discontinuance notification period ends when manufacturing ceases. (b) When can FDA reduce the discontinuance...

21 CFR 314.122 - Submitting an abbreviated application for, or a 505(j)(2)(C) petition that relies on, a listed...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... petition FDA for a determination whether the drug product was withdrawn from the market for safety or...

21 CFR 314.122 - Submitting an abbreviated application for, or a 505(j)(2)(C) petition that relies on, a listed...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... petition FDA for a determination whether the drug product was withdrawn from the market for safety or...

21 CFR 314.91 - Obtaining a reduction in the discontinuance notification period.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG... manufacturer of certain products notifies FDA that it will discontinue manufacturing the product. The discontinuance notification period ends when manufacturing ceases. (b) When can FDA reduce the discontinuance...

21 CFR 314.122 - Submitting an abbreviated application for, or a 505(j)(2)(C) petition that relies on, a listed...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... petition FDA for a determination whether the drug product was withdrawn from the market for safety or...

21 CFR 314.91 - Obtaining a reduction in the discontinuance notification period.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG... manufacturer of certain products notifies FDA that it will discontinue manufacturing the product. The discontinuance notification period ends when manufacturing ceases. (b) When can FDA reduce the discontinuance...

21 CFR 314.122 - Submitting an abbreviated application for, or a 505(j)(2)(C) petition that relies on, a listed...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and... petition FDA for a determination whether the drug product was withdrawn from the market for safety or...

Design of Experiment Analysis of the Sulzer Metco DJ High Velocity Oxy-Fuel Coating of Hydroxyapatite for Orthopedic Applications

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Hasan, S.; Stokes, J.

2011-01-01

High Velocity Oxy-Fuel (HVOF) has the potential to produce hydroxyapatite (HA; Bio-ceramic) coatings based on its experience with other sprayed ceramic materials. This technique should offer mechanical and biological results comparable to other thermal spraying processes, such as atmospheric plasma thermal spray, currently FDA approved for HA deposition. Deposition of HA via HVOF is a new venture especially using the Sulzer Metco Diamond Jet (DJ) process, and the aim of this article was to establish this technique's potential in providing superior HA coating results compared to the FDA-approved plasma spray technique. In this research, a Design of Experiment (DOE) model was developed to optimize the Sulzer Metco DJ HVOF process for the deposition of HA. In order to select suitable ranges for the production of HA coatings, the parameters were first investigated. Five parameters (factors) were researched over two levels namely: oxygen flow rate, propylene flow rate, air flow rate, spray distance, and powder flow rate. Coating crystallinity and purity were measured at the surface of each sample as the responses to the factors used. The research showed that propylene, air flow rate, spray distance, and powder feed rate had the largest effect on the responses, and the study aimed to find the preferred optimized settings to achieve high crystallinity and purity of percentages of up to 95%. This research found crystallinity and purity values of 93.8 and 99.8%, respectively, for a set of HVOF parameters which showed improvement compared to the crystallinity and purity values of 87.6 and 99.4%, respectively, found using the FDA-approved Sulzer Metco Atmospheric Plasma thermal spray process. Hence, a new technique for HA deposition now exists using the DJ HVOF facility; however, other mechanical and biorelated properties must also be assessed.

How Data Packages Lacking Phase III Pivotal Trial Data Can Support Regulatory Approval and Reimbursement for Oncologics in Australia.

PubMed

Macaulay, Richard; Siddiqui, Mohammad Kashif; Stoddart, Samuel

2015-05-01

Oncology drugs lacking supportive phase III trial data have achieved Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) regulatory approval and even European reimbursement approval where no therapeutic alternative exists and early-stage data indicate dramatic clinical benefits. This research aimed to compare under what circumstances oncologics can obtain both regulatory and reimbursement approval in Australia on this basis. Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) Australian Public Assessment Reports, EMA, FDA, and Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) Public Summary Documents were extracted for any oncologic indication appraised in Australia on a pivotal trial package lacking phase III data, excluding pediatric indications and new formulations. Australian Public Assessment Reports were available for six TGA-appraised oncologics across seven indications on such a data package: five of seven approved, one of seven restricted, and one of seven rejected. The EMA and the FDA issued recommendations on these indications an average of 1 and 2 years earlier, respectively. The PBAC appraised six oncologics across 10 indications on such a data package, with four (nilotinib, dasatinib, imatinib, and brentuximab vedotin) approved and two rejected (cetuximab and bevacizumab). Seven of the eight approved indications required multiple submissions, with inadequate clinical data frequently cited as key. Six of the eight PBAC-approved indications included economic modeling on a cost-benefit approach. The TGA will approve oncologics that offer potentially substantial clinical benefits on the basis of an indirect comparison of single-arm trials but at a delay versus the EMA and the FDA. The PBAC reimbursement approval also requires more rigorous supportive clinical data and acceptable cost-effectiveness as demonstrated on a cost-benefit or cost-quality-adjusted life-year metric. Copyright © 2015 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Coming Soon to a Pharmacy Near You.

PubMed

Dubois, Wil

2016-01-01

Recent FDA approvals introduce both cheaper insulin in the form of a biosimilar and lipid-lowering agents with prices that rival the cost of cancer drugs. They also give us brand new ways to lower blood glucose and repair the damage done when glucose control fails. Hundreds more are in the pipeline, of which one or two per year will win marketing approval from the FDA.

Three Drugs Approved for Urothelial Carcinoma by FDA.

PubMed

2017-07-01

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

Health Reports

DTIC Science & Technology

1992-11-01

Food and Drug Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone: FDA Approval Should Be Withheld Administration Until the Mastitis Issue Is Resolved (Report, Aug. 6...Care: Demonstration Project Concerning Future Structure of Veterans’ Health Program (Testimony, Aug. 11, 1992, GA(Yr-HRD-92-53). Recombinant Bovine ...Growth Hormone: FDA Approval Should Be Withheld Until the Mastitis Issue Is Resolved (Report, Aug. 6, 1992, GAO/PEMD-92-26). Page 10 GAD/RRD-98-38 Health

Regulatory aspects of noninvasive glucose measurements.

PubMed

Gutman, Steve; Bernhardt, Patricia; Pinkos, Arleen; Moxey-Mims, Marva; Knott, Thomas; Cooper, Jean

2002-01-01

The Medical Device Amendments of 1976 to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) established three regulatory classes for medical devices. Section 513 of the Act specifies three classes based upon the degree of control and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight that is necessary to assure that the various types of devices are safe and effective. High-risk devices are placed into the most regulated device class, Class III. Under Section 515 of the Act, all devices placed in Class III are subject to premarket approval (PMA) requirements. PMA by FDA is the required process of scientific review to ensure the safety and effectiveness of Class III devices. Advisory panel review is required of virtually all original submissions. Manufacturing facilities of devices requiring PMA approval are also subject to preapproval inspection to assure data integrity and compliance with good manufacturing practices. An approved PMA is granted for marketing a particular medical device for a particular intended use. FDA considers noninvasive and minimally invasive glucose devices that are intended to measure, monitor, or predict blood glucose levels in diabetics to be high-risk medical devices. These devices will have a significant potential impact on the medical care of people with diabetes. The technology offers potential improvements in the quality of life, enhanced blood glucose control through increased frequency of testing, or access to testing, in a broader range of patients. However, the technology is not yet well understood, and the information obtained from these devices is often different from the information that has been the traditional base for the management of diabetes. As a result, FDA requires both analytical and clinical studies to support the intended claims for these new devices.

Digital mammography. Why hasn't it been approved for U.S. hospitals?

PubMed

2000-01-01

Mammography is the only major imaging technique still unavailable in the United States in digital form. This is because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been unable to devise an effective method for manufacturers to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of digital mammography systems. As a result, the agency has been unable to approve any of those systems for marketing in the United States. In this Regulatory Update, we describe FDA's recent efforts to help manufacturers obtain approval and the reasons those efforts have so far proved ineffective.

