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.

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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 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...

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

PubMed

2015-05-22

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

78 FR 5463 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-25

... currently assessing any additional data requirements. In this regard, FDA published an Advance Notice of... report. Here, e-form FDA 3744a and reporting via the Electronic Submission Gateway are provided by FDA... January 17, 2012 (77 FR 2302), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed...

21 CFR 314.55 - Pediatric use information.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... group have failed. (4) FDA action on waiver. FDA shall grant a full or partial waiver, as appropriate... of disease, elimination or substantial reduction of a treatment-limiting drug reaction, documented...

21 CFR 1.363 - What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... or maintain records or make them available to FDA as required by this subpart? 1.363 Section 1.363... What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to FDA as... or other information available to FDA as required by section 414 or 704(a) of the act and this...

21 CFR 1.363 - What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... or maintain records or make them available to FDA as required by this subpart? 1.363 Section 1.363... What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to FDA as... or other information available to FDA as required by section 414 or 704(a) of the act and this...

21 CFR 1.363 - What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... or maintain records or make them available to FDA as required by this subpart? 1.363 Section 1.363... What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to FDA as... or other information available to FDA as required by section 414 or 704(a) of the act and this...

21 CFR 1.363 - What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... or maintain records or make them available to FDA as required by this subpart? 1.363 Section 1.363... What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to FDA as... or other information available to FDA as required by section 414 or 704(a) of the act and this...

21 CFR 1.363 - What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... or maintain records or make them available to FDA as required by this subpart? 1.363 Section 1.363... What are the consequences of failing to establish or maintain records or make them available to FDA as... or other information available to FDA as required by section 414 or 704(a) of the act and this...

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

PubMed

2016-11-18

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

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...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2011-04-01 2011-04-01 false What records must be made available to FDA? 111... records must be made available to FDA? (a) You must have all records required under this part, or copies of such records, readily available during the retention period for inspection and copying by FDA when...

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 111.610 - What records must be made available to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2010-04-01 2010-04-01 false What records must be made available to FDA? 111... records must be made available to FDA? (a) You must have all records required under this part, or copies of such records, readily available during the retention period for inspection and copying by FDA when...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2014-04-01 2014-04-01 false What records must be made available to FDA? 111... records must be made available to FDA? (a) You must have all records required under this part, or copies of such records, readily available during the retention period for inspection and copying by FDA when...

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 111.610 - What records must be made available to FDA?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... 21 Food and Drugs 2 2012-04-01 2012-04-01 false What records must be made available to FDA? 111... records must be made available to FDA? (a) You must have all records required under this part, or copies of such records, readily available during the retention period for inspection and copying by FDA when...

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...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

FDA & digital mammography: why has FDA required full field digital mammography systems to be regulated as potentially dangerous devices for more than 10 years?

PubMed

Nields, Morgan W

2010-05-01

Digital mammography is routinely used in the US to screen asymptomatic women for breast cancer and currently over 50% of US screening centers employ the technology. In spite of FDAs knowledge that digital mammography requires less radiation than film mammography and that its equivalence has been proven in a prospective randomized trial, the agency has failed to allow the technology market access via the 510(k) pre market clearance pathway. As a result of the restrictive Pre Market Approval process, only four suppliers have received FDA approval. The resulting lack of a competitive market has kept costs high, restricted technological innovation, and impeded product improvements as a result of PMA requirements. Meanwhile, at least twelve companies are on the market in the EU and the resulting competitive market has lowered costs and provided increased technological choice. A cultural change with new leadership occurred in the early 90's at FDA. The historical culture at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health of collaboration and education gave way to one characterized by a lack of reliance on outside scientific expertise, tolerance of decision making by unqualified reviewers, and an emphasis on enforcement and punishment. Digital mammography fell victim to this cultural change and as a result major innovations like breast CT and computer aided detection technologies are also withheld from the market. The medical device law, currently under review by the Institute of Medicine, should be amended by the Congress so that new technologies can be appropriately classified in accordance with the risk based assessment classification system detailed in Chapter V of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. A panel of scientific experts chartered by the NIH or IOM should determine the classification appropriate for new technologies that have no historical regulatory framework. This would be binding on FDA. Unless the law is changed we will likely again experience additional debacles similar to that of digital mammography where important technology has been withheld from millions of women for more than a decade. Copyright 2010 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

77 FR 45639 - Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2013

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-01

... compensation and benefits (PC&B) paid per full-time equivalent position (FTE) at FDA for the first 3 of the 4... preceding FY 2013. The 3 year average is 2.17 percent. Table 1--FDA Personnel Compensation and Benefits (PC... 108.25 122.3 The FY 2013 application fee is estimated by dividing the average number of full...

75 FR 49502 - Medical Device User Fee Act; Public Meeting; Request for Comments

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-13

... Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the...)) requires that, before FDA begins negotiations with the regulated industry on user fee reauthorization, we...

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

PubMed Central

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

2016-01-01

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

Engineer Novel Anticancer Bioagents

DTIC Science & Technology

2010-10-01

selection (hence to create marker-free genetically modified organism – GMO as required by FDA regulations) have failed. The overall transformation...free genetically modified organism – GMO , as required by FDA regulations). Key Research Status 1. Reconstitution of a complete FK228 biosynthetic

Prior notice of imported food under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002. Final rule.

PubMed

2008-11-07

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a final regulation that requires the submission to FDA of prior notice of food, including animal feed, that is imported or offered for import into the United States. The final rule implements the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002 (the Bioterrorism Act), which required prior notification of imported food to begin on December 12, 2003. The final rule requires that the prior notice be submitted to FDA electronically via either the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP or Customs) Automated Broker Interface (ABI) of the Automated Commercial System (ACS) or the FDA Prior Notice System Interface (FDA PNSI). The information must be submitted and confirmed electronically as facially complete by FDA for review no less than 8 hours (for food arriving by water), 4 hours (for food arriving by air or land/rail), and 2 hours (for food arriving by land/road) before the food arrives at the port of arrival. Food imported or offered for import without adequate prior notice is subject to refusal and, if refused, must be held. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing the availability of a draft compliance policy guide (CPG) entitled "Sec. 110.310 Prior Notice of Imported Food Under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002."

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

PubMed

2012-02-06

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

FDA plan for statutory compliance. Notice of availability.

PubMed

1998-11-24

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

Communicating Tobacco Product Information to the Public.

PubMed

Berman, Micah L; Byron, M Justin; Hemmerich, Natalie; Lindblom, Eric N; Lazard, Allison J; Peters, Ellen; Brewer, Noel T

2017-01-01

The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA) requires tobacco companies to disclose information about the harmful chemicals in their products to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The law requires the FDA, in turn, to communicate this information to the public "in a format that is understandable and not misleading to a lay person." But how should the FDA comply with this requirement? What does it mean for information about complex chemicals to be "understandable and not misleading to a lay person"? These questions are not easy ones to answer. Disclosures about the amount of harmful chemicals (constituents) in different tobacco products may help to inform consumers, but may also conversely prompt consumers to reach incorrect or unsupported conclusions about products' relative health risks. This paper first analyzes the FDA's legal obligation to publish tobacco constituent information so that it is "understandable and not misleading to a layperson." Second, it discusses how that legal analysis has guided scientific research examining how members of the public interpret messages regarding tobacco constituents. Lastly, this paper concludes with policy recommendations for the FDA as it considers how to comply with the law's constituent disclosure requirement while still furthering its overall objective of promoting public health.

Mitigation Strategies To Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration. Final rule.

PubMed

2016-05-27

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is issuing this final rule to require domestic and foreign food facilities that are required to register under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to address hazards that may be introduced with the intention to cause wide scale public health harm. These food facilities are required to conduct a vulnerability assessment to identify significant vulnerabilities and actionable process steps and implement mitigation strategies to significantly minimize or prevent significant vulnerabilities identified at actionable process steps in a food operation. FDA is issuing these requirements as part of our implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA).

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

PubMed

Keatley, K L

1999-01-01

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

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

PubMed

2010-11-05

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

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 314.55 - 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 320.30 - Inquiries regarding bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements and review of protocols by...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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...

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.

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

PubMed

Couture, Larry A; Carpenter, Melissa K

2015-10-01

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

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

PubMed

1998-05-18

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

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 314.52 - 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 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 314.52 - 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 314.52 - 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 314.94 - 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...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-14

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

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

PubMed

Villafranco, John E; Bond, Katie

2009-01-01

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

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

PubMed

Yim, Seon-Hee; Chung, Yeun-Jun

2014-12-01

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

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.

Beverages: bottled water. Final rule.

PubMed

2009-05-29

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its bottled water regulations to require that bottled water manufacturers test source water for total coliform, as is required for finished bottled water products, and to require, if any coliform organisms are detected in source water, that bottled water manufacturers determine whether any of the coliform organisms are Escherichia coli (E. coli), an indicator of fecal contamination. FDA also is amending its bottled water regulations to require, if any coliform organisms are detected in finished bottled water products, that bottled water manufacturers determine whether any of the coliform organisms are E. coli. FDA also is amending the adulteration provision of the bottled water standard to reflect the possibility of adulteration caused by the presence of filth. Bottled water containing E. coli will be considered adulterated, and source water containing E. coli will not be considered to be of a safe, sanitary quality and will be prohibited from use in the production of bottled water. FDA is also amending its bottled water regulations to require that, before a bottler can use source water from a source that has tested positive for E. coli, the bottler must take appropriate measures to rectify or eliminate the cause of E. coli contamination of that source, and that the bottler must keep records of such actions. Existing regulatory provisions require bottled water manufacturers to keep records of new testing required by this rule. This final rule will ensure that FDA's standards for the minimum quality of bottled water, as affected by fecal contamination, will be no less protective of the public health than those set by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for public drinking water.

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

PubMed

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

2015-03-01

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

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

PubMed

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

2016-05-01

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

75 FR 69093 - Prescription Drug User Fee Act; Reopening of the Comment Period

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-10

... review program after negotiations with the regulated industry conclude. FDA expects that this additional...)(2) (21 U.S.C. 379h-2(d)(2)) of the FD&C Act requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the... requires public review of the recommendations for the human drug review program after negotiations with the...

77 FR 18830 - Small Entity Compliance Guide: Further Amendments to General Regulations of the Food and Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-28

... language the requirements of the regulation and to help small businesses understand and comply with the... is making available this SECG stating in plain language the legal requirements of the February 2...-regulated products. FDA is issuing this SECG as level 2 guidance consistent with FDA's good guidance...

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 ...

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.

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

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

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 ...

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

PubMed

James, J S

1998-03-06

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

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

PubMed

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

2016-01-01

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

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

PubMed

Javitt, Gail H; Hudson, Kathy

2003-01-01

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

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

PubMed

Park, Glen D; Mitchel, Jules T

2016-06-01

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

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...

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

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

MedlinePlus

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

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 ...

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

PubMed

1994-06-17

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

78 FR 3646 - Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-16

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend its regulation for Current Good Manufacturing Practice In Manufacturing, Packing, or Holding Human Food (CGMPs) to modernize it and to add requirements for domestic and foreign facilities that are required to register under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to establish and implement hazard analysis and risk- based preventive controls for human food. FDA also is proposing to revise certain definitions in FDA's current regulation for Registration of Food Facilities to clarify the scope of the exemption from registration requirements provided by the FD&C Act for ``farms.'' FDA is taking this action as part of its announced initiative to revisit the CGMPs since they were last revised in 1986 and to implement new statutory provisions in the FD&C Act. The proposed rule is intended to build a food safety system for the future that makes modern, science-, and risk-based preventive controls the norm across all sectors of the food system.

76 FR 45831 - Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2012

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-01

... annual change in cost, per FDA full time equivalent (FTE), of all personnel compensation and benefits... and benefits per FTE over the previous 5 of the most recent 6 FYs (FY 2006 through FY 2010). The data... percent. Table 1--FDA Personnel Compensation and Benefits (PC&B) Each Year and Percent Change Annual...

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 314.99 - Other responsibilities of an applicant of an 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... abbreviated application. (b) An applicant may ask FDA to waive under this section any requirement that applies...

21 CFR 803.40 - If I am an importer, what kinds of individual adverse event reports must I submit, when must I...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... facilities, individuals, or medical or scientific literature, whether published or unpublished, that... injury. This report must contain the information required by § 803.42, on FDA form 3500A or an electronic.... This report must contain information required by § 803.42, on FDA form 3500A or an electronic...