Delegations of authority and organization; Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, and Center for Drug Evaluation and Research--FDA. Final rule.

PubMed

1991-11-21

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the regulations for delegations of authority relating to premarket approval of products that are or contain a biologic, a device, or a drug. The amendment grants directors, deputy directors, and certain other supervisory personnel in the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) reciprocal premarket approval authority to approve such products.

Drug Safety

MedlinePlus

... over-the-counter drug. The FDA evaluates the safety of a drug by looking at Side effects ... clinical trials The FDA also monitors a drug's safety after approval. For you, drug safety means buying ...

2016 in review: FDA approvals of new molecular entities.

PubMed

Griesenauer, Rebekah H; Kinch, Michael S

2017-11-01

An overview of drugs approved by FDA in 2016 reveals dramatic disruptions in long-term trends. The number of new molecular entities (NMEs) dropped, reflecting the lowest rate of small-molecule approvals observed in almost five decades. In addition, the pace of industry consolidation slowed substantially. The impact of mergers and acquisitions decreased the total number of organizations with past approval experience and continued research and development (R&D) activities to 102, divided evenly between more established pharmaceutical and newer biotechnology companies. Despite these substantial differences, the industry continued to pursue regulatory incentives, as evidenced by a continued increase in the fraction of NMEs approved using an orphan or priority designation, and almost all oncology drugs approved in 2016 utilized these mechanisms. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

PubMed

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

2018-02-01

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

Assessment of Apixaban Prescribing Patterns for Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation in Hospitalized Patients.

PubMed

Gibson, Caitlin M; Smith, Carmen B; Davis, Sondra; Scalese, Michael J

2018-01-01

Apixaban is a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Other DOACs require renal dose adjustments based solely on creatinine clearance. Apixaban differs in that its dose adjustments are more complex, potentially leading to prescribing errors. To determine if adherence to Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved dosing for apixaban is maintained in hospitalized patients with NVAF. Patients ≥18 years old with NVAF who received apixaban during admission to 1 of 3 hospitals were evaluated. The primary outcome was to determine if providers order apixaban in accordance with FDA-approved dosages. Secondary outcomes included determining if pharmacist review increased the number of orders in accordance with FDA-approved dosing, which of the 3 criteria (age ≥80 years, body weight ≤60 kg, or serum creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dL) were met in patients receiving off-label dosing, and the rationale for off-label prescribing. A total of 556 patients met inclusion criteria. Apixaban was dosed according to FDA labeling by providers in 83.4% (n = 464) of orders. After pharmacist review, 87.0% (n = 484) of orders were at the approved dose, 12.2% (n = 68) were underdosed, and 0.7% (n = 4) were overdosed. Most patients who were underdosed met only 1 dose reduction criterion-most commonly age ≥80 years (56.0%). Reasons for off-label dosing included home dose continuation (39.0%), history of or perceived bleeding risk (30.5%), or unspecified/other (30.5%). The majority of apixaban orders for NVAF were based on FDA-approved dosages after provider entry and pharmacist review.

Evaluation of drug content (potency) for compounded and FDA-approved formulations of doxycycline on receipt and after 21 days of storage.

PubMed

KuKanich, Kate; KuKanich, Butch; Slead, Tanner; Warner, Matt

2017-10-01

OBJECTIVE To determine drug content (potency) of compounded doxycycline formulations for veterinary use and of US FDA-approved doxycycline formulations for human use < 24 hours after receipt (day 1) and after 21 days of storage under recommended conditions (day 21). DESIGN Evaluation study. SAMPLE FDA-approved doxycycline tablets (100 mg), capsules (100 mg), and liquid suspension (10 mg/mL) and compounded doxycycline formulations from 3 pharmacies (tablets [25, 100, and 150 mg; 1 product/source], chews [100 mg; 1 product/source], and liquid suspensions or solution [6 mg/mL {2 sources} and 50 mg/mL {1 source}]). PROCEDURES Doxycycline content was measured in 5 samples of each tablet, chew, or capsule formulation and 5 replicates/bottle of liquid formulation on days 1 and 21 by liquid chromatography and compared with US Pharmacopeia acceptable ranges. RESULTS All FDA-approved formulations had acceptable content on days 1 and 21. On day 1, mean doxycycline content for the 3 compounded tablet formulations was 89%, 98%, and 116% (3/5, 5/5, and 1/5 samples within acceptable ranges); day 21 content range was 86% to 112% (1/5, 5/5, and 4/5 samples within acceptable ranges). Day 1 content of chews was 81%, 78%, and 98% (0/5, 0/5, and 5/5 samples within acceptable ranges), and that of compounded liquids was 50%, 52%, and 85% (no results within acceptable ranges). No chews or compounded liquid formulations met USP standards on day 21. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE FDA-approved doxycycline should be prescribed when possible. Whole tablets yielded the most consistent doxycycline content for compounded formulations.

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

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.

AIDSinfo Drug Database

MedlinePlus

... HIV/AIDS-related drugs for that condition. OK Filters Approval: What's this? FDA-Approved Investigational Class: What's ... Encephalitis Tuberculosis Varicella-Zoster Virus Diseases Update Loading... Filter by approval status, drug class, and condition Browse ...

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.

A History of the Sonocare CST-100: The First FDA-approved HIFU Device

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Muratore, Robert

2006-05-01

The Sonocare CST-100 Therapeutic Ultrasound System, designed for the treatment of glaucoma, was developed in the 1980s and became the first high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) device to receive Food and Drug Administration approval. The system arose from studies done by F.L. Lizzi, Eng.Sc.D., of Riverside Research Institute and D.J. Coleman, M.D., of Cornell Medical Center/New York Hospital on the safety of ultrasound diagnosis of the eye. As safety limits were probed, therapeutic regimes were discovered. Optimization of operational parameters, clinical experience, and engineering design came together through a spin-off company, Sonocare, Inc., formed to produce and market the ophthalmic device. Various precedents were set during the approval process, including the acceptance by the FDA of radiation momentum imparted to an absorber as a measure of acoustic power. Many devices were sold, but the laser industry, grandfathered into the therapeutic field, eventually out-marketed Sonocare. The CST-100 remains as a model of elegant industrial design, and existing units are used daily in HIFU laboratory experiments.

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

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

The new collaborative path in medical device development: the medical device innovation consortium.

PubMed

Kampfrath, Thomas; Cotten, Steven W

2013-10-01

The United States medical device market is the world's largest with over $100 billion in sales in 2011. Despite robust industry growth, the efficiency of the FDA approval process for moderate-risk (Class II) and high-risk devices (Class III) requiring 510(k) submission or pre-market approval (PMA) has been criticized. Recently, the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) announced the creation of a Medical Device Innovation Consortium (MDIC), a public-private partnership (PPP) to share knowledge in regulatory science. Overarching goals include creating a forum for the exchange of ideas among the FDA, industry, and non-profit entities; providing monetary investments for project proposals prioritized by key working groups; and developing tools that support cost effective innovation, data-driven methodology, and implementation strategies. Clinical chemists and clinical laboratory scientists have several unique opportunities to contribute to the MDIC. These laboratory professionals have invaluable experience with the real-life performance of a variety of medical devices and their expertise can recognize unmet needs and contribute towards the acceleration of device development. Copyright © 2013 The Canadian Society of Clinical Chemists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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 currently are likely to be overcome only under strong and permanent leadership willing to redefine the role and procedures of the FDA with an open mind.

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 implementing the legislation, the FDA published in the Federal Register a list of standards to which manufacturers may declare conformity. Visit AAMI's Web site at www.aami.org/news/fda.standards for a copy of the list and for information on nominating other standards for official recognition by the agency. The FDA expects that use of standards will benefit the agency and manufacturers alike: "We estimate that in time, reliance on declarations of conformity to recognized standards could save the agency considerable resources while reducing the regulatory obstacles to entry to domestic and international markets," state the authors.

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.

FDA Approvals - Cancer Currents Blog

Cancer.gov

Blog posts on cancer drugs and devices approved by the Food and Drug Administration—including summaries of the evidence to support the approvals and what they mean for patients—from NCI Cancer Currents.

Midyear Commentary on Trends in Drug Delivery and Clinical Translational Medicine: Growth in Biosimilar (Complex Injectable Drug Formulation) Products Within Evolving Collaborative Regulatory Interagency (FDA, FTC, and DOJ) Practices and Enforcement

PubMed Central

Ho, Rodney J.Y.

2017-01-01

Before the 2009 Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act that enabled the U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA) to create the 351(k) Biologic License Application–an abbreviated biosimilar approval process, FDA approved follow-on biomolecule products such as beta-interferon, glucagon, hyaluronidase, and somatropin (human growth hormone) under varying and evolving rules. With the 351(k) Biologic License Application biosimilar approval process in place, currently, there are 4 (licensed in 2015–2016) biosimilars available, namely Neupogen (filgrastim; $1 B/y), Humira (adalumumab; $14.2 B/y), Enbrel (etanercept; $8.7 B/y), and Remicade (infliximab; $6.5 B/y). With well-established product market capitalization of these and other top income producers—such as Rituxan (rituximab; $6.8 B/y), Herceptin (trastuzumab; $6.5 B/y), and Avastin (bevacizumab; $5.8 B/y), and a price differential of 15%–30% compared to branded products, there is an intense interest in development of biosimilars by established pharmaceutical companies. Currently, there are 160 biosimilar candidates in clinical studies, many of which are sponsored by large pharmaceutical companies known for product innovation. This trend will likely continue. Additional information on a biomolecule platform is presented in the Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences Drug Delivery Clinical Trials Database (jpharmscidatabase.org). There are 44,789, 18,456, and 12,897 clinical trials registered to evaluate (1) drug delivery technology, (2) biomolecule platform, and (3) drug metabolism and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interactions; representing 19%–60% increase over the last 3 years. PMID:27876365

21 CFR 314.55 - Pediatric use information.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.55 Pediatric use... disease and the effects of the drug are sufficiently similar in adults and pediatric patients, FDA may... required. (b) Deferred submission. (1) FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of an applicant...

21 CFR 314.55 - Pediatric use information.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.55 Pediatric use... disease and the effects of the drug are sufficiently similar in adults and pediatric patients, FDA may... required. (b) Deferred submission. (1) FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of an applicant...

21 CFR 314.95 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter stating that its abbreviated new drug... information: (1) A statement that FDA has received an abbreviated new drug application submitted by the...

21 CFR 814.42 - Filing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.42 Filing a PMA. (a) The filing of an application means that FDA has made a threshold determination that the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. Within 45 days after a PMA is received by FDA, the agency will notify the...

21 CFR 314.100 - Timeframes for reviewing applications and abbreviated applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.100 Timeframes for reviewing... application for a new drug under section 505(j) of the act, FDA will review it and send the applicant either...

21 CFR 314.100 - Timeframes for reviewing applications and abbreviated applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.100 Timeframes for reviewing... application for a new drug under section 505(j) of the act, FDA will review it and send the applicant either...

21 CFR 314.101 - Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.101 Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application. (a)(1) Within 60 days after FDA receives an...

76 FR 15321 - SEDASYS Computer-Assisted Personalized Sedation System; Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc.'s, Petition...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-21

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-P-0176... of FDA's Denial of Premarket Approval AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that it intends to refer for review before...

21 CFR 814.42 - Filing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.42 Filing a PMA. (a) The filing of an application means that FDA has made a threshold determination that the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. Within 45 days after a PMA is received by FDA, the agency will notify the...

21 CFR 314.101 - Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.101 Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application. (a)(1) Within 60 days after FDA receives an...

21 CFR 314.101 - Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.101 Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application. (a)(1) Within 60 days after FDA receives an...

21 CFR 314.55 - Pediatric use information.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.55 Pediatric use... disease and the effects of the drug are sufficiently similar in adults and pediatric patients, FDA may... required. (b) Deferred submission. (1) FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of an applicant...

21 CFR 314.100 - Timeframes for reviewing applications and abbreviated applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.100 Timeframes for reviewing... application for a new drug under section 505(j) of the act, FDA will review it and send the applicant either...

21 CFR 314.95 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter stating that its abbreviated new drug... information: (1) A statement that FDA has received an abbreviated new drug application submitted by the...

21 CFR 314.100 - Timeframes for reviewing applications and abbreviated applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.100 Timeframes for reviewing... application for a new drug under section 505(j) of the act, FDA will review it and send the applicant either...

21 CFR 314.101 - Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.101 Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application. (a)(1) Within 60 days after FDA receives an...

21 CFR 314.100 - Timeframes for reviewing applications and abbreviated applications.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.100 Timeframes for reviewing... application for a new drug under section 505(j) of the act, FDA will review it and send the applicant either...

21 CFR 314.101 - Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.101 Filing an application and receiving an abbreviated new drug application. (a)(1) Within 60 days after FDA receives an...

21 CFR 814.42 - Filing a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.42 Filing a PMA. (a) The filing of an application means that FDA has made a threshold determination that the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. Within 45 days after a PMA is received by FDA, the agency will notify the...

Medical countermeasures for unwanted CBRN exposures: Part I chemical and biological threats with review of recent countermeasure patents.

PubMed

Singh, Vijay K; Garcia, Melissa; Wise, Stephen Y; Seed, Thomas M

2016-12-01

The threat of chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) warfare has been addressed as the uppermost risk to national security since the terrorist attacks on 11 September 2001. Despite significant scientific advances over the past several decades toward the development of safe, non-toxic and effective countermeasures to combat CBRN threats, relatively few countermeasures have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA). Therefore, countermeasures capable of protecting the population from the effects of CBRN attack remain a significant unmet medical need. Chemical and biological (CB) threat agents can be particularly hazardous due to their effectiveness in small quantities and ease of distribution. Area covered: This article reviews the development of countermeasures for CB threats and highlights specific threats for which at least one countermeasure has been approved following the FDA Animal Rule. Patents of CB countermeasures since 2010 have been included. Expert opinion: Nine CB countermeasures have received FDA approval for use in humans following the Animal Rule, and a number of promising CB countermeasures are currently under development. In the next few years, we should expect to have multiple countermeasures approved by the FDA for each indication allowing for more flexible and effective treatment options.

Filgrastim for the treatment of hematopoietic acute radiation syndrome.

PubMed

Farese, A M; MacVittie, T J

2015-09-01

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved Neupogen(®) (filgrastim) for the treatment of patients with radiation-induced myelosuppression following a radiological/nuclear incident. It is the first medical countermeasure currently approved by the FDA for this indication under the criteria of the FDA "animal rule". This article summarizes the consequences of high-dose radiation exposure, a description of the hematopoietic acute radiation syndrome (H-ARS), the use of hematopoietic growth factors in radiation accident victims and current available treatments for H-ARS with an emphasis on the use of Neupogen in this scenario. Copyright 2015 Prous Science, S.A.U. or its licensors. All rights reserved.

A new paradigm for obtaining marketing approval for pediatric-sized prosthetic heart valves.