21 CFR 803.40 - If I am an importer, what kinds of individual adverse event reports must I submit, when must I...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... facilities, individuals, or medical or scientific literature, whether published or unpublished, that... injury. This report must contain the information required by § 803.42, on FDA form 3500A or an electronic.... This report must contain information required by § 803.42, on FDA form 3500A or an electronic...

Prevention of Salmonella enteritidis in shell eggs during production, storage, and transportation. Final rule.

PubMed

2009-07-09

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a final rule that requires shell egg producers to implement measures to prevent Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) from contaminating eggs on the farm and from further growth during storage and transportation, and requires these producers to maintain records concerning their compliance with the rule and to register with FDA. FDA is taking this action because SE is among the leading bacterial causes of foodborne illness in the United States, and shell eggs are a primary source of human SE infections. The final rule will reduce SE-associated illnesses and deaths by reducing the risk that shell eggs are contaminated with SE.

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

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

PubMed

Kuehn, Carrie M

2018-01-01

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

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.

78 FR 64735 - Current Good Manufacturing Practice and Hazard Analysis and Risk-Based Preventive Controls for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-29

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing regulations for domestic and foreign facilities that are required to register under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) to establish requirements for current good manufacturing practice in manufacturing, processing, packing, and holding of animal food. FDA also is proposing regulations to require that certain facilities establish and implement hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls for food for animals. FDA is taking this action to provide greater assurance that animal food is safe and will not cause illness or injury to animals or humans and is intended to build an animal food safety system for the future that makes modern, science and risk-based preventive controls the norm across all sectors of the animal food system.

The teratology testing of food additives.

PubMed

Barrow, Paul C; Spézia, François

2013-01-01

The developmental and reproductive toxicity testing (including teratogenicity) of new foods and food additives is performed worldwide according to the guidelines given in the FDA Redbook. These studies are not required for substances that are generally recognized as safe, according to the FDA inventory. The anticipated cumulated human exposure level above which developmental or reproduction studies are required depends on the structure-alert category. For food additives of concern, both developmental (prenatal) and reproduction (multigeneration) studies are required. The developmental studies are performed in two species, usually the rat and the rabbit. The reproduction study is generally performed in the rat. The two rat studies are preferably combined into a single experimental design, if possible. The test methods described in the FDA Redbook are similar to those specified by the OECD for the reproductive toxicity testing of chemicals.

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

PubMed

Knapp, Veronica

2011-01-01

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

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

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

PubMed

Palley, H A

1995-01-01

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

21 CFR 514.5 - Presubmission conferences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... resolution. FDA is committed to resolving differences between a potential applicant and FDA reviewing... communication. (b) Requesting a presubmission conference. A potential applicant is entitled to one or more... establishing part or all of a submission or investigational requirement. A potential applicant's request for a...

21 CFR 514.5 - Presubmission conferences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... resolution. FDA is committed to resolving differences between a potential applicant and FDA reviewing... communication. (b) Requesting a presubmission conference. A potential applicant is entitled to one or more... establishing part or all of a submission or investigational requirement. A potential applicant's request for a...

21 CFR 514.5 - Presubmission conferences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... resolution. FDA is committed to resolving differences between a potential applicant and FDA reviewing... communication. (b) Requesting a presubmission conference. A potential applicant is entitled to one or more... establishing part or all of a submission or investigational requirement. A potential applicant's request for a...

21 CFR 514.5 - Presubmission conferences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... resolution. FDA is committed to resolving differences between a potential applicant and FDA reviewing... communication. (b) Requesting a presubmission conference. A potential applicant is entitled to one or more... establishing part or all of a submission or investigational requirement. A potential applicant's request for a...

21 CFR 514.5 - Presubmission conferences.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... resolution. FDA is committed to resolving differences between a potential applicant and FDA reviewing... communication. (b) Requesting a presubmission conference. A potential applicant is entitled to one or more... establishing part or all of a submission or investigational requirement. A potential applicant's request for a...

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

Applications of functional data analysis: A systematic review.

PubMed

Ullah, Shahid; Finch, Caroline F

2013-03-19

Functional data analysis (FDA) is increasingly being used to better analyze, model and predict time series data. Key aspects of FDA include the choice of smoothing technique, data reduction, adjustment for clustering, functional linear modeling and forecasting methods. A systematic review using 11 electronic databases was conducted to identify FDA application studies published in the peer-review literature during 1995-2010. Papers reporting methodological considerations only were excluded, as were non-English articles. In total, 84 FDA application articles were identified; 75.0% of the reviewed articles have been published since 2005. Application of FDA has appeared in a large number of publications across various fields of sciences; the majority is related to biomedicine applications (21.4%). Overall, 72 studies (85.7%) provided information about the type of smoothing techniques used, with B-spline smoothing (29.8%) being the most popular. Functional principal component analysis (FPCA) for extracting information from functional data was reported in 51 (60.7%) studies. One-quarter (25.0%) of the published studies used functional linear models to describe relationships between explanatory and outcome variables and only 8.3% used FDA for forecasting time series data. Despite its clear benefits for analyzing time series data, full appreciation of the key features and value of FDA have been limited to date, though the applications show its relevance to many public health and biomedical problems. Wider application of FDA to all studies involving correlated measurements should allow better modeling of, and predictions from, such data in the future especially as FDA makes no a priori age and time effects assumptions.

Applications of functional data analysis: A systematic review

PubMed Central

2013-01-01

Background Functional data analysis (FDA) is increasingly being used to better analyze, model and predict time series data. Key aspects of FDA include the choice of smoothing technique, data reduction, adjustment for clustering, functional linear modeling and forecasting methods. Methods A systematic review using 11 electronic databases was conducted to identify FDA application studies published in the peer-review literature during 1995–2010. Papers reporting methodological considerations only were excluded, as were non-English articles. Results In total, 84 FDA application articles were identified; 75.0% of the reviewed articles have been published since 2005. Application of FDA has appeared in a large number of publications across various fields of sciences; the majority is related to biomedicine applications (21.4%). Overall, 72 studies (85.7%) provided information about the type of smoothing techniques used, with B-spline smoothing (29.8%) being the most popular. Functional principal component analysis (FPCA) for extracting information from functional data was reported in 51 (60.7%) studies. One-quarter (25.0%) of the published studies used functional linear models to describe relationships between explanatory and outcome variables and only 8.3% used FDA for forecasting time series data. Conclusions Despite its clear benefits for analyzing time series data, full appreciation of the key features and value of FDA have been limited to date, though the applications show its relevance to many public health and biomedical problems. Wider application of FDA to all studies involving correlated measurements should allow better modeling of, and predictions from, such data in the future especially as FDA makes no a priori age and time effects assumptions. PMID:23510439

77 FR 60125 - Generic Drug Facilities, Sites and Organizations

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-10-02

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

21 CFR 54.1 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... steps have not been taken in the design, conduct, reporting, and analysis of the studies to minimize... INVESTIGATORS § 54.1 Purpose. (a) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates clinical studies submitted in... clinical studies to determine whether the applications are approvable under the statutory requirements. FDA...

21 CFR 54.1 - Purpose.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... steps have not been taken in the design, conduct, reporting, and analysis of the studies to minimize... INVESTIGATORS § 54.1 Purpose. (a) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates clinical studies submitted in... clinical studies to determine whether the applications are approvable under the statutory requirements. FDA...

Regulating biopharmaceuticals under CDER versus CBER: an insider's perspective.

PubMed

Schwieterman, William D

2006-10-01

The FDA has recently transferred jurisdiction for the regulation of certain biopharmaceuticals from the Center for Biologics, Evaluation and Research to the Center for Drugs, Evaluation and Research, where they will be reviewed in the same FDA divisions as are traditional pharmaceutical agents. With this transfer, sponsors of investigational biopharmaceuticals should expect changes in the regulatory requirements the FDA imposes on the clinical development plans, including an increase in the size and number of pivotal studies; more consistent requirements for conducting preclinical tests in two animal species; increased emphasis on organ structure and function as components of primary endpoints; more emphasis on characterizing dose-ranging and pharmacology; more intense scrutinizing of product advertising; and decreased direct communication with the review team.

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.

FDA-Required Tobacco Product Inserts & Onserts–and the First Amendment.

PubMed

Lindblom, Eric N; Berman, Micah L; Thrasher, James F

In 2012, a federal court of appeals struck down an FDA rule requiring graphic health warnings on cigarettes as violating First Amendment commercial speech protections. Tobacco product inserts and onserts can more readily avoid First Amendment constraints while delivering more extensive information to tobacco users, and can work effectively to support and encourage smoking cessation. This paper examines FDA’s authority to require effective inserts and onserts and shows how FDA could design and support them to avoid First Amendment problems. Through this process, the paper offers helpful insights regarding how key Tobacco Control Act provisions can and should be interpreted and applied to follow and promote the statute’s purposes and objectives. The paper’s rigorous analysis of existing First Amendment case law relating to compelled commercial speech also provides useful guidance for any government efforts either to compel product disclosures or to require government messaging in or on commercial products or their advertising, whether done for remedial, purely informational, or behavior modification purposes.

Petition to request an exemption from 100 percent identity testing of dietary ingredients: Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations for Dietary Supplements. Interim final rule.

PubMed

2007-06-25

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing an interim final rule (IFR) that sets forth a procedure for requesting an exemption from the requirement in the final rule "Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations for Dietary Supplements," published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, that the manufacturer conduct at least one appropriate test or examination to verify the identity of any component that is a dietary ingredient. This IFR allows for submission to, and review by, FDA of an alternative to the required 100 percent identity testing of components that are dietary ingredients, provided certain conditions are met and establishes a requirement for retention of records relating to the FDA's response to an exemption request.

76 FR 45820 - Food Safety Modernization Act Domestic and Foreign Facility Reinspections, Recall, and Importer...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-01

... of sick leave 80 10 days of training 80 2 hours of meetings per week 80 Net Supported Direct FDA Work... implementing these user fees in FY 2013. II. Estimating the Average Cost of a Supported Direct FDA Work Hour... Direct Work Hour in FY 2010 In general, the starting point for estimating the full cost per direct work...

75 FR 75936 - Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements; Research Report

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-07

... on consumer attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and intended behaviors related to cigarette smoking. The... that FDA was conducting research to: (1) Measure consumer attitudes, beliefs, and intended behaviors... warnings on smoking behavior and evaluating the communication effectiveness of such images. FDA worked with...

77 FR 25184 - Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-27

... disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at: http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees... at http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm to learn about possible modifications before... effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special...

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...

21 CFR 99.401 - Corrective actions and cessation of dissemination of information.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES GENERAL DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ON UNAPPROVED/NEW USES FOR MARKETED DRUGS... cessation of dissemination of information. (a) FDA actions based on post dissemination data. If FDA receives... requirements; or (2) Order the manufacturer to cease dissemination of information and to take corrective action...

21 CFR 99.403 - Termination of approvals of applications for exemption.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... SERVICES GENERAL DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ON UNAPPROVED/NEW USES FOR MARKETED DRUGS, BIOLOGICS, AND... section. If FDA also issues an order to cease dissemination of information, the manufacturer shall comply... use. FDA may require a manufacturer that ceases dissemination of information on the new use to...

76 FR 71248 - Animal Food Labeling; Declaration of Certifiable Color Additives

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-11-17

.... FDA-2009-N-0025] Animal Food Labeling; Declaration of Certifiable Color Additives AGENCY: Food and... amending its regulations regarding the declaration of certified color additives on the labels of animal... common or usual names of all color additives required to be certified by FDA. An additional purpose of...

76 FR 43847 - Poison Prevention Packaging Requirements; Exemption of Powder Formulations of Colesevelam...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-22

... FDA-regulated drug, biologic, medical device, dietary supplement, or cosmetic. (See http://www.fda.gov... powders generally present a low risk because they are more difficult to ingest, particularly in large quantities. Generally, with the exception of caustics, the primary exposure risk associated with powders is...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-07-11

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

78 FR 12329 - Distinguishing Medical Device Recalls From Product Enhancements; Reporting Requirements; Draft...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-22

... Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of the... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0114...

78 FR 60883 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-02

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0545... Request; Infant Formula Requirements AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has...

75 FR 48350 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-10

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0190... Request; Infant Formula Requirements AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has...

21 CFR 207.25 - Information required in registration and drug listing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

...-2657 or in conjunction with the FDA voluntary inventory on Form FDA-2422 (Survey Report of Marketed... blood bank, a quantitative listing of the active ingredient(s). Unless the quantitative listing is...)(iii), the registrant may limit the quantitative listing of ingredients to each variation of level of...

21 CFR 207.25 - Information required in registration and drug listing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

...-2657 or in conjunction with the FDA voluntary inventory on Form FDA-2422 (Survey Report of Marketed... blood bank, a quantitative listing of the active ingredient(s). Unless the quantitative listing is...)(iii), the registrant may limit the quantitative listing of ingredients to each variation of level of...

21 CFR 207.25 - Information required in registration and drug listing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

...-2657 or in conjunction with the FDA voluntary inventory on Form FDA-2422 (Survey Report of Marketed... blood bank, a quantitative listing of the active ingredient(s). Unless the quantitative listing is...)(iii), the registrant may limit the quantitative listing of ingredients to each variation of level of...

21 CFR 207.25 - Information required in registration and drug listing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

...-2657 or in conjunction with the FDA voluntary inventory on Form FDA-2422 (Survey Report of Marketed... blood bank, a quantitative listing of the active ingredient(s). Unless the quantitative listing is...)(iii), the registrant may limit the quantitative listing of ingredients to each variation of level of...

21 CFR 207.25 - Information required in registration and drug listing.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...-2657 or in conjunction with the FDA voluntary inventory on Form FDA-2422 (Survey Report of Marketed... blood bank, a quantitative listing of the active ingredient(s). Unless the quantitative listing is...)(iii), the registrant may limit the quantitative listing of ingredients to each variation of level of...

78 FR 4152 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Recordkeeping...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-01-18

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0333... Requirements for Microbiological Testing and Corrective Measures for Bottled Water AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity...

Current good manufacturing practice regulation and investigational new drugs. Direct final rule.

PubMed

2006-01-17

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending its current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for human drugs, including biological products, to exempt most investigational "Phase 1" drugs from complying with the requirements in FDA's regulations. FDA will instead exercise oversight of production of these drugs under the agency's general statutory CGMP authority and investigational new drug application (IND) authority. In addition, FDA is making available simultaneously with the publication of this direct final rule, a guidance document setting forth recommendations on approaches to CGMP compliance for the exempted Phase 1 drugs. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is publishing a companion proposed rule, under FDA's usual procedure for notice-and-comment rulemaking, to provide a procedural framework to finalize the rule in the event the agency receives any significant adverse comments and withdraws this direct final rule. The companion proposed rule and direct final rule are substantively identical. Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled "INDs--Approaches to Complying With CGMP During Phase 1" to provide further guidance on the subject.

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

PubMed

Burlington, D B

1996-01-01

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

Validation of Single and Pooled Manure Drag Swabs for the Detection of Salmonella Serovar Enteritidis in Commercial Poultry Houses.

PubMed

Kinde, Hailu; Goodluck, Helen A; Pitesky, Maurice; Friend, Tom D; Campbell, James A; Hill, Ashley E

2015-12-01

Single swabs (cultured individually) are currently used in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) official method for sampling the environment of commercial laying hens for the detection of Salmonella enterica ssp. serovar Enteritidis (Salmonella Enteritidis). The FDA has also granted provisional acceptance of the National Poultry Improvement Plan's (NPIP) Salmonella isolation and identification methodology for samples taken from table-egg layer flock environments. The NPIP method, as with the FDA method, requires single-swab culturing for the environmental sampling of laying houses for Salmonella Enteritidis. The FDA culture protocol requires a multistep culture enrichment broth, and it is more labor intensive than the NPIP culture protocol, which requires a single enrichment broth. The main objective of this study was to compare the FDA single-swab culturing protocol with that of the NPIP culturing protocol but using a four-swab pool scheme. Single and multi-laboratory testing of replicate manure drag swab sets (n  =  525 and 672, respectively) collected from a Salmonella Enteritidis-free commercial poultry flock was performed by artificially contaminating swabs with either Salmonella Enteritidis phage type 4, 8, or 13a at one of two inoculation levels: low, x¯  = 2.5 CFU (range 2.5-2.7), or medium, x¯  = 10.0 CFU (range 7.5-12). For each replicate, a single swab (inoculated), sets of two swabs (one inoculated and one uninoculated), and sets of four swabs (one inoculated and three uninoculated), testing was conducted using the FDA or NPIP culture method. For swabs inoculated with phage type 8, the NPIP method was more efficient (P < 0.05) for all swab sets at both inoculation levels than the reference method. The single swabs in the NPIP method were significantly (P < 0.05) better than four-pool swabs in detecting Salmonella Enteritidis at the lower inoculation level. In the collaborative study (n  =  13 labs) using Salmonella Enteritidis phage type 13a inoculated swabs, there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) between the FDA method (single swabs) and the pooled NPIP method (four-pool swabs). The study concludes that the pooled NPIP method is not significantly different from the FDA method for the detection of Salmonella Enteritidis in drag swabs in commercial poultry laying houses. Consequently based on the FDA's Salmonella Enteritidis rule for equivalency of different methods, the pooled NPIP method should be considered equivalent. Furthermore, the pooled NPIP method was more efficient and cost effective.

FDA's Approach to Regulating Biosimilars.

PubMed

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

2017-04-15

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

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

PubMed

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

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

Brief report: investigation into recalled human tissue for transplantation--United States, 2005-2006.

PubMed

2006-05-26

On September 29, 2005, a human tissue-processing company discovered inaccuracies in donor records forwarded from a tissue-recovery firm and notified the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). An FDA investigation determined that the recovery firm, Biomedical Tissue Services, Ltd. (BTS) (Fort Lee, New Jersey), recovered tissues from human donors who might not have met donor eligibility requirements and who were not screened properly for certain infectious diseases. In October 2005, BTS and the five processors that had received the tissues, working with FDA, issued a recall for all tissues recovered by BTS. The continuing FDA investigation determined that information for some donors (e.g., cause, place, or time of death) was not consistent with death certificate data obtained from the states where the deaths occurred. The investigation also determined that BTS had failed to recover tissues in a manner that would prevent contamination or cross-contamination and failed to control environmental conditions adequately during tissue recovery. These failures were violations of the Current Good Tissue Practice Rules (effective May 25, 2005), which require manufacturers to recover, process, store, label, package, and distribute human cells, tissue, and cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/Ps) to prevent introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases. In January 2006, FDA ordered BTS to cease manufacturing and to retain all HCT/Ps.

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.

The educational potential of direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.

PubMed

Kaphingst, Kimberly A; DeJong, William

2004-01-01

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations for direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertising allow broadcast advertisements with incomplete risk information if the ads refer consumers to physicians, pharmacists, and supplemental information sources. New research reveals several problems with both television advertisements and supplemental text materials that might compromise their ability to meet the FDA's requirement for "fair balance" in the presentation of risks and benefits. In response, we make several recommendations to improve the educational quality of DTC advertising, which can be implemented through either voluntary agreements or revised FDA regulations.

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

PubMed

Donawa, M E

1995-11-01

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

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."

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

PubMed

1998-09-25

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

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

PubMed

Gruber, Marion F

2015-11-25

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

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

Background 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. Methods and results 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. Conclusion 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. PMID:26060416

76 FR 36627 - Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-22

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

Required warnings for cigarette packages and advertisements. Final rule.

PubMed

2011-06-22

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

75 FR 12756 - Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Prescription Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-17

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal agencies are required to publish notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the reporting requirements, including third party disclosure, contained in FDA's regulations on prescription drug advertisements.

Compounding pharmacy conundrum: "we cannot live without them but we cannot live with them" according to the present paradigm.

PubMed

Guharoy, Roy; Noviasky, John; Haydar, Ziad; Fakih, Mohamad G; Hartman, Christian

2013-04-01

Compounding pharmacies serve a critical role in modern health care to meet special patient care needs. Although the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has clearly delineated jurisdiction over drug companies and products manufactured under Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) regulations to ensure quality, potency, and purity, compounding pharmacies are regulated by the State Boards and are not registered by the FDA. In recent years, some compounding pharmacies acted like a manufacturer, preparing large amounts of injectable drugs with interstate activities. Multiple outbreaks have been linked to compounding pharmacies, including a recent outbreak of fungal meningitis related to contaminated methylprednisolone, exposing > 14,000 patients in multiple states. This tragedy underscores the urgency of addressing safety related to compounding pharmacies. There is a call for action at the federal and state levels to set minimum production standards, impose new labeling conditions on compounded drugs, and require large-scale compounders be regulated by the FDA. "Industrial" compounding must come under FDA oversight, require those pharmacies to meet GMP standards, and ensure quality and safe products for patient use. Moreover, compliance with the Institute for Safe Medication Practices 2011 recommendations that any type of sterile compounding must be in compliance with the United States Pharmacopoeia chapter 797 guidelines will reduce the risk of patient harm from microbial contamination. Finally, other critical factors that require close attention include addressing injectable products compounded in hospitals and other outpatient health-care centers. The FDA and State Boards of Pharmacy must be adequately funded to exercise the oversight effectively.

75 FR 70266 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-17

... Nutrition Facts label format to require, the Agency undertook consumer research to evaluate alternatives (Refs. 1, 2, and 3). More recently, FDA conducted qualitative consumer research on the format of the.... 5). In addition to conducting consumer research, in response to the OWG plan FDA issued two advance...

77 FR 32120 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Experimental...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-31

... require, the Agency undertook consumer research to evaluate alternatives (Refs. 1 to 3). More recently, FDA conducted qualitative consumer research on the format of the Nutrition Facts label on behalf of... consumer research, in the Federal Register of November 2, 2007 (72 FR 62149) FDA issued an Advance Notice...

78 FR 14306 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-05

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2000-D-0598... Safety of Residues of Veterinary Drugs in Human Food: Genotoxicity Testing'' (VICH GL23(R)); Availability AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA...

76 FR 34082 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; State Petitions...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-10

...) enables FDA to determine whether the State food labeling or standard of identity requirement satisfies the... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0402... Exemption From Preemption AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and...

21 CFR 320.31 - Applicability of requirements regarding an “Investigational New Drug Application.”

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... article and reference standard used in the study and release the reserve samples to FDA upon request, in... electronic submission (e.g., method of transmission, media, file formats, preparation and organization of... Evaluation and Research at FDA. Relevant followup information to a bioavailability/bioequivalence safety...

21 CFR 320.31 - Applicability of requirements regarding an “Investigational New Drug Application.”

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... article and reference standard used in the study and release the reserve samples to FDA upon request, in... electronic submission (e.g., method of transmission, media, file formats, preparation and organization of... Evaluation and Research at FDA. Relevant followup information to a bioavailability/bioequivalence safety...

21 CFR 320.31 - Applicability of requirements regarding an “Investigational New Drug Application.”

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... article and reference standard used in the study and release the reserve samples to FDA upon request, in... electronic submission (e.g., method of transmission, media, file formats, preparation and organization of... Evaluation and Research at FDA. Relevant followup information to a bioavailability/bioequivalence safety...

21 CFR 320.31 - Applicability of requirements regarding an “Investigational New Drug Application.”

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... article and reference standard used in the study and release the reserve samples to FDA upon request, in... electronic submission (e.g., method of transmission, media, file formats, preparation and organization of... Evaluation and Research at FDA. Relevant followup information to a bioavailability/bioequivalence safety...

77 FR 36277 - Academic Development of a Training Program for Good Laboratory Practices in High Containment...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-06-18

... requirements in high and maximum biocontainment, scientists working in this environment and FDA staff who will...] Academic Development of a Training Program for Good Laboratory Practices in High Containment Environments... Containment Environments (U24).'' In this FOA, FDA announces its intention to accept and consider a single...

78 FR 68705 - Premerger Notification; Reporting and Waiting Period Requirements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-15

....\\6\\ An exclusive license is substantively the same as buying the patent or part of the patent... through the FDA approval process, nor to effectively market or promote it in drug form after FDA approval... promotion of the drug. There is a great deal of uncertainty involved because the transfer takes place very...

76 FR 56201 - Prescription Drug User Fee Act; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-12

... PDUFA expires in September 2012. At that time, new legislation will be required for FDA to collect... and upgrade its information technology systems. At the same time, FDA committed to complete reviews in...\\ Since PDUFA was enacted, the median approval time of original NDAs and BLAs has been reduced by about 50...

78 FR 59265 - FD&C Yellow No. 5; Exemption From the Requirement of a Tolerance

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-26

... (NAICS code 112). Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311). Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532). B. How.... 5 is a FDA permanently listed color additive used in food, drugs and cosmetics, including drugs and cosmetics for the eye area. FDA's color additive evaluation included the consideration of an extensive set...