PubMed

Yoganathan, Ajit P; Fogel, Mark; Gamble, Susan; Morton, Michael; Schmidt, Paul; Secunda, Jeff; Vidmar, Sara; Del Nido, Pedro

2013-10-01

Congenital heart valve disease is one of the most common abnormalities in children. There are limited technological solutions available for treating children with congenital heart valve diseases. The aim of this study is to provide the details of the consensus reached in terms of pediatric definitions, design approach, in vitro testing, and clinical trials, which may be used as guidance for developing prosthetic heart valves for the pediatric indication. In stark contrast to the various designs of adult-sized replacement valves available in the market, there are no Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved prosthetic heart valves available for use in the pediatric population. There is a pressing need for FDA-approved pediatric valve devices in the United States. The pediatric patient population has been typically excluded from replacement heart valve trials for several reasons. In January 2010, heart valve manufacturers and pediatric clinicians collaborated with academicians and FDA staff in a workshop to suggest ways to successfully evaluate pediatric prosthetic valves and conduct pediatric clinical trials to provide acceptable heart valve replacement options for this patient population. Recommendations, derived from ISO 5840:2005 and the 2010 FDA Draft Replacement Heart Valve Guidance, are provided for hydrodynamic, durability, and fatigue testing. The article specifically addresses in vitro and premarket and postmarket approval clinical studies that should be considered by a heart valve manufacturer for obtaining regulatory approval of pediatric sizes of prosthetic heart valve designs that are already approved for adult clinical use. Copyright © 2013 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Impact of cardiovascular outcomes on the development and approval of medications for the treatment of diabetes mellitus.

PubMed

Joffe, Hylton V; Parks, Mary H; Temple, Robert

2010-03-01

All medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus are indicated to improve glycemic control. Since 1995, FDA has used HbA1c as the primary basis for approval of these therapies because a reduction in blood glucose lessens the symptoms of hyperglycemia and lowering of HbA1c has been shown to reduce the risk for some of the chronic complications of diabetes. Despite evidence of clinical benefit with therapies that reduce HbA1c, concerns have been raised that some diabetes medications may increase cardiovascular risk in a patient population that is already vulnerable to cardiovascular disease. Therefore, FDA convened a public advisory committee meeting to discuss the role of cardiovascular assessment in the pre-approval and post-approval settings for medications developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. After considering the advisory panel's recommendations and other data, FDA published a guidance document requesting evidence showing that new treatments for type 2 diabetes do not result in an unacceptable increase in cardiovascular risk. This review article begins by summarizing the events leading up to publication of this guidance. Subsequent sections discuss the guidance itself as well as general considerations for implementing the new cardiovascular recommendations. The new approach to developing medications for the treatment of type 2 diabetes will lead to evaluation in patients more representative of those who will use these therapies, if approved, and will help healthcare providers make informed decisions when choosing a medication within the growing treatment armamentarium for type 2 diabetes.

Post-market clinical research conducted by medical device manufacturers: a cross-sectional survey.

PubMed

Ross, Joseph S; Blount, Katrina L; Ritchie, Jessica D; Hodshon, Beth; Krumholz, Harlan M

2015-01-01

In the US, once a medical device is made available for use, several requirements have been established by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to ensure ongoing post-market surveillance of device safety and effectiveness. Our objective was to determine how commonly medical device manufacturers initiate post-market clinical studies or augment FDA post-market surveillance requirements for higher-risk devices that are most often approved via the FDA's pre-market approval (PMA) pathway. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 47 manufacturers with operations in California, Minnesota, and Massachusetts who market devices approved via the PMA pathway. Among 22 respondents (response rate =47%), nearly all self-reported conducting post-market clinical research studies, commonly between 1 and 5; only 1 respondent reported never conducting post-market clinical research studies. While manufacturers most often engaged in these studies to satisfy FDA requirements, other reasons were reported, including performance monitoring and surveillance and market acceptance initiatives. Risks of conducting and not conducting post-market clinical research studies were described through open-ended response to questions. Medical device manufacturers commonly initiate post-market clinical studies at the request of the FDA. Clinical data from these studies should be integrated into national post-market surveillance initiatives.

Tattoos and Permanent Make-Up

MedlinePlus

... tattoos you have before any medical procedure. FDA's Role FDA-- has not approved any inks for injecting ... International Programs News & Events Training & Continuing Education Inspections & Compliance Federal, State & Local Officials Consumers Health Professionals Science & ...

Communicating uncertainties about prescription drugs to the public: a national randomized trial.

PubMed

Schwartz, Lisa M; Woloshin, Steven

2011-09-12

Many new drugs are aggressively promoted. The public may not realize that even with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, important uncertainties about the benefits and harms of these drugs remain. We assessed the US public's understanding of the meaning of FDA drug approval and tested how brief explanations communicating drug uncertainties affect consumer choices. We conducted an Internet-based randomized controlled trial using a national sample of US adults from a research panel of approximately 30,000 households. A total of 2944 participants were randomized to receive 1 of 3 explanations about a pair of cholesterol drugs (1 approved based only on a surrogate outcome [lower cholesterol] and 1 based on a patient outcome [reduced myocardial infarctions]). Participants were randomized a second time to receive 1 of 3 explanations about a pair of heartburn drugs (1 newly approved and 1 approved 8 years earlier). Controls received no explanation; the nondirective group received explanations (for the cholesterol drugs, surrogates do not always translate into patient outcomes; for the heartburn drugs, it takes time to establish the safety of new drugs); the directive group received explanations plus advice to "Ask for a drug shown to reduce heart attacks or ask for one with a longer track record." The primary outcomes were choice: the cholesterol drug reducing myocardial infarctions, and the older heartburn drug. Thirty-nine percent mistakenly believed that the FDA approves only "extremely effective" drugs; 25% mistakenly believed that the FDA approves only drugs without serious side effects. Explanations affected choices: 71% of those in the directive group, 71% in the nondirective group, and 59% of controls chose the cholesterol drug that reduced myocardial infarctions (absolute difference, 12% [95% confidence interval, 7%-18%] for each explanation vs control). For the heartburn drugs, 53% of the directive group, 53% of the nondirective group, and 34% of controls chose the older drug (absolute difference, 19% [95% confidence interval, 13%-24%] for each explanation vs control). A substantial proportion of the public mistakenly believes that the FDA approves only extremely effective drugs and drugs lacking serious side effects. Brief explanations highlighting uncertainties about the benefit of drugs approved based on surrogate outcomes and the safety of new prescription drugs improved choices. Nondirective explanations worked as well as directive ones. clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00950157, NCT00950131.

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

PubMed

Howland, Robert H

2008-01-01

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

Regulation and Device Development: Tips for Optimizing Your Experience With the Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Brooks, Steven S

2017-06-01

Physician-inventors are in a unique position to identify unserved patient needs, and innovate solutions to clinical problems. These solutions may also have associated commercial opportunities. The logistics of developing these medical products, however, can seem a daunting task. One of the primary barriers in the United States is the regulatory process of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In this article, we will explore the risk-based approach used by the FDA which forms a framework to consider the regulatory pathway and the process to gain regulatory clearance or approval for medical devices. Inherent device properties and the procedural risk of the devices will determine the rigor with which they are scrutinized by FDA, and the evidentiary requirements to legally market them. Data and evidentiary development will vary depending on risk and regulatory precedent and may or may not require clinical data This regulatory paradigm will determine into which risk-based device class they fit, and whether they are regulated under the 510(k) or premarket approval application pathways. The FDA, although gatekeeper of the US market and tasked with determining which products are safe and effective, can be a powerful ally for product development. They have significant scientific and medical expertise, and mechanisms to both provide guidance, and also to consider novel approaches to product development and evidence development. Early interaction for routine and novel products alike can result in expedited and efficient development. This collaborative approach can be best practice to most expeditiously develop the next generation of products, getting them into the hands of US doctors and into the treatment of US patients. Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Dietary Supplements: What You Need to Know

MedlinePlus

... must notify FDA about that ingredient prior to marketing. However, the notification will only be reviewed by FDA (not approved) and only for safety, not effectiveness. Manufacturers are required to produce dietary supplements in ...