78 FR 77686 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Food and Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-12-24

... and review process. FDA's regulations governing application for Agency approval to market a new drug... Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of... submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of...

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...

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.

Federal regulation of vision enhancement devices for normal and abnormal vision

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Drum, Bruce

2006-09-01

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates the safety and effectiveness of medical devices and biological products as well as food and drugs. The FDA defines a device as a product that is intended, by physical means, to diagnose, treat, or prevent disease, or to affect the structure or function of the body. All vision enhancement devices fulfill this definition because they are intended to affect a function (vision) of the body. In practice, however, FDA historically has drawn a distinction between devices that are intended to enhance low vision as opposed to normal vision. Most low vision aids are therapeutic devices intended to compensate for visual impairment, and are actively regulated according to their level of risk to the patient. The risk level is usually low (e.g. Class I, exempt from 510(k) submission requirements for magnifiers that do not touch the eye), but can be as high as Class III (requiring a clinical trial and Premarket Approval (PMA) application) for certain implanted and prosthetic devices (e.g. intraocular telescopes and prosthetic retinal implants). In contrast, the FDA usually does not actively enforce its regulations for devices that are intended to enhance normal vision, are low risk, and do not have a medical intended use. However, if an implanted or prosthetic device were developed for enhancing normal vision, the FDA would likely decide to regulate it actively, because its intended use would entail a substantial medical risk to the user. Companies developing such devices should contact the FDA at an early stage to clarify their regulatory status.

Closing the information gap: informing better medical decisionmaking through the use of post-market safety and comparative effectiveness information.

PubMed

Fox, Bethany

2012-01-01

While FDA gathers vast amounts of data about prescription drugs prior to their marketing approval, important information about the relative effectiveness and long term safety of products is not required for approval, and often is never collected. Increased postmarket research on the safety and comparative effectiveness of products would improve medical decisionmaking and lead to better clinical outcomes. Fortunately, Congress has recognized the value of this information for healthcare professionals. In response to a congressional mandate in the FDA Amendments Act (FDAAA), FDA is developing the Sentinel Initiative, an active surveillance system for monitoring postmarket drug safety issues. FDAAA also authorized FDA to require a drug sponsor to conduct postmarket safety studies or clinical trials to address a specific safety concern. To increase the repository of comparative effectiveness information, Congress established the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), directing it to manage comparative effectiveness research (CER). This article discusses the need for better safety and comparative effectiveness information and outlines methods to efficiently conduct the research and communicate it effectively to healthcare professionals. Coordination between FDA and the PCORI in gathering and communicating postmarket information is recommended. Medical source data collected by the Sentinel Initiative should be used for CER in addition to postmarket safety surveillance, and FDA and the PCORI should adopt identical standards for the distribution and communication of CER. Coordination between the two entities is recommended to save costs, reduce duplication of efforts, and to generate and communicate more information on prescription drugs for medical decisionmakers.

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.

Regulation of prescription drug promotion: direct-to-consumer advertising.

PubMed

Baylor-Henry, M; Drezin, N A

1998-01-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for regulating the information on prescription drugs disseminated by sponsors to health care providers and consumers to ensure that it is truthful and not misleading, and that it presents a fair balance of benefit and risk information. Thus the public health is both protected and promoted by the dissemination of honest, accurate information about regulated products. This paper discusses the regulatory requirements for promotional materials for prescription drugs and the standards used by the FDA to evaluate these materials. It also discusses the agency's views on direct-to-consumer advertising, the enforcement actions that are available to the FDA, the process used by the FDA to determine what action should be taken and when, and what remedies are available.

Anatomy of a recall.

PubMed

Dzanis, David A

2008-08-01

Pet foods on the market that are contaminated or otherwise present a health risk to humans or animals may be subject to a recall under US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations. Legally, all recalls are "voluntary," but there is little incentive for companies to refuse a request by FDA to conduct a recall. While the firm does the bulk of the work, FDA oversees all aspects of a recall to help ensure that violative product is swiftly removed from the market. A recent new federal law will require FDA to improve its abilities to detect outbreaks of pet food-borne illness, respond to a contamination incident, and communicate with industry and the public on the matter of recalls. Veterinarians play a key role in detecting and reporting pet food-borne illness.

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.

77 FR 37570 - Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for a Pacemaker Programmer

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-06-22

... fallen into disuse and FDA has concluded that there is little or no interest in marketing these devices... little or no interest in marketing the affected devices and that the final rule would not have a significant economic impact. VI. Federalism FDA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles...

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...

Blueprint for prescriber continuing education program.

PubMed

2012-06-01

On October 25, 2011, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted online this Blueprint for Prescriber Continuing Education, labeled "final," relating to extended-release and long-acting opioids. The pending FDA Risk Evaluation Management Strategy (REMS) requires prescriber education. This document provides guidance to sponsors of these dosage forms in developing the prescvriber education component of their REMS. This report was posted online by the federal agency on October 25, 2011 at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/drugsafety/informationbydrugclass/ucm277916.pdf. It is in the public domain.

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

Cancer.gov

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

What we know and don't know about the bioeffects of nanoparticles: developing experimental approaches for safety assessment.

PubMed

Stratmeyer, Mel E; Goering, Peter L; Hitchins, Victoria M; Umbreit, Thomas H

2010-08-01

The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates nano-based medical products and therefore is required to address the safety and biological effects of nano-scale materials used in these products. Both in vitro and in vivo toxicological research studies are being conducted at the FDA to help determine the risks versus benefits of these new products. This article will briefly summarize some of the initial research findings from FDA-CDRH studies using TiO(2), polystyrene, and silicon nanoparticles.

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.

75 FR 69523 - Required Warnings for Cigarette Packages and Advertisements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-12

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

Regulatory Challenges for Cartilage Repair Technologies.

PubMed

McGowan, Kevin B; Stiegman, Glenn

2013-01-01

In the United States, few Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved options exist for the treatment of focal cartilage and osteochondral lesions. Developers of products for cartilage repair face many challenges to obtain marketing approval from the FDA. The objective of this review is to discuss the necessary steps for FDA application and approval for a new cartilage repair product. FDA Guidance Documents, FDA Panel Meetings, scientific organization recommendations, and clinicaltrials.gov were reviewed to demonstrate the current thinking of FDA and the scientific community on the regulatory process for cartilage repair therapies. Cartilage repair therapies can receive market approval from FDA as medical devices, drugs, or biologics, and the specific classification of product can affect the nonclinical, clinical, and regulatory strategy to bring the product to market. Recent FDA guidance gives an outline of the required elements to bring a cartilage repair product to market, although these standards are often very general. As a result, companies have to carefully craft their study patient population, comparator group, and clinical endpoint to best showcase their product's attributes. In addition, regulatory strategy and manufacturing process validation need to be considered early in the clinical study process to allow for timely product approval following the completion of clinical study. Although the path to regulatory approval for a cartilage repair therapy is challenging and time-consuming, proper clinical trial planning and attention to the details can eventually save companies time and money by bringing a product to the market in the most expeditious process possible.

Regulatory Challenges for Cartilage Repair Technologies

PubMed Central

Stiegman, Glenn

2013-01-01

In the United States, few Food and Drug Administration (FDA)–approved options exist for the treatment of focal cartilage and osteochondral lesions. Developers of products for cartilage repair face many challenges to obtain marketing approval from the FDA. The objective of this review is to discuss the necessary steps for FDA application and approval for a new cartilage repair product. FDA Guidance Documents, FDA Panel Meetings, scientific organization recommendations, and clinicaltrials.gov were reviewed to demonstrate the current thinking of FDA and the scientific community on the regulatory process for cartilage repair therapies. Cartilage repair therapies can receive market approval from FDA as medical devices, drugs, or biologics, and the specific classification of product can affect the nonclinical, clinical, and regulatory strategy to bring the product to market. Recent FDA guidance gives an outline of the required elements to bring a cartilage repair product to market, although these standards are often very general. As a result, companies have to carefully craft their study patient population, comparator group, and clinical endpoint to best showcase their product’s attributes. In addition, regulatory strategy and manufacturing process validation need to be considered early in the clinical study process to allow for timely product approval following the completion of clinical study. Although the path to regulatory approval for a cartilage repair therapy is challenging and time-consuming, proper clinical trial planning and attention to the details can eventually save companies time and money by bringing a product to the market in the most expeditious process possible. PMID:26069647

Regulatory and ethical issues with dietary supplements.

PubMed

Harris, I M

2000-11-01

Dietary supplements are commonly used, and many are effective or hold promise for treating various conditions. However, they do not require Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval. Impurities and adulterants have been found in the products, mostly due to the lack of requirements for good manufacturing practices. In addition, as no standardization is required, the active ingredient may be absent or highly variable among manufacturers. The FDA published its 10-year plan for dietary supplements that addresses safety, labeling, boundaries, enforcement, research, and outreach. This endeavor, if put into place, will be instrumental in providing consumers with more confidence in the safety, composition, and labeling of dietary supplements.

Current good manufacturing practices, quality control procedures, quality factors, notification requirements, and records and reports, for infant formula. Final rule.

PubMed

2014-06-10

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is issuing a final rule that adopts, with some modifications, the interim final rule (IFR) entitled "Current Good Manufacturing Practices, Quality Control Procedures, Quality Factors, Notification Requirements, and Records and Reports, for Infant Formula'' (February 10, 2014). This final rule affirms the IFR's changes to FDA's regulations and provides additional modifications and clarifications. The final rule also responds to certain comments submitted in response to the request for comments in the IFR.

Proceedings of the Food and Drug Administration's public workshop on new red blood cell product regulatory science 2016.

PubMed

Vostal, Jaroslav G; Buehler, Paul W; Gelderman, Monique P; Alayash, Abdu I; Doctor, Alan; Zimring, James C; Glynn, Simone A; Hess, John R; Klein, Harvey; Acker, Jason P; Spinella, Philip C; D'Alessandro, Angelo; Palsson, Bernhard; Raife, Thomas J; Busch, Michael P; McMahon, Timothy J; Intaglietta, Marcos; Swartz, Harold M; Dubick, Michael A; Cardin, Sylvain; Patel, Rakesh P; Natanson, Charles; Weisel, John W; Muszynski, Jennifer A; Norris, Philip J; Ness, Paul M

2018-01-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) held a workshop on red blood cell (RBC) product regulatory science on October 6 and 7, 2016, at the Natcher Conference Center on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Campus in Bethesda, Maryland. The workshop was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, NIH; the Department of Defense; the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Department of Health and Human Services; and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, FDA. The workshop reviewed the status and scientific basis of the current regulatory framework and the available scientific tools to expand it to evaluate innovative and future RBC transfusion products. A full record of the proceedings is available on the FDA website (http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/NewsEvents/WorkshopsMeetingsConferences/ucm507890.htm). The contents of the summary are the authors' opinions and do not represent agency policy. © 2017 AABB.

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

PubMed

Caliendo, Angela M; Hanson, Kimberly E

2016-04-01

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

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.

21 CFR 201.66 - Format and content requirements for over-the-counter (OTC) drug product labeling.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

...: “[Bullet] side effects occur. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.” The telephone number... means any component that is intended to furnish pharmacological activity or other direct effect in the... specified activity or effect. (3) Approved drug application means a new drug (NDA) or abbreviated new drug...

21 CFR 201.66 - Format and content requirements for over-the-counter (OTC) drug product labeling.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

...: “[Bullet] side effects occur. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.” The telephone number... means any component that is intended to furnish pharmacological activity or other direct effect in the... specified activity or effect. (3) Approved drug application means a new drug (NDA) or abbreviated new drug...

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.

Healthcare software assurance.

PubMed

Cooper, Jason G; Pauley, Keith A

2006-01-01

Software assurance is a rigorous, lifecycle phase-independent set of activities which ensure completeness, safety, and reliability of software processes and products. This is accomplished by guaranteeing conformance to all requirements, standards, procedures, and regulations. These assurance processes are even more important when coupled with healthcare software systems, embedded software in medical instrumentation, and other healthcare-oriented life-critical systems. The current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory requirements and guidance documentation do not address certain aspects of complete software assurance activities. In addition, the FDA's software oversight processes require enhancement to include increasingly complex healthcare systems such as Hospital Information Systems (HIS). The importance of complete software assurance is introduced, current regulatory requirements and guidance discussed, and the necessity for enhancements to the current processes shall be highlighted.

77 FR 39921 - D&C Red No. 6 and D&C Red No. 7; Change in Specification

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-06

..., OH 45232, had filed a color additive petition (CAP 1C0290) requesting that FDA amend its regulations....2306 and 74.2307. Both color additives are required to be batch certified by FDA before they may... D&C Red Nos. 6 and 7 contained ether-soluble matter for which the proponents of the color additives...

Current good manufacturing practice and investigational new drugs intended for use in clinical trials. Final rule.

PubMed

2008-07-15

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for human drugs, including biological products, to exempt most phase 1 investigational drugs from complying with the regulatory CGMP requirements. FDA will continue to exercise oversight of the manufacture of these drugs under FDA's general statutory CGMP authority and through review of the investigational new drug applications (IND). In addition, elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing the availability of a guidance document entitled "Guidance for Industry: CGMP for Phase 1 Investigational Drugs" dated November 2007 (the companion guidance). This guidance document sets forth recommendations on approaches to compliance with statutory CGMP for the exempted phase 1 investigational drugs. FDA is taking this action to focus a manufacturer's effort on applying CGMP that is appropriate and meaningful for the manufacture of the earliest stage investigational drug products intended for use in phase 1 clinical trials while ensuring safety and quality. This action will also streamline and promote the drug development process.

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

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

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

2008-02-01

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

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.

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.

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.

The US Food and Drug Administration's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program - Current Status and Future Direction.

PubMed

Wu, Jasmanda; Juhaeri, Juhaeri

2016-12-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Amendments Act of 2007 granted the FDA new authorities to enhance drug safety by requiring application holders to submit a proposed Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS). A REMS is a required risk management plan that uses tools beyond the package insert. REMS elements may include a medication guide and patient package insert for patients and a communication plan focused on health care professionals. Elements to assure safe use (ETASUs) are put in place to mitigate a specific known serious risk when other less restrictive elements of a REMS are not sufficient to mitigate such risk. An implementation system is required for an REMS that includes the ETASUs. With approximately eight years of experience with REMS programs, many health care settings have created systems to manage REMS and also to integrate REMS into their practice settings. At the same time, there are issues associated with the development and implementation of REMS. In 2011, FDA created the REMS Integration Initiative to develop guidance on how to apply statutory criteria to determine when a REMS is required, to improve standardization and assessment of REMS, and to improve integration of REMS into the existing healthcare system. A key component of the REMS Integration Initiative is stakeholder outreach to better understand how existing REMS programs are working and to identify opportunities for improvement. This review attempts to share our company's experience with the REMS program, and to provide updates on FDA's efforts to improve REMS communication, to standardize REMS process, to reduce REMS program burdens and to build a common REMS platform. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

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.

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

PubMed

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

2016-10-01

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

Validation of gamma irradiator controls for quality and regulatory compliance

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

Harding, Rorry B.; Pinteric, Francis J. A.

1995-09-01

Since 1978 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has had both the legal authority and the Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) regulations in place to require irradiator owners who process medical devices to produce evidence of Irradiation Process Validation. One of the key components of Irradiation Process Validation is the validation of the irradiator controls. However, it is only recently that FDA audits have focused on this component of the process validation. What is Irradiator Control System Validation? What constitutes evidence of control? How do owners obtain evidence? What is the irradiator supplier's role in validation? How does the ISO 9000 Quality Standard relate to the FDA's CGMP requirement for evidence of Control System Validation? This paper presents answers to these questions based on the recent experiences of Nordion's engineering and product management staff who have worked with several US-based irradiator owners. This topic — Validation of Irradiator Controls — is a significant regulatory compliance and operations issue within the irradiator suppliers' and users' community.

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

PubMed

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

2014-06-01

The Industry Committee of the Tissue Engineering Regenerative Medicine International Society, Americas Chapter (TERMIS-AM) administered a survey to its membership in 2013 to assess the awareness of science requirements in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory process. One hundred forty-four members responded to the survey. Their occupational and geographical representation was representative of the TERMIS-AM membership as a whole. The survey elicited basic demographic information, the degree to which members were involved in tissue engineering technology development, and their plans for future involvement in such development. The survey then assessed the awareness of general FDA scientific practices as well as specific science requirements for regulatory submissions to the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH), and the Office of Combination Projects (OCP). The FDA-specific questions in the survey were culled from guidance documents posted on the FDA web site ( www.fda.gov ). One of the answer options was an opt-out clause that enabled survey respondents to claim a lack of sufficient awareness of the topic to answer the question. This enabled the stratification of respondents on the basis of confidence in the topic. Results indicate that across all occupational groups (academic, business, and government) that are represented in the TERMIS-AM membership, the awareness of FDA science requirements varies markedly. Those who performed best were for-profit company employees, consultants, and government employees; while students, professors, and respondents from outside the USA performed least well. Confidence in question topics was associated with increased correctness in responses across all groups, though the association between confidence and the ability to answer correctly was poorest among students and professors. Though 80% of respondents claimed involvement in the development of a tissue engineering technology, their responses were no more correct than those who were not. Among those developing tissue engineering technologies, few are taking advantage of existing standards organizations to strengthen their regulatory submissions. The data suggest that early exposure to regulatory experts would be of value for those seeking to bring their technology to the market. For all groups studied but especially for students and professors, formal initial or continuing education in Regulatory Science should be considered to best support translational tissue engineering research and development. In addition, the involvement of standards development organizations during tissue engineering technology development is strongly recommended.

21 CFR 601.27 - Pediatric studies.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... action on waiver. FDA shall grant a full or partial waiver, as appropriate, if the agency finds that... treatment-limiting drug reaction; documented enhancement of compliance; or evidence of safety and...

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.

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

PubMed

Drum, Bruce

2004-01-01

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

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.

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-01-01

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

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-01-01

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

16 CFR 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-01-01

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

Agency perspectives on food safety for the products of animal biotechnology.

PubMed

Howard, H J; Jones, K M; Rudenko, L

2012-08-01

Animal biotechnology represents one subset of tools among a larger set of technologies for potential use to meet increasing world demands for food. Assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as artificial insemination and embryo transfer continue to make positive contributions in food animal production. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) performed a comprehensive risk assessment to identify potential food consumption or animal health risks associated with animal cloning, an emerging ART. At that time, FDA concluded that animal cloning posed no unique risks either to animal health or to food consumption, and food from animal clones and their sexually reproduced offspring required no additional federal regulation beyond that applicable to conventionally bred animals of the species examined. At this time, no new information has arisen that would necessitate a change in FDA's conclusions on food from animal clones or their sexually reproduced offspring. Use of recombinant DNA technologies to produce genetically engineered (GE) animals represents another emerging technology with potential to impact food animal production. In its regulation of GE animals, FDA follows a cumulative, risk-based approach to address scientific questions related to the GE animals. FDA evaluates data and information on the safety, effectiveness and stability of the GE event. FDA carries out its review at several levels (e.g. molecular biology, animal safety, food safety, environmental safety and claim validation). GE animal sponsors provide data to address risk questions for each level. This manuscript discusses FDA's role in evaluation of animal cloning and GE animals. © 2012 Blackwell Verlag GmbH.

77 FR 51811 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Self-Identification of Generic Drug Facilities, Sites, and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-27

... as it prepares to meet the self- identification requirement. It explains who is required to self... describing how FDA will implement the self- identification requirement contained in GDUFA. As required by... industry as it prepares to meet the self-identification requirement. The guidance explains who is required...

Deeming Tobacco Products To Be Subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as Amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act; Restrictions on the Sale and Distribution of Tobacco Products and Required Warning Statements for Tobacco Products. Final rule.

PubMed

2016-05-10

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing this final rule to deem products meeting the statutory definition of "tobacco product,'' except accessories of the newly deemed tobacco products, to be subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act). The Tobacco Control Act provides FDA authority to regulate cigarettes, cigarette tobacco, roll-your-own tobacco, smokeless tobacco, and any other tobacco products that the Agency by regulation deems to be subject to the law. With this final rule, FDA is extending the Agency's "tobacco product'' authorities in the FD&C Act to all other categories of products that meet the statutory definition of "tobacco product" in the FD&C Act, except accessories of such newly deemed tobacco products. This final rule also prohibits the sale of "covered tobacco products" to individuals under the age of 18 and requires the display of health warnings on cigarette tobacco, roll-your own tobacco, and covered tobacco product packages and in advertisements. FDA is taking this action to reduce the death and disease from tobacco products. In accordance with the Tobacco Control Act, we consider and intend the extension of our authorities over tobacco products and the various requirements and prohibitions established by this rule to be severable.

Aristolochic Acids

MedlinePlus

... a full list, see the FDA website at https: / / go. usa. gov/ xN66S. Contact the manufacturer or ... I go for more information? National Toxicology Program https: / / ntp. niehs. nih. gov/ go/ roc The Report ...

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.

Interpreting labels of abuse-deterrent opioid analgesics.

PubMed

Webster, Lynn R

To provide an overview of available abuse-deterrent opioids (ADOs) and the labeling text that describes abuse-deterrent (AD) properties. A nonsystematic review of ADO literature and regulatory documents guiding their development. A critical assessment and discussion of common routes of opioid abuse, AD methods and properties, US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) study requirements to achieve AD labeling, and brief guide to understanding AD labels. The FDA has issued guidance as incentive and direction to industry to develop ADOs as one component of a multi-pronged public-health strategy to combat opioid abuse and misuse. The guidance describes separate categories of premarket and postmarket studies and makes recommendations for claims that may be made based on study findings. Ten ADOs have FDA-approved labeling attesting to AD properties. Available formulations that fail to conform to FDA guidance in study and labeling recommendations cannot be considered ADO. Formulations with AD properties are expected to reduce risk compared to the same agents without AD properties but cannot prevent all abuse and adverse clinical outcomes.

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

PubMed

1998-09-25

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

21 CFR 54.4 - Certification and disclosure requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

16 CFR § 1702.3 - Substantive requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-01-01

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

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 56.104 - Exemptions from IRB requirement.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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.

Revisions to labeling requirements for blood and blood components, including source plasma. Final rule.

PubMed

2012-01-03

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is revising the labeling requirements for blood and blood components intended for use in transfusion or for further manufacture by combining, simplifying, and updating specific regulations applicable to labeling and circulars of information. These requirements will facilitate the use of a labeling system using machine-readable information that would be acceptable as a replacement for the ``ABC Codabar'' system for the labeling of blood and blood components. FDA is taking this action as a part of its efforts to comprehensively review and, as necessary, revise its regulations, policies, guidances, and procedures related to the regulation of blood and blood components. This final rule is intended to help ensure the continued safety of the blood supply and facilitate consistency in labeling.

Overview of regulation of dietary supplements in the USA and issues of adulteration with phenethylamines (PEAs).

PubMed

Pawar, Rahul S; Grundel, Erich

2017-03-01

The multi-billion dollar dietary supplement industry is global in reach. The industry has been criticized for problems related to poor quality control, safety, misbranding, and adulteration. In this review, we describe how the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates dietary supplements within the framework of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA), which amended the FD&C Act, gave the FDA the authority to promulgate Good Manufacturing Practices for dietary supplements and required that manufacturers provide the FDA information supporting a conclusion that the ingredients are reasonably expected to be safe if the dietary ingredients were not marketed in the USA before 15 October 1994. Recent amendments to the FD&C Act require that serious dietary-supplement-related adverse events be reported to the FDA and provide the agency with mandatory recall authority. We discuss the presence of naturally occurring (e.g. Ephedra, Citrus aurantium, Acacia) and synthetic (e.g. β-methylphenethylamines, methylsynephrine, α-ethyl-phenethylamine) biologically active phenethylamines (PEAs) in dietary supplements and of PEA drugs (e.g. clenbuterol, fenfluramine, sibutramine, lorcaserin) in weight-loss products. Regulatory actions against manufacturers of products labelled as dietary supplements that contain the aliphatic amines 1,3-dimethylamine and 1,3-dimethylbutylamine, and PEAs such as β-methylphenethylamine, aegeline, and Dendrobium illustrate the FDA's use of its authority under the FD&C Act to promote dietary supplement safety. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Published 2016. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

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

PubMed Central

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

2015-01-01

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

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

PubMed

2010-09-29

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

76 FR 60848 - National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee; Notice of Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-30

.../phone line to learn about possible modifications before coming to the meeting. Agenda: On November 4... status of the Full Field Digital Mammography universal quality control manual. FDA intends to make...