21 CFR 314.2 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.2 Purpose. The purpose of this part... safe and effective. These regulations are also intended to establish an effective system for FDA's...

21 CFR 314.2 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.2 Purpose. The purpose of this part... safe and effective. These regulations are also intended to establish an effective system for FDA's...

21 CFR 314.2 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.2 Purpose. The purpose of this part... safe and effective. These regulations are also intended to establish an effective system for FDA's...

21 CFR 314.2 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.2 Purpose. The purpose of this part... safe and effective. These regulations are also intended to establish an effective system for FDA's...

21 CFR 314.2 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.2 Purpose. The purpose of this part... safe and effective. These regulations are also intended to establish an effective system for FDA's...

Mammography: What You Need to Know

MedlinePlus

... changes in how the nipple looks. Why Is Facility Certification Important? The FDA, or an FDA-approved ... for all women.” Where Is the Closest Certified Facility? About 8,700 certified facilities are now in ...

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

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

PubMed

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

2014-01-01

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

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

PubMed Central

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

2014-01-01

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

Landscape of Innovation for Cardiovascular Pharmaceuticals: From Basic Science to New Molecular Entities.

PubMed

Beierlein, Jennifer M; McNamee, Laura M; Walsh, Michael J; Kaitin, Kenneth I; DiMasi, Joseph A; Ledley, Fred D

2017-07-01

This study examines the complete timelines of translational science for new cardiovascular therapeutics from the initiation of basic research leading to identification of new drug targets through clinical development and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of new molecular entities (NMEs) based on this research. This work extends previous studies by examining the association between the growth of research on drug targets and approval of NMEs associated with these targets. Drawing on research on innovation in other technology sectors, where technological maturity is an important determinant in the success or failure of new product development, an analytical model was used to characterize the growth of research related to the known targets for all 168 approved cardiovascular therapeutics. Categorizing and mapping the technological maturity of cardiovascular therapeutics reveal that (1) there has been a distinct transition from phenotypic to targeted methods for drug discovery, (2) the durations of clinical and regulatory processes were significantly influenced by changes in FDA practice, and (3) the longest phase of the translational process was the time required for technology to advance from initiation of research to a statistically defined established point of technology maturation (mean, 30.8 years). This work reveals a normative association between metrics of research maturation and approval of new cardiovascular therapeutics and suggests strategies for advancing translational science by accelerating basic and applied research and improving the synchrony between the maturation of this research and drug development initiatives. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

Opportunities for Data Science in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The Use of Data to Find Efficiencies in Drug Development Can?t Come Too Soon.

PubMed

Keshava, Nirmal

2017-01-01

By the numbers, 2016 was not a good year for the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. As of early December, only 19 new drugs had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), fewer than half of those approved in 2015 and the lowest number since 2007. Further, the FDA approved only 61% of submissions in 2016, compared to 95% in 2015 [1]. And, among the largest companies, the return on investment for research and development (R&D) fell to 3.7% [2].

Drug interactions evaluation: An integrated part of risk assessment of therapeutics

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

Zhang, Lei; Reynolds, Kellie S.; Zhao, Ping

2010-03-01

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions can lead to serious adverse events or decreased drug efficacy. The evaluation of a new molecular entity's (NME's) drug-drug interaction potential is an integral part of risk assessment during drug development and regulatory review. Alteration of activities of enzymes or transporters involved in the absorption, distribution, metabolism, or excretion of a new molecular entity by concomitant drugs may alter drug exposure, which can impact response (safety or efficacy). The recent Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft drug interaction guidance ( (http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm072101.pdf)) highlights the methodologies and criteria that may be used to guide drug interaction evaluation by industrymore » and regulatory agencies and to construct informative labeling for health practitioner and patients. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration established a 'Drug Development and Drug Interactions' website to provide up-to-date information regarding evaluation of drug interactions ( (http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm080499.htm)). This review summarizes key elements in the FDA drug interaction guidance and new scientific developments that can guide the evaluation of drug-drug interactions during the drug development process.« less

A Phase II Immunotherapeutic Trial: Combination Androgen Ablative Therapy Treatment for Advanced Prostate Cancer

DTIC Science & Technology

2008-03-01

two study statisticians; d) the filing of an investigator IND with the FDA; e) procurement of local IRB approvals; f) procurement of FDA-approval to...compromising the interpretation of outcome data pertaining to the treatment of patients with local or advanced prostate cancer receiving treatment on...patients prior treatment (radiation or cryotherapy ) • 1 patient taking Saw Palmetto (before criteria changed) • 5 patients taking Proscar/Avodart • 2

The Oncogenic Palmitoyi-Protein Network in Prostate Cancer

DTIC Science & Technology

2015-06-01

obesity drug, Ortistat, which inhibits the enzyme fatty acid synthase (FASN), has been shown to slow the growth of human prostate tumors in mice...Orlistat, an FDA-approved anti- obesity drug, suppresses the growth of human prostate tumors in nude mice.5 Despite these advances, the role of lipid...We also tested in vivo whether this network is vulnerable to an intervention that employs a dietary strategy in combination with an FDA-approved

State-of-the-art in design rules for drug delivery platforms: lessons learned from FDA-approved nanomedicines.

PubMed

Dawidczyk, Charlene M; Kim, Chloe; Park, Jea Ho; Russell, Luisa M; Lee, Kwan Hyi; Pomper, Martin G; Searson, Peter C

2014-08-10

The ability to efficiently deliver a drug to a tumor site is dependent on a wide range of physiologically imposed design constraints. Nanotechnology provides the possibility of creating delivery vehicles where these design constraints can be decoupled, allowing new approaches for reducing the unwanted side effects of systemic delivery, increasing targeting efficiency and efficacy. Here we review the design strategies of the two FDA-approved antibody-drug conjugates (Brentuximab vedotin and Trastuzumab emtansine) and the four FDA-approved nanoparticle-based drug delivery platforms (Doxil, DaunoXome, Marqibo, and Abraxane) in the context of the challenges associated with systemic targeted delivery of a drug to a solid tumor. The lessons learned from these nanomedicines provide an important insight into the key challenges associated with the development of new platforms for systemic delivery of anti-cancer drugs. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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.

Recent strategies for drug development in fibromyalgia syndrome.

PubMed

Blumenthal, David E; Malemud, Charles J

2016-12-01

The US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved 3 medications for treating fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). There have been no additional FDA approvals since January 2009 and the efficacy of the FDA-approved medications for FMS has been questioned. Areas covered: The "search for studies" tool using clinicaltrials.gov and PubMed were employed. The term, "fibromyalgia" was used for clinicaltrials.gov. The terms employed for PubMed were "Name-of-Drug Fibromyalgia", "Fibromyalgia Treatment" or "Fibromyalgia Drug Treatment." Clinical trials were reviewed if they were prospective and blinded, and if they employed a comparator, either placebo or another pharmaceutical. Expert commentary: Progress toward standardizing the outcome measures for FMS clinical trials have been made but challenges remain. Several pharmaceutical candidates for FMS have been tested since 2009. The results of these studies with potential novel targets for drug development for FMS were reviewed including the results of trials with sodium oxybate, quetiapine, esreboxetine, nabilone, memantine, naltrexone, and melatonin.

A Pressing Need for Pharmacotherapy Development to Treat Drug Addiction: An Editorial from a Legal Perspective.

PubMed

Andraka-Christou, B

2016-01-01

Only three FDA-approved pharmacological treatments exist for treating opiate dependence, all of which are underprescribed and underused. No FDA-approved pharmacological treatments exist for cocaine or methamphetamine dependence. More evidence-based, FDA-approved treatments are needed for treating drug dependence, but pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to pursue such research without government incentives. Today pharmaceutical companies primarily conduct research and development (R&D) related to "blockbuster" and rare diseases; drug dependence does not fall into either category. Further compounding the problem, pharmaceutical companies have been recently slashing risky areas of research, rather than adopting new areas. Fortunately, the government has a number of options to incentivize pharmaceutical R&D relating to drug dependence treatment, including the following: market exclusivity for new medications, tax breaks, priority review vouchers, liability reduction, and an advanced market commitment. © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The "art" of medicine and the "smokescreen" of the randomized trial off-label use of vascular devices.