Which prescription for the illegible and unreadable DTC (direct-to-consumer) brief summary--major surgery or euthanasia?

PubMed

Hochhauser, Mark

2002-01-01

Healthcare costs are rising, mostly because of increased prescription drug use, chiefly as the result of direct-to-consumer drug ads on television, newspapers, and magazines. However, the FDA's requirement for a brief summary in direct-to-consumer drug ads has produced summaries that are ineffective because they are illegible and unreadable, create information overload, and require literacy skills not possessed by most consumers. If the FDA wants brief summaries to be in a patient-friendly format, it should provide document design templates and plain language examples. Unless brief summaries are written so that they can be understood by the average patient, they should be overhauled or done away with.

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

PubMed

1993-08-03

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

Tinea capitis: diagnostic criteria and treatment options.

PubMed

Meadows-Oliver, Mikki

2009-01-01

Tinea capitis is a fungal infection involving the hair shaft of the scalp. It is commonly referred to as ringworm and occurs primarily in children. Treatment with a systemic anti-fingal rather than topical treatment is required. Currently, two medications, griseofulvin (Grifulvin) and terbinafine (Lamisil Granules), are FDA-approved to treat tinea capitis. Treatment with griseofulvin is usually 6 to 8 weeks, while treatment with terbinafine requires 6 weeks. There are other medications currently not FDA-approved to treat tinea capitis that have similar cure rates and shorter durations of treatment for tinea capitis, and as a result, are being used off-label. The research-based literature related to the treatment of tinea capitis with various pharmacologic agents is reviewed.

Concise Review: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Regenerative Medicine.

PubMed

Witten, Celia M; McFarland, Richard D; Simek, Stephanie L

2015-12-01

Regenerative medicine (RM) is a popular term for a field of scientific and medical research. There is not one universally accepted definition of RM, but it is generally taken to mean the translation of multidisciplinary biology and engineering science into therapeutic approaches to regenerate, replace, or repair tissues and organs. RM products have the potential to provide treatments for a number of unmet needs but have substantial scientific and regulatory challenges that need to be addressed for this potential to be fully realized. FDA has established formal regulatory definitions for biologics, medical devices, and combination products, as well as human cells and tissues. Regenerative medicine products regulated by FDA are classified on the basis of these definitions, and the classification forms the basis for determining the regulatory requirements to each specific product. FDA regulations are generally written to allow the agency flexibility to accommodate new scientific questions raised by novel and evolving technologies. FDA efforts to facilitate product development in this novel and promising area include working with individual sponsors, interacting with the scientific and industry communities, participating in standards development, and developing policy and guidance. Regenerative medicine is generally taken to mean the translation of multidisciplinary biology and engineering science into therapeutic approaches to regenerate, replace, or repair tissues and organs. This article provides an overview of the efforts of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to facilitate product development in the field commonly known was regenerative medicine. It provides an introduction to the processes by which FDA works with individual sponsors, interacts with the scientific and industry communities, participates in standards development, and develops formal FDA policy and guidance. ©AlphaMed Press.

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.

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

PubMed

Weimholt, Josef

2015-01-01

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

21 CFR 900.11 - Requirements for certification.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-12

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

ClinicalTrials.gov, stem cells and 'pay-to-participate' clinical studies.

PubMed

Turner, Leigh

2017-09-01

Numerous US businesses that engage in direct-to-consumer advertising of stem cell interventions that are not US FDA-approved also recruit clients by listing 'pay-to-participate' studies listed on ClinicalTrials.gov . Individuals considering enrolling in such studies and NIH officials responsible for overseeing the database need to be aware that some businesses are using the registry to promote unapproved stem cell interventions that study subjects are charged to receive. Inclusion of such studies in ClinicalTrials.gov reveals that the database needs better screening tools. In particular, screening should evaluate whether studies submitted to the registry have been reviewed and permitted to proceed by the FDA in the case of clinical studies requiring FDA clearance in addition to institutional review board approval.

Carbapenem Susceptibility Testing Errors Using Three Automated Systems, Disk Diffusion, Etest, and Broth Microdilution and Carbapenem Resistance Genes in Isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii-calcoaceticus Complex

DTIC Science & Technology

2011-10-01

Phoenix, and Vitek 2 systems). Discordant results were categorized as very major errors (VME), major errors (ME), and minor errors (mE). DNA sequences...01 OCT 2011 2 . REPORT TYPE N/A 3. DATES COVERED - 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Carbapenem Susceptibility Testing Errors Using Three Automated...FDA standards required for device approval (11). The Vitek 2 method was the only automated susceptibility method in our study that satisfied FDA

Medical devices; exemption from premarket notification; Class II devices; optical impression systems for computer assisted design and manufacturing. Final rule.

PubMed

2003-04-22

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is publishing an order granting a petition requesting exemption from the premarket notification requirements for data acquisition units for ceramic dental restoration systems. This rule exempts from premarket notification data acquisition units for ceramic dental restoration systems and establishes a guidance document as a special control for this device. FDA is publishing this order in accordance with the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA).

Effects of Prescription Drugs During Pregnancy. Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-Seventh Congress, First Session (July, 30, 1981).

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

Congress of the U.S., Washington, DC. House Committee on Science and Technology.

This hearing focuses on scientific and policy deficiencies in the area of drug-induced birth defects. Witnesses charge that (1) the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require the kinds of clinical studies that are necessary to actually determine the safety of drugs used in pregnancy, (2) the FDA does nothing to enable women to find out…

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.

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.

Origins of the prohibition against off-label promotion.

PubMed

Coleman, Terry S

2014-01-01

The statute and regulations administered by the Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") do not explicitly prohibit the promotion of drugs and medical devices for unapproved uses, yet the government has collected billions of dollars in penalties for such "off-label" promotion. The statutory interpretations and regulatory provisions relied on by the government to take enforcement action against off-label promotion are the incidental by-products of initiatives undertaken by FDA through administrative action and litigation early in its implementation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The actions were designed to obtain FDA authority over therapeutic claims made in advertising, even though Congress had assigned authority over advertising to the Federal Trade Commission, and to establish a prescription-only drug system, even though FDA lacked statutory authority for such a system. The principal purpose of both efforts was to prevent inappropriate self-medication. This article describes the history of those strategies, including expansion of the definition of the term "labeling" to encompass matter that was initially regarded as advertising; creation of the rule that the labeling of drugs must have adequate directions for all "intended" uses; and construction of the prescription-only drug system in a manner that allowed FDA to use the statutory requirement for labeling to have "adequate directions for use" to prohibit the off-label promotion of prescription drugs.

Literacy demands of product information intended to supplement television direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertisements.

PubMed

Kaphingst, Kimberly A; Rudd, Rima E; DeJong, William; Daltroy, Lawren H

2004-11-01

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allows television direct-to-consumer (DTC) prescription drug advertisements that do not fully disclose drug risks if the ads include "adequate provision" for dissemination of the drug's approved labeling. This requirement can be met in part by referring consumers to multiple text sources of product labeling. This study was designed to assess the materials to which consumers were referred in 23 DTC television advertisements. SMOG assessments showed that the average reading grade levels were in the high school range for the main body sections of the materials and college-level range for the brief summary sections. The Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) instrument identified specific difficulties with the materials, including content, graphics, layout, and typography features. Stronger plain language requirements are recommended. Health care providers should be aware that patients who ask about an advertised drug might not have the full information required to make an informed decision.

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

PubMed

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

2013-01-22

The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for the protection of the public health by assuring the safety, effectiveness and security of human drugs and biological products through the enforcement of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and related regulations. These enforcement activities include regulatory letters (i.e. warning letters and notice of violation) to pharmaceutical companies. A regulatory letter represents the FDA's first official notification to a pharmaceutical company that the FDA has discovered a product or activity in violation of the FDCA.This study analyzed trends in the pharmaceutical-related regulatory letters released by the FDA during the period 1997-2011 and assessed differences in the average number and type of regulatory letters released during the last four federal administrations. Data derived from the FDA webpage. Information about the FDA office releasing the letter, date, company, and drug-related violation was collected. Regulatory letters were classified by federal administration. Descriptive statistics were performed for the analysis. Between 1997 and 2011 the FDA released 2,467 regulatory letters related to pharmaceuticals. FDA headquarters offices released 50.6% and district offices 49.4% of the regulatory letters. The Office of Prescription Drug Promotion released the largest number of regulatory letters (850; 34.5% of the total), followed by the Office of Scientific Investigations (131; 5.3%), and the Office of Compliance (105; 4.3%). During the 2nd Clinton Administration (1997-2000) the average number of regulatory letters per year was 242.8 ± 45.6, during the Bush Administration (2001-2008) it was 120.4 ± 33.7, and during the first three years of the Obama administration (2009-2011) it was 177.7.0 ± 17.0. The average number of regulatory letters released by the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion also varied by administration: Clinton (122.3 ± 36.4), Bush (29.5 ± 16.2) and Obama (41.7 ± 11.1). Most regulatory letters released by FDA headquarters were related to marketing and advertising activities of pharmaceutical companies. The number of regulatory letters was highest during the second Clinton administration, diminished during the Bush administrations, and increased again during the Obama administration. A further assessment of the impact of changes in federal administration on the enforcement activities of the FDA is required.

76 FR 14407 - Exchange of Letters Between Dr. Murray M. Lumpkin, Deputy Commissioner, International Programs...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-16

..., Fisheries and Food of Ireland Concerning Certification Requirements for Caseins, Caseinates, and Mixtures... certification requirements for caseins, caseinates, and mixtures thereof exported from Ireland to the United States. The mutual goals of FDA and DAFF in establishing certification requirements for caseins...

78 FR 66940 - Regulatory Requirements for Hearing Aid Devices and Personal Sound Amplification Products; Draft...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-07

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2013-D-1295] Regulatory Requirements for Hearing Aid Devices and Personal Sound Amplification Products; Draft Guidance for... draft guidance entitled ``Regulatory Requirements for Hearing Aid Devices and Personal Sound...

The constitutional protection of trade secrets and patents under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009.

PubMed

Epstein, Richard A

2011-01-01

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 ("Biosimilars Act") is for the field of pharmaceutical products the single most important legislative development since passage of the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 ("Hatch-Waxman Act"), on which portions of the Biosimilars Act are clearly patterned. Congress revised section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (PHSA) to create a pathway for FDA approval of "biosimilar" biological products. Each biosimilar applicant is required to cite in its application a "reference product" that was approved on the basis of a full application containing testing data and manufacturing information, which is owned and was submitted by another company and much of which constitutes trade secret information subject to constitutional protection. Because the Biosimilars Act authorizes biosimilar applicants to cite these previously approved applications, the implementation of the new legislative scheme raises critical issues under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, pursuant to which private property--trade secrets included--may not be taken for public use, without "just compensation." FDA must confront those issues as it implements the scheme set out in the Biosimilars Act. This article will discuss these issues, after providing a brief overview of the Biosimilars Act and a more detailed examination of the law of trade secrets.

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.

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

Risk evaluation and mitigation strategies: a focus on the mycophenolic acid preparations.

PubMed

Rostas, Sara; Kim, Miae; Gabardi, Steven

2014-03-01

To review risks associated with mycophenolic acid (MPA) preparations and evaluate their required risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS) elements. Articles were identified through a non-date-limited MEDLINE and EMBASE search using the terms fetal toxicity, teratogenicity, risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, REMS, MPA, mycophenolate mofetil, entericcoated MPA, and organ transplant. Information from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the manufacturers of the MPA preparations was also evaluated. The MPA preparations are associated with several potential risks, including gastrointestinal disturbances and myelosuppression; however, their impact on the fetus in pregnant patients taking 1 of these agents poses the greatest risk. The FDA approved REMS programs for all MPA products, both innovator and generic preparations, in September 2012. With evidence of increased risk of miscarriage and birth defects associated with MPA use, the FDA instituted a REMS program that contains both a medication guide and elements to assure safe use (ETASU). The medication guides for the MPA products, which were previously FDA approved, should continue to be distributed to patients who get either an initial prescription filled or a refill. The ETASU requires prescribers to complete training and obtain patient signatures on the Patient-Prescriber Acknowledgment Form. A single, national, voluntary pregnancy registry specific to this medication has been established, and pregnant patients should be encouraged to participate. Although the impact of the MPA REMS on clinical practice is not clear, it is a step toward increasing the understanding of fetal risks with MPA.

78 FR 46966 - Food Safety Modernization Act Domestic and Foreign Facility Reinspection, Recall, and Importer...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-08-02

... the full cost recovery of FDA reinspection or recall oversight could impose severe economic hardship... Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) and the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM). Thus, as the starting...

Tinea capitis: diagnostic criteria and treatment options.

PubMed

Meadows-Oliver, Mikki

2009-01-01

Tinea capitis is a fungal infection involving the hair shaft of the scalp. It is commonly referred to as ringworm and occurs primarily in children. Treatment with a systemic anti-fungal rather than topical treatment is required. Currently, two medications, griseofulvin (Grifulvin) and terbinafine (Lamisil Granules), are FDA-approved to treat tinea capitis. Treatment with griseofulvin is usually 6 to 8 weeks, while treatment with terbinafine requires 6 weeks. There are other medications currently not FDA-approved to treat tinea capitis that have similar cure rates and shorter durations of treatment for tinea capitis, and as a result, are being used off-label. This article reviews the research-based literature related to the treatment of tinea capitis with various pharmacologic agents.

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

PubMed

Moss, Julie

2006-05-01

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

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

PubMed

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

2012-06-01

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

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

PubMed

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

2015-05-15

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

Your business in court and at Federal agencies: 2011-2012.

PubMed

Reiss, John B; Crowder, Dawn; McCabe, Brittany; DeFeo, Marisa; Rifin, Marta; Talbot, Meghan

2013-01-01

FDA transparency effort continued, including the Secretary's adopting eight measures to improve access to Agency information and activities. A continuing problem was shortages of prescription drugs, which probably was enhanced by increased manufacturing recalls. FDA issued more device Guidances for regulatory clarity. Enforcement involving drugs and devices increased, including GMP and GLP enforcement and surveillance of internet claims. The Supreme Court decided generic drug manufacturers may cause the FDA to revise incorrectly listed use codes, and pharmaceutical detailers may not receive overtime payments. FDA initiated implementation of the Food Safety and Modernization Act, including two pilot tracking systems for supply chain tracing and to determine how quickly data can be gathered. The Agency issued guidance for new dietary supplements. FDA failed to impose graphic labeling requirements on the tobacco industry, but established it can regulate electronic cigarettes as tobacco. The Agency issued guidelines for the use of nanomaterials in cosmetics, and reviewed the effectiveness of sunscreen products. FDA is being given more authority over larger areas of the U.S. economy, but its resources are not increased proportionately. The pharmaceutical industry made major payments for alleged violations of the Drug Rebate Statute, Anti-Kickback Statute, Wholesale Price and Off-Label Use prohibitions. The government continues using the Responsible Corporate Officer doctrine to make company managers responsible for corporate conduct about which they had no knowledge. Companies should have a robust compliance program in effect. The FTC and the SEC continue their oversight activities, including SEC's enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The defense of product liability litigation continues grappling with federal preemption of state laws.

21 CFR 821.55 - Confidentiality.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... MEDICAL DEVICE TRACKING REQUIREMENTS Records and Inspections § 821.55 Confidentiality. (a) Any patient receiving a device subject to tracking requirements under this part may refuse to release, or refuse... identifying information for the purpose of tracking. (b) Records and other information submitted to FDA under...

77 FR 6463 - Revisions to Labeling Requirements for Blood and Blood Components, Including Source Plasma...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-02-08

... 640 [Docket No. FDA-2003-N-0097; Formerly 2003N-0211] Revisions to Labeling Requirements for Blood and Blood Components, Including Source Plasma; Correction AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION... published a final rule entitled ``Revisions to Labeling Requirements for Blood and Blood Components...

76 FR 35678 - SPF Labeling and Testing Requirements and Drug Facts Labeling for Over-the-Counter Sunscreen Drug...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-06-17

... [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0449] SPF Labeling and Testing Requirements and Drug Facts Labeling for Over-the... testing requirements for over-the-counter (OTC) sunscreen products containing specified ingredients and... techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology. SPF Labeling and Testing...

21 CFR 610.68 - Exceptions or alternatives to labeling requirements for biological products held by the Strategic...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... requirements for biological products held by the Strategic National Stockpile. 610.68 Section 610.68 Food and... GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS Labeling Standards § 610.68 Exceptions or alternatives to labeling requirements for biological products held by the Strategic National Stockpile. (a) The appropriate FDA Center...

Comparisons of Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency risk management implementation for recent pharmaceutical approvals: report of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research risk benefit management working group.

PubMed

Lis, Yvonne; Roberts, Melissa H; Kamble, Shital; J Guo, Jeff; Raisch, Dennis W

2012-12-01

1) To compare the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) and European Medicines Agency's (EMA's) Risk Management Plan (RMP) guidances and 2) to compare REMS and RMPs for specific chemical entities and biological products. FDA, EMA, and pharmaceutical company Web sites were consulted for details pertaining to REMS and RMPs. REMS requirements include medication guides, communication plans, elements to ensure safe use, implementation systems, and specified assessment intervals. RMP requirements are increased pharmacovigilance and risk minimization activities. We compared these requirements for drugs requiring both REMS and RMPs. We identified 95 drugs on FDA's REMS list as of March 2010. Of these, there were 29 drugs (11 biologics and 18 new chemical entities) with EMA RMPs. REMS and RMPs are similar in objectives, with comparable toolkits. Both allow flexibility in product-specific actions, recognizing adverse effects of potential concern. Of the 29 drugs reviewed, REMS requirements not included in RMPs were patient medication guides (100% of the drugs), provider communication plans (38%), and routine monitoring of REMS (66%). RMP requirements not included in REMS were specific adverse event reporting (45% of the drugs), prospective registry studies (34%), prospective epidemiology studies (24%), additional trial data (28%), and Summary of Product Characteristics contraindications (76%). Both REMS and RMPs provide positive guidance for identification, monitoring, and minimization of risk to patient safety. Currently, neither agency provides specific guidance on how risk should be related to benefit either qualitatively or quantitatively. Copyright © 2012 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

DTIC Science & Technology

2005-06-02

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

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

PubMed

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

2000-01-01

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

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

PubMed

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

2018-02-01

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

Tagatose, the new GRAS sweetener and health product.

PubMed

Levin, Gilbert V

2002-01-01

Tagatose, a low-calorie, full-bulk natural sugar, has just attained GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, thereby permitting its use as a sweetener in foods and beverages. This paper presents all current aspects of tagatose with respect to demonstrated food and beverage applications and the potential health and medical benefits of this unique substance. Summarized studies are referenced to detailed peer-reviewed papers. The safety studies followed the recommendations in the FDA "Red Book." Results were submitted to an Expert Panel for determination of GRAS status under FDA regulation. Small phase 2 clinical trials showed tagatose to be effective in treating type 2 diabetes. The results, buttressed by the references cited, support the efficacy of the various applications disclosed for tagatose. Tagatose has been found to be safe and efficacious for use as a low-calorie, full-bulk sweetener in a wide variety of foods, beverages, health foods, and dietary supplements. It fills broad, heretofore unmet needs for a low-calorie sweetener in products in which the bulk of sugar is important, such as chocolates, chewing gum, cakes, ice cream, and frosted cereals. Its synergism with high-intensity sweeteners also makes it useful in sodas. Various health and medical benefits are indicated, including the treatment of type 2 diabetes, hyperglycemia, anemia, and hemophilia and the improvement of fetal development.

21 CFR 814.82 - Postapproval requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

Regulatory Requirements for Devices for the Handicapped.

ERIC Educational Resources Information Center

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

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

76 FR 57060 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-15

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-D-0588] International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products; Draft Guidance for Industry on Pharmacovigilance of Veterinary Medicinal Products: Electronic...

Free Space Optical Communication in the Military Environment

DTIC Science & Technology

2014-09-01

Communications Commission FDA Food and Drug Administration FMV Full Motion Video FOB Forward Operating Base FOENEX Free-Space Optical Experimental Network...from radio and voice to chat message and email. Data-rich multimedia content, such as high-definition pictures, video chat, video files, and...introduction of full-motion video (FMV) via numerous different Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) systems, such as targeting pods on

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

PubMed

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

2006-09-06

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

Mycophenolate fetal toxicity and risk evaluation and mitigation strategies.

PubMed

Kim, M; Rostas, S; Gabardi, S

2013-06-01

The mycophenolic acid (MPA) preparations are one of the most commonly used immunosuppressants in the United States. However, these agents carry a black box warning regarding their use during pregnancy due to an association with increased risk of miscarriage and congenital defects. To ensure that the benefits of MPA outweigh the risks, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required all manufacturers of MPA products to propose risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS). Four years after initially calling for proposals, the FDA approved a single shared REMS system in September 2012. The elements of the MPA REMS include a medication guide and elements to assure safe use (ETASU). The medication guide, which was previously FDA-approved in 2008, should continue to be distributed to patients, and the ETASU requires physicians to complete training and obtain patient signatures on the "Patient-Prescriber Acknowledgement Form." A single, national, voluntary pregnancy registry is available, and pregnant patients should be encouraged to participate. Although the impact of the MPA REMS on clinical practice is not clear, it is a step toward increasing the understanding of fetal risks with MPA products among patients and possibly practitioners. © Copyright 2013 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Applying radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology in transfusion medicine.

PubMed

Hohberger, Clive; Davis, Rodeina; Briggs, Lynne; Gutierrez, Alfonso; Veeramani, Dhamaraj

2012-05-01

ISO/IEC 18000-3 mode 1 standard 13.56 MHz RFID tags have been accepted by the International Society for Blood Transfusion (ISBT) and the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as data carriers to integrate with and augment ISBT 128 barcode data carried on blood products. The use of 13.56 MHz RFID carrying ISBT 128 data structures allows the global deployment and use of RFID, supporting both international transfer of blood and international disaster relief. The deployment in process at the BloodCenter of Wisconsin and testing at the University of Iowa Health Center is the first FDA-permitted implementation of RFID throughout in all phases of blood banking, donation through transfusion. RFID technology and equipment selection will be discussed along with FDA-required RF safety testing; integration with the blood enterprise computing system and required RFID tag performance. Tag design and survivability is an issue due to blood bag centrifugation and irradiation. Deployment issues will be discussed. Use of RFID results in significant return on investment over the use of barcodes in the blood center operations through labor savings and error reduction. Copyright © 2011 The International Alliance for Biological Standardization. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

PubMed

Schneider, Lon S

2014-03-01

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

45 CFR 73a.735-103 - Responsibilities.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

... organization whose FDA-regulated activities constitute more than an insignificant part of its business as...) Other employees are similarly responsible for observing the financial interest retention requirements in...

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

PubMed Central

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

2014-01-01

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

78 FR 20926 - Draft Guidance for Industry on Providing Postmarket Periodic Safety Reports in the International...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-04-08

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Providing Postmarket Periodic Safety Reports in the ICH E2C(R2) Format (Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report).'' This guidance is intended to inform applicants of the conditions under which FDA will exercise its waiver authority to permit applicants to submit an International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) E2C(R2) Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report (PBRER) in place of the ICH E2C(R1) Periodic Safety Update Report (PSUR), U.S. periodic adverse drug experience report (PADER), or U.S. periodic adverse experience report (PAER), to satisfy the periodic safety reporting requirements in FDA regulations. The guidance describes the steps applicants can take to submit the PBRER, and discusses the format, content, submission deadline, and frequency of reporting for the PBRER.

75 FR 78155 - Uniform Compliance Date for Food Labeling Regulations

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-15

... labeling requirements to minimize the economic impact of label changes. On December 8, 2008, FDA... dates of these labeling changes were not coordinated, the cumulative economic impact on the food... for an orderly and economical industry adjustment to new labeling requirements by allowing sufficient...

76 FR 78668 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Requirements on...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-19

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0883] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Requirements on Content and Format of Labeling for Human Prescription Drug and Biological Products AGENCY: Food and Drug...

77 FR 20406 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-04-04

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2012-D-0288] International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal... been developed for veterinary use by the International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical...

What is needed to incorporate clinical pharmacogenetic tests into the practice of psychopharmacotherapy?