PubMed

Ansel, Gary M; Jaff, Michael R

2008-12-01

Once a device is approved for sale in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), it can legally be used by doctors to treat any condition a physician determines is medically appropriate. Based on postmarket published data and physician procedural experience, this may even become the standard of care when an alternative device either does not exist or is inferior in performance, even before FDA approval. This right of physicians to practice medicine without FDA approval is Federal law. The off-label use of medical devices for the treatment of peripheral vascular disease has recently become the latest target by groups with interests that have little to do with patient care. This interference has begun to negatively impact the latitude necessary for physicians to best treat their patients. Copyright 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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

PubMed

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

2018-05-24

To characterize postmarketing requirements for new drugs and biologics approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and to examine rates and timeliness of registration, results reporting, and publication of required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials. Cross sectional analysis. Postmarketing requirements for all new drugs and biologics approved by the FDA between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2012, with follow-up up to 15 November 2017. Postmarketing requirements and their characteristics known at the time of FDA approval, including FDA authority, study design, and study characteristics. Rates and timeliness of registration and results reporting on ClinicalTrials.gov and publication in peer reviewed journals of required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials. Between 2009 and 12, the FDA approved 97 new drugs and biologics for 106 indications with at least one postmarketing requirement at the time of first approval, for a total of 437 postmarketing requirements. Postmarket study descriptions were short (median word count 44 (interquartile range 29-71)) and often lacked information to determine an up to date progress (131 (30%)). 220 (50.3%) postmarketing requirements were for new animal or other studies (including pharmacokinetic studies); 134 (30.7%) were for prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials; and 83 (19.0%) were for secondary analyses or follow-up studies. Of 110 clinical trials, 38 (34.5%), 44 (40.0%), 62 (56.4%), 66 (60.0%), and 98 (89.1%) did not report enough information to establish use of randomization, comparator type, allocation, outcome, and number of patients to be enrolled, respectively. Of 134 required prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials, 102 (76.1%) were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov; of 50 registered and completed studies, 36 (72.0%) had reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov. Among 65 completed studies, 47 (72.3%) had either reported results or were published a median of 47 months (interquartile range 32-67) after FDA approval. 32 (68.1%) of these 47 studies did not report results publicly by the time of their original FDA report submission deadline. Postmarketing requirements for new drugs and biologics were often briefly described and did not contain enough information to characterize study designs. Approximately three quarters of postmarketing requirements for prospective cohort studies, registries, and clinical trials were registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, and nearly three quarters of completed studies reported results or were published, suggesting that at least a quarter of these required studies are not being publicly disseminated. 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.

76 FR 31965 - Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-02

.... ENDURANT STENT GRAFT SYSTEM. FDA-2011-M-0040 P100010 Medtronic Cryocath, ARCTIC FRONT December 17, 2010. LP.... Vascular. LX VASCULAR STENT SYSTEMS. FDA-2011-M-0039 P070026 Depuy, Inc......... CERAMAX CERAMIC HIP.... EXPANDABLE RENAL STENT SYSTEM. FDA-2011-M-0056 P090013 Medtronic, Inc..... REVO MRI SURESCAN IPG February 8...

77 FR 60704 - Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-10-04

...] Fenestrated April 4, 2012. AAA Endovascular Graft (with the adjunctive Zenith Alignment Stent). P110029, FDA...\\ plus CoCr April 12, 2012. Coronary Stent on RX System. P110035, FDA-2012-M-0373 Boston Scientific Epic\\TM\\ Vascular Self- April 13, 2012. Corp. Expanding Stent System. P090015, FDA-2012-M-0390 Leica...

77 FR 15779 - Medical Devices; Availability of Safety and Effectiveness Summaries for Premarket Approval...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-16

... 26, 2011. iliac balloon- expandable stent system. P100042, FDA-2011-M-0792 Gen-Probe APTIMA HPV assay..., 2011. XIENCE PRIME LL EVEROLIMUS-eluting coronary stent system. P100041, FDA-2011-M-0837 Edwards.... EVEROLIMUS-eluting platinum chromium coronary stent system. P100024, FDA-2011-M-0866 Dako Denmark A/S...

21 CFR 314.92 - Drug products for which abbreviated applications may be submitted.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... suitable for an abbreviated new drug application submission by FDA through the petition procedures set forth under § 10.30 of this chapter and § 314.93. (b) FDA will publish in the list listed drugs for...

21 CFR 314.52 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... notice required by paragraph (a) of this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter...) application submitted by the applicant has been filed by FDA. (2) The application number. (3) The established...

21 CFR 314.92 - Drug products for which abbreviated applications may be submitted.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... suitable for an abbreviated new drug application submission by FDA through the petition procedures set forth under § 10.30 of this chapter and § 314.93. (b) FDA will publish in the list listed drugs for...

21 CFR 314.161 - Determination of reasons for voluntary withdrawal of a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.161 Determination of reasons for... act, FDA will initiate a proceeding in accordance with § 314.153(b). (e) A drug that the agency...

21 CFR 314.52 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... notice required by paragraph (a) of this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter...) application submitted by the applicant has been filed by FDA. (2) The application number. (3) The established...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.52 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... notice required by paragraph (a) of this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter...) application submitted by the applicant has been filed by FDA. (2) The application number. (3) The established...

21 CFR 314.161 - Determination of reasons for voluntary withdrawal of a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.161 Determination of reasons for... act, FDA will initiate a proceeding in accordance with § 314.153(b). (e) A drug that the agency...

21 CFR 314.52 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... notice required by paragraph (a) of this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter...) application submitted by the applicant has been filed by FDA. (2) The application number. (3) The established...

21 CFR 314.52 - Notice of certification of invalidity or noninfringement of a patent.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... notice required by paragraph (a) of this section when it receives from FDA an acknowledgment letter...) application submitted by the applicant has been filed by FDA. (2) The application number. (3) The established...

21 CFR 314.161 - Determination of reasons for voluntary withdrawal of a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.161 Determination of reasons for... act, FDA will initiate a proceeding in accordance with § 314.153(b). (e) A drug that the agency...

21 CFR 314.92 - Drug products for which abbreviated applications may be submitted.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... suitable for an abbreviated new drug application submission by FDA through the petition procedures set forth under § 10.30 of this chapter and § 314.93. (b) FDA will publish in the list listed drugs for...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

21 CFR 314.92 - Drug products for which abbreviated applications may be submitted.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... suitable for an abbreviated new drug application submission by FDA through the petition procedures set forth under § 10.30 of this chapter and § 314.93. (b) FDA will publish in the list listed drugs for...

21 CFR 314.161 - Determination of reasons for voluntary withdrawal of a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.161 Determination of reasons for... act, FDA will initiate a proceeding in accordance with § 314.153(b). (e) A drug that the agency...

21 CFR 314.161 - Determination of reasons for voluntary withdrawal of a listed drug.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG FDA Action on Applications and Abbreviated Applications § 314.161 Determination of reasons for... act, FDA will initiate a proceeding in accordance with § 314.153(b). (e) A drug that the agency...

A United States regulator's perspective on the ongoing chlorofluorocarbon transition.

PubMed

Meyer, R J

1999-12-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) put in place a general ban on the use of chlorofluorocarbons for the products it regulates (medical devices, drugs, and foods) in 1978, exempting those products where chlorofluorocarbon use was determined to be essential for the public health. In the intervening years, as the international commitment to a full transition away from all chlorofluorocarbon use took shape under the Montreal Protocol, the FDA has worked with industry to facilitate the development and testing of alternative technologies and products for inhalation drug products. As these alternative products begin to move from testing through the approval process and into marketing, the FDA is working collaboratively with the Environmental Protection Agency, other governmental agencies, and nongovernmental stakeholders to develop a transition policy for the United States. The transition policy for metered dose inhalers must be one that achieves the dual aims of first protecting the patients who rely on these vital medical products, while also achieving the public health need of protecting the ozone layer. As a part of developing such a transition strategy, the FDA published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in March 1997. The ANPRM proposed mechanisms by which the FDA could determine when chlorofluorocarbon use in a drug product could no longer be considered essential. The ANPRM resulted in a large amount of valuable public debate and input. The FDA is now working to incorporate the knowledge gained from these public comments as it continues the rule-making process.

Fibrin sealants: surgical hemostat, sealant and adhesive.

PubMed

Mandell, Samuel P; Gibran, Nicole S

2014-06-01

Fibrin sealants (FS) have been approved for use in the United States since 1998. Since approval, they have been used in a wide variety of clinical settings and new products continue to be introduced. This review covers the literature supporting the USA FDA-approved indications for FS products produced by Baxter Corp. Literature review of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, FDA approval documents and product websites yielded information contained in this article. Mechanism of action, efficacy and safety of these products are covered. FS are generally safe, popular and are used for a wide variety of off-label indications. Their use appears to be expanding rapidly. For many uses, including approved ones, large well-controlled trials are still needed. Additionally, cost-effectiveness data for these products would be a great benefit in guiding their future use.

Tobramycin Ophthalmic

MedlinePlus

... not currently approved by the FDA for safety, effectiveness, and quality. Federal law generally requires that prescription drugs in the U.S. be shown to be both safe and effective prior to marketing. Please see the FDA website for more information ...

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

PubMed

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

2013-10-01

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

Accelerated approval of oncology products: the food and drug administration experience.

PubMed

Johnson, John R; Ning, Yang-Min; Farrell, Ann; Justice, Robert; Keegan, Patricia; Pazdur, Richard

2011-04-20

We reviewed the regulatory history of the accelerated approval process and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) experience with accelerated approval of oncology products from its initiation in December 11, 1992, to July 1, 2010. The accelerated approval regulations allowed accelerated approval of products to treat serious or life-threatening diseases based on surrogate endpoints that are reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Failure to complete postapproval trials to confirm clinical benefit with due diligence could result in removal of the accelerated approval indication from the market. From December 11, 1992, to July 1, 2010, the FDA granted accelerated approval to 35 oncology products for 47 new indications. Clinical benefit was confirmed in postapproval trials for 26 of the 47 new indications, resulting in conversion to regular approval. The median time between accelerated approval and regular approval of oncology products was 3.9 years (range = 0.8-12.6 years) and the mean time was 4.7 years, representing a substantial time savings in terms of earlier availability of drugs to cancer patients. Three new indications did not show clinical benefit when confirmatory postapproval trials were completed and were subsequently removed from the market or had restricted distribution plans implemented. Confirmatory trials were not completed for 14 new indications. The five longest intervals from receipt of accelerated approval to July 1, 2010, without completion of trials to confirm clinical benefit were 10.5, 6.4, 5.5, 5.5, and 4.7 years. The five longest intervals between accelerated approval and successful conversion to regular approval were 12.6, 9.7, 8.1, 7.5, and 7.4 years. Trials to confirm clinical benefit should be part of the drug development plan and should be in progress at the time of an application seeking accelerated approval to prevent an ineffective drug from remaining on the market for an unacceptable time.

Transplant recipients are vulnerable to coverage denial under Medicare Part D.

PubMed

Potter, Lisa M; Maldonado, Angela Q; Lentine, Krista L; Schnitzler, Mark A; Zhang, Zidong; Hess, Gregory P; Garrity, Edward; Kasiske, Bertram L; Axelrod, David A

2018-02-15

Transplant immunosuppressants are often used off-label because of insufficient randomized prospective trial data to achieve organ-specific US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Transplant recipients who rely on Medicare Part D for immunosuppressant drug coverage are vulnerable to coverage denial for off-label prescriptions, unless use is supported by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)-approved compendia. An integrated dataset including national transplant registry data and 3 years of dispensed pharmacy records was used to identify the prevalence of immunosuppression use that is both off-label and not supported by CMS-approved compendia. Numbers of potentially vulnerable transplant recipients were identified. Off-label and off-compendia immunosuppression regimens are frequently prescribed (3-year mean: lung 66.5%, intestine 34.2%, pancreas 33.4%, heart 21.8%, liver 16.5%, kidney 0%). The annual retail cost of these at-risk medications exceeds $30 million. This population-based study of transplant immunosuppressants vulnerable to claim denials under Medicare Part D coverage demonstrates a substantial gap between clinical practice, current FDA approval processes, and policy mandates for pharmaceutical coverage. This coverage barrier reduces access to life-saving medications for patients without alternative resources and may increase the risk of graft loss and death from medication nonadherence. © 2018 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

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

NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

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

2007-01-01

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

Performing clinical studies involving hernia mesh devices: what every investigator should know about the FDA investigational device exemption (IDE) process.

PubMed

Ashar, B S; Dang, J M; Krause, D; Luke, M C

2011-12-01

The FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) is responsible for providing reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of all medical devices marketed within the US. To date, CDRH has cleared numerous hernia mesh devices for general use, but has not cleared/approved any mesh devices intended for certain specific uses, such as for infected wounds, hernia prevention, biofilm reduction, or prevention of adhesions. CDRH is requesting that manufacturers seeking specific hernia mesh device labeling claims consult with the Agency to determine the level of evidence necessary for justifying such claims.

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

Objective To evaluate clinical trial registration, reporting and publication rates for new drugs by: (1) legal requirements and (2) the ethical standard that all human subjects research should be publicly accessible to contribute to generalisable knowledge. Design Cross-sectional analysis of all clinical trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for drugs approved in 2012, sponsored by large biopharmaceutical companies. Data sources Information from Drugs@FDA, ClinicalTrials.gov, MEDLINE-indexed journals and drug company communications. Main outcome measures Clinical trial registration and results reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov, publication in the medical literature, and compliance with the 2007 FDA Amendments Acts (FDAAA), analysed on the drug level. Results The FDA approved 15 drugs sponsored by 10 large companies in 2012. We identified 318 relevant trials involving 99 599 research participants. Per drug, a median of 57% (IQR 32–83%) of trials were registered, 20% (IQR 12–28%) reported results in ClinicalTrials.gov, 56% (IQR 41–83%) were published, and 65% (IQR 41–83%) were either published or reported results. Almost half of all reviewed drugs had at least one undisclosed phase II or III trial. Per drug, a median of 17% (IQR 8–20%) of trials supporting FDA approvals were subject to FDAAA mandated public disclosure; of these, a median of 67% (IQR 0–100%) were FDAAA-compliant. 68% of research participants (67 629 of 99 599) participated in FDAAA-subject trials, with 51% (33 405 of 67 629) enrolled in non-compliant trials. Transparency varied widely among companies. Conclusions Trial disclosures for new drugs remain below legal and ethics standards, with wide variation in practices among drugs and their sponsors. Best practices are emerging. 2 of our 10 reviewed companies disclosed all trials and complied with legal disclosure requirements for their 2012 approved drugs. Ranking new drugs on transparency criteria may improve compliance with legal and ethics standards and the quality of medical knowledge. PMID:26563214

Economics of new oncology drug development.

PubMed

DiMasi, Joseph A; Grabowski, Henry G

2007-01-10

Review existing studies and provide new results on the development, regulatory, and market aspects of new oncology drug development. We utilized data from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), company surveys, and publicly available commercial business intelligence databases on new oncology drugs approved in the United States and on investigational oncology drugs to estimate average development and regulatory approval times, clinical approval success rates, first-in-class status, and global market diffusion. We found that approved new oncology drugs to have a disproportionately high share of FDA priority review ratings, of orphan drug designations at approval, and of drugs that were granted inclusion in at least one of the FDA's expedited access programs. US regulatory approval times were shorter, on average, for oncology drugs (0.5 years), but US clinical development times were longer on average (1.5 years). Clinical approval success rates were similar for oncology and other drugs, but proportionately more of the oncology failures reached expensive late-stage clinical testing before being abandoned. In relation to other drugs, new oncology drug approvals were more often first-in-class and diffused more widely across important international markets. The market success of oncology drugs has induced a substantial amount of investment in oncology drug development in the last decade or so. However, given the great need for further progress, the extent to which efforts to develop new oncology drugs will grow depends on future public-sector investment in basic research, developments in translational medicine, and regulatory reforms that advance drug-development science.

Antipyrine-Benzocaine Otic

MedlinePlus

... not currently approved by the FDA for safety, effectiveness, and quality. Federal law generally requires that prescription drugs in the U.S. be shown to be both safe and effective prior to marketing. Please see the FDA website for more information ...

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.

New Antiretroviral Therapies for Pediatric HIV Infection

PubMed Central

Morris, Jennifer L.; Kraus, Donna M.

2005-01-01

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome affect millions of children worldwide. The development of antiretroviral therapy has significantly improved the morbidity and mortality of pediatric patients infected with HIV. Currently, 4 classes of antiretroviral agents exist: nucleoside / nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitors, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, protease inhibitors, and entry inhibitors. A total of 21 single-entity antiretroviral agents and 4 co-formulated antiretroviral products hold Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for treatment of HIV-1 infection. However, not all of these agents are indicated for use in patients less than 18 years of age. Since the year 2000, 7 new antiretroviral agents (atazanavir, emtricitabine, enfuvirtide, fosamprenavir, lopinavir/ritonavir, tenofovir, and tipranavir) have been approved by the FDA for use in adult patients as part of combination therapy for the treatment of HIV-1 infection. Although only 3 of these newer agents (emtricitabine, enfuvirtide, and lopinavir/ritonavir) are currently FDA approved for use in pediatric patients, pediatric clinical studies of the other 4 new agents are currently underway. The purpose of this article is to review these 7 new antiretroviral agents and describe their roles in the treatment of pediatric HIV infection. For each drug, the following information will be addressed: FDA-approved indication and age groups, clinical efficacy, pharmacokinetics, adverse drug reactions, clinically relevant drug interactions, pediatric and adult dosing, dosage forms, administration, and place in the treatment of pediatric HIV infection. PMID:23118639

Patent life of antiretroviral drugs approved in the US from 1987 to 2007.

PubMed

Rodriguez-Monguio, Rosa; Seoane-Vazquez, Enrique

2009-06-01

This study analyzes the effective patent life of antiretroviral (ARV) new molecular entities (NMEs) approved for marketing in the United States (US) between 1987 and 2007. The study includes all NMEs approved during the study period with at least one patent listed in the Orange Book (OB). Drugs discontinued from the market were excluded from the analysis. Data sources are the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Patent and Trademark Office. A comparison between the effective patent life of ARV NMEs and NMEs from other therapeutic classes was performed. The first and last patents were used to estimate the minimum and maximum effective patent life of NMEs. Group differences were assessed using group comparison t-tests, Chi-Square and Fishers' exact tests. The FDA approved 547 NMEs during the study period; 153 NMEs did not have a patent listed in the OB or were discontinued from the US market. The patent analysis included 22 ARV NMEs and 372 other NMEs. ARV MNEs had a range from 1 to 15 patents listed in the OB. The FDA new drug application (NDA) review time was shorter for ARVs (5.8+/-2.3 months) than for other NMEs (23.6+/-18.7 months). ARV NMEs had an average of 13.2+/-3.8 years of effective patent life for the first patent versus 11.0+/-4.2 years for other NMEs. ARV NMEs had an average of 17.5+/-3.6 years of effective patent life for the last patent versus the 14.8+/-4.8 years for other NMEs. The effective patent life listed for the last patent of seven ARV NMEs (31.8%) exceeded 20 years. Shortening the drug approval process increased the effective patent life of ARVs and facilitated faster entry of new drugs into the market. ARVs had an average of 2-3 more years of effective patent life than other therapeutic classes and, therefore, a longer period without generic competition.

21 CFR 314.90 - Waivers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.90 Waivers. (a) An applicant may ask the... under §§ 314.50 through 314.81. An applicant may ask FDA to waive under § 314.126(c) any criteria of an... information justifying a waiver. (b) FDA may grant a waiver if it finds one of the following: (1) The...

21 CFR 314.90 - Waivers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.90 Waivers. (a) An applicant may ask the... under §§ 314.50 through 314.81. An applicant may ask FDA to waive under § 314.126(c) any criteria of an... information justifying a waiver. (b) FDA may grant a waiver if it finds one of the following: (1) The...

21 CFR 314.90 - Waivers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.90 Waivers. (a) An applicant may ask the... under §§ 314.50 through 314.81. An applicant may ask FDA to waive under § 314.126(c) any criteria of an... information justifying a waiver. (b) FDA may grant a waiver if it finds one of the following: (1) The...

21 CFR 814.44 - Procedures for review of a PMA.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...) MEDICAL DEVICES PREMARKET APPROVAL OF MEDICAL DEVICES FDA Action on a PMA § 814.44 Procedures for review of a PMA. (a) FDA will begin substantive review of a PMA after the PMA is accepted for filing under § 814.42. FDA may refer the PMA to a panel on its own initiative, and will do so upon request of an...

21 CFR 314.90 - Waivers.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG Applications § 314.90 Waivers. (a) An applicant may ask the... under §§ 314.50 through 314.81. An applicant may ask FDA to waive under § 314.126(c) any criteria of an... information justifying a waiver. (b) FDA may grant a waiver if it finds one of the following: (1) The...

Prescription for change: an interview with FDA Commissioner Dr. David Kessler.

PubMed

Kessler, D

1992-07-01

Dr David A. Kessler took over as Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration in December 1990. Since then, he has initiated many changes to improve the structure and efficiency of the agency. In this interview, he describes some of the problems and challenges associated with the process of reviewing and approving new drugs.

Immunotherapy Combination Approved for Advanced Kidney Cancer

Cancer.gov

FDA has approved the combination of the immunotherapy drugs nivolumab (Opdivo) and ipilimumab (Yervoy) as an initial treatment for some patients with advanced kidney cancer. The approval is expected to immediately affect patient care, as this Cancer Currents post explains.

HIV Testing in the United States

MedlinePlus

... health facilities ;” May 2007. ← Return to text FDA Consumer Information, “Fourth Generation HIV Diagnostic Test Approved, permitting ... HIV): Screening; ” April 2013. ← Return to text FDA Consumer Information, “First rapid diagnostic test to detect both ...

21 CFR 314.1 - Scope of this part.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.1 Scope of this part... postmarketing reports to them. (b) This part does not apply to drug products subject to licensing by FDA under...

21 CFR 314.1 - Scope of this part.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.1 Scope of this part... postmarketing reports to them. (b) This part does not apply to drug products subject to licensing by FDA under...

21 CFR 314.99 - Other responsibilities of an applicant of an abbreviated application.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) DRUGS FOR HUMAN USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW... abbreviated application. (b) An applicant may ask FDA to waive under this section any requirement that applies...

21 CFR 314.1 - Scope of this part.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... USE APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG General Provisions § 314.1 Scope of this part... postmarketing reports to them. (b) This part does not apply to drug products subject to licensing by FDA under...