PubMed

de Leon, Jose; Spina, Edoardo

2016-01-01

This editorial considers two questions in psychopharmacotherapy: 1) What is needed to market pharmacogenetic tests in the US, since the US appears to lead other countries? and 2) What is needed for US-marketed pharmacogenetic tests to be incorporated by prescribers into long-term practice? US marketing of pharmacogenetic tests requires 1) understanding the pharmacological complexity of drug response, 2) modifying the oversight of non-FDA regulatory agencies, 3) clarifying the FDA's role and 4) promoting innovative marketing. The incorporation of pharmacogenetic tests into long-term practice requires 1) not jeopardizing pharmacogenetic testing by short-sighted marketing of non-validated tests, 2) educating prescribers about benefits, 3) educating patients about limitations and 4) considering the differences between isolated testing and generalized testing incorporating big data.

Postmarketing Surveillance for “Modified-Risk” Tobacco Products

PubMed Central

2012-01-01

Introduction: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) acquired authority to regulate tobacco products in 2009. This authority will provide a structured process for manufacturers to introduce products that may have “modified-risk” for morbidity or mortality relative to traditional tobacco products, with postmarketing surveillance and studies a condition of marketing. Method: A narrative review approach was taken. The author searched and integrated publicly accessible literature on tobacco product surveillance as well as drug and medical device postmarket activities currently performed by FDA. Results: FDA relies on active and passive methods for postmarket surveillance and can require specific studies and risk evaluation and mitigation strategies for certain products, including those with abuse liability. Past efforts at examining the individual and population effects of reduced harm tobacco products provide an example of integrating different data streams. Discussion: Postmarket surveillance can be viewed in terms of the Agent–Host–Vector–Environment model, and concepts from diffusion of innovations are relevant to understanding factors associated with the adoption of new products by the population. Given that active and passive surveillance approaches have different strengths and weaknesses, multiple approaches may be necessary to evaluate population-level effects. Assuring that required studies are properly conducted and reported and that data indicating significant public health harms are quickly recognized will be important going forward. Conclusions: The advent of broad regulatory authority over tobacco provides opportunities for policy evaluation research. The research community can provide FDA with the independent science it needs to evaluate the public health impact of novel tobacco products. PMID:21330282

Responses to the Standard for Exchange of Nonclinical Data (SEND) in non-US countries

PubMed Central

Anzai, Takayuki; Kaminishi, Masamichi; Sato, Keizo; Kaufman, Laura; Iwata, Hijiri; Nakae, Dai

2015-01-01

The Standard for the Exchange of Nonclinical Data (SEND), adopted by the US FDA, is part of a set of regulations and guidances requiring the submission of standardized electronic study data for nonclinical and clinical data submissions. SEND is the nonclinical implementation of SDTM (Study Data Tabulation Model), the standard electronic format for clinical regulatory submissions to FDA. SEND, SDTM, and the associated Controlled Terminology have been developed by CDISC (Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium). In order to successfully implement SEND, interdisciplinary contributions between sponsors and CROs, need a model for task allocation. This is being undertaken by the Pharmaceutical Users Software Exchange (PhUSE). Because SEND is currently the preferred submission format of the US FDA only and will become required by it starting in December 2016, only American academic societies and companies are actively involved. An exception to this is the INHAND initiative, which leads the way in standardizing terminology for toxicological pathology. On the other hand, international globalization of other clinical and nonclinical practices is not feasible because there are substantial differences between the US and non-US countries in CRO involvement in drug development. Thus, non-US countries must consider and develop approaches to SEND that meet their needs. This paper summarizes the activities of the major organizations involved in SEND development and implementation, discusses the effective use of SEND, and details a compliance scheme (research material of the Showa University School of Medicine) illustrating how pharmaceutical companies can complete a large amount of work up to an FDA application with the effective utilization of CROs and solution providers. PMID:26028814

Why (not) go east? Comparison of findings from FDA Investigational New Drug study site inspections performed in Central and Eastern Europe with results from the USA, Western Europe, and other parts of the world.

PubMed

Caldron, Paul H; Gavrilova, Svetlana I; Kropf, Siegfried

2012-01-01

Since the mid-1990s, investigational sites in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have been increasingly utilized by pharmaceutical companies because of their high productivity in terms of patient enrolment into clinical trials. Based on the FDA's publicly accessible Clinical Investigator Inspection List, we present an analysis of findings and outcome classifications from FDA inspections during Investigational New Drug (IND) studies and compare the results for the CEE region to those from Western European countries and the USA. Data from all 5531 FDA clinical trials inspections that occurred between 1994 (when the FDA first performed inspections in CEE) and the end of 2010 were entered into the database for comparative analysis. Of these, 4865 routine data audit (DA) inspections were analyzed: 401 from clinical trials performed in Western Europe, 230 in CEE, 3858 in the USA, and 376 in other countries. The average number of deficiencies per inspection ranged between 0.99 for CEE and 1.97 in Western Europe. No deficiencies were noted during 16.6%, 39.0%, and 21.5% of the inspections in Western Europe, CEE and USA, respectively. The percentages of inspections after which no follow-up action was indicated were 36.9% for Western Europe, 55.7% for CEE, and 44.3% for US sites. CEE was also the region with the lowest percentage of inspections that required official or voluntary action. On the basis of FDA inspection data, the high productivity of CEE sites appears to be accompanied by regulatory compliance as well as by data quality standards that are not inferior to those in Western regions.

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

PubMed

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

2016-06-01

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

75 FR 31790 - Determination That Cysteine Hydrochloride Injection, USP, 7.25%, Was Not Withdrawn From Sale for...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-06-04

... an additive to amino acid solutions to meet the nutritional requirements of newborn infants requiring... have impaired enzymatic processes and require TPN. It can also be added to amino acid solutions to provide a more complete profile of amino acids for protein synthesis. Hospira notified FDA in a letter...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-04-13

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

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 ...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-16

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-20

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-03-28

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-25

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-16

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

21 CFR 821.25 - Device tracking system and content requirements: manufacturer requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... manufacturer of a tracked device shall keep current records in accordance with its standard operating procedure... this section. A manufacturer shall make this standard operating procedure available to FDA upon request. A manufacturer shall incorporate the following into the standard operating procedure: (1) Data...

21 CFR 821.25 - Device tracking system and content requirements: manufacturer requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... manufacturer of a tracked device shall keep current records in accordance with its standard operating procedure... this section. A manufacturer shall make this standard operating procedure available to FDA upon request. A manufacturer shall incorporate the following into the standard operating procedure: (1) Data...

21 CFR 821.25 - Device tracking system and content requirements: manufacturer requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... manufacturer of a tracked device shall keep current records in accordance with its standard operating procedure... this section. A manufacturer shall make this standard operating procedure available to FDA upon request. A manufacturer shall incorporate the following into the standard operating procedure: (1) Data...

21 CFR 821.25 - Device tracking system and content requirements: manufacturer requirements.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

... manufacturer of a tracked device shall keep current records in accordance with its standard operating procedure... this section. A manufacturer shall make this standard operating procedure available to FDA upon request. A manufacturer shall incorporate the following into the standard operating procedure: (1) Data...

75 FR 43182 - Voluntary Registration by Authorized Officials of Non-Covered Retail Food Establishments and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-07-23

... Act) established requirements for nutrition labeling of standard menu items for restaurants and..., pending promulgation of regulations. FDA is issuing this notice to assist restaurants and similar retail... INFORMATION: I. Background Section 4205 of the Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148) requires restaurants...

78 FR 63872 - Turtles Intrastate and Interstate Requirements

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-25

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 1240 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0639] Turtles Intrastate and Interstate Requirements Correction In rule document 2013-17751 appearing on pages 44878-44881 in the issue of July 25, 2013, make the following correction: On page 44879...

76 FR 53851 - Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Cardiovascular Permanent Pacemaker...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-30

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 870 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0505] Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Cardiovascular Permanent... preamendments device: Cardiovascular permanent pacemaker electrode. The document was published with an incorrect...

76 FR 57058 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-09-15

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2010-D-0165] International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products; Guidance for Industry on Studies To Evaluate the Metabolism and Residue Kinetics of Veterinary...

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...

Patient use of dietary supplements: a clinician's perspective.

PubMed

Sadovsky, Richard; Collins, Nancy; Tighe, Ann P; Brunton, Stephen A; Safeer, Richard

2008-04-01

The estimated prevalence of dietary-supplement use among US adults was 73% in 2002. Appropriate use of dietary supplements within the paradigm of evidence-based medicine may be a challenge for medical doctors and non-physician clinicians. Randomized, controlled, clinical trial data, which are considered the gold standard for evidence-based decision making, are lacking. Standardized guidelines for the use of dietary supplements are lacking, and dietary supplements can bear unsupported claims. This article is intended to review clinically-relevant issues related to the widespread use of dietary supplements, with emphasis on regulatory oversight and safety. Review articles and clinical trial articles published up until December 2007 were selected based on a search of the MEDLINE electronic database using PubMed. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Website was also used as a resource. We used the search terms dietary supplement(s), vitamin supplements, mineral supplements, and Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act. Articles discussing dietary supplements and their regulation, prevalence of use, prescription and nonprescription formulations, and/or adverse events were selected for review. Articles discussing one or more of these topics in adults were selected for inclusion. New FDA regulations require dietary-supplement manufacturers to evaluate the identity, purity, strength, and composition of their products. However, these regulations are not designed to demonstrate product efficacy and safety, and dietary-supplement manufacturers are not required to submit efficacy and safety data to the FDA prior to marketing. Product contamination and/or mislabeling may undermine the integrity of dietary-supplement formulations. The use of dietary supplements may be associated with adverse events. Although there are new regulatory requirements for dietary supplements, these products will not require FDA approval or submission of efficacy and safety data prior to marketing under the new regulation. A limitation to the literature used for this review is the lack of prospective, randomized clinical trials on the safety and efficacy of dietary supplements. Clinicians should be aware of all the dietary supplements that their patients consume, and help their patients make informed decisions appropriate to their medical care.

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.

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.

Fisher, Neyman, and Bayes at FDA.

PubMed

Rubin, Donald B

2016-01-01

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

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.

Innovative postmarket device evaluation using a quality registry to monitor thoracic endovascular aortic repair in the treatment of aortic dissection.

PubMed

Beck, Adam W; Lombardi, Joseph V; Abel, Dorothy B; Morales, J Pablo; Marinac-Dabic, Danica; Wang, Grace; Azizzadeh, Ali; Kern, John; Fillinger, Mark; White, Rodney; Cronenwett, Jack L; Cambria, Richard P

2017-05-01

United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-mandated postapproval studies have long been a mainstay of the continued evaluation of high-risk medical devices after initial marketing approval; however, these studies often present challenges related to patient/physician recruitment and retention. Retrospective single-center studies also do not fully represent the spectrum of real-world performance nor are they likely to have a sufficiently large enough sample size to detect important signals. In recent years, The FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health has been promoting the development and use of patient registries to advance infrastructure and methodologies for medical device investigation. The FDA 2012 document, "Strengthening the National System for Medical Device Post-market Surveillance," highlighted registries as a core foundational infrastructure when linked to other complementary data sources, including embedded unique device identification. The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection project is an innovative method of using quality improvement registries to meet the needs of device evaluation after market approval. Here we report the organization and background of this project and highlight the innovation facilitated by collaboration of physicians, the FDA, and device manufacturers. This effort used an existing national network of VQI participants to capture patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair for acute type B aortic dissection within a registry that aligns with standard practice and existing quality efforts. The VQI captures detailed patient, device, and procedural data for consecutive eligible cases under the auspices of a Patient Safety Organization (PSO). Patients were divided into a 5-year follow-up group (200 acute; 200 chronic dissections) and a 1-year follow-up group (100 acute; 100 chronic). The 5-year cohort required additional imaging details, and the 1-year group required standard VQI registry data entry. The sample size of patients in each of the 5-year acute and chronic dissection arms was achieved ≤24 months of project initiation, and data capture for the 1-year follow-up group is also nearly complete. Data completeness and follow-up has been excellent, and the two FDA-approved devices for dissection are equally represented. Although the completeness of long-term follow-up is yet to be determined, the rapidity of data collection supports the use of this construct for device assessment after market approval. The alignment of this effort with routine clinical practice and ongoing quality improvement initiatives is critical and has required minimal additional effort by practitioners, thus facilitating patient inclusion. Importantly, the success and development of this unique project has helped inform FDA strategy for future device evaluation after market approval. Copyright © 2017 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Multiple Sclerosis: Hope through Research

MedlinePlus

... been a valuable tool to test whether an experimental new therapy is effective at reducing exacerbations. top ... that they will require aggressive and perhaps even experimental treatment. The current FDA-approved therapies for MS ...

78 FR 59706 - Secure Supply Chain Pilot Program; Correction

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-09-27

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration [Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0656...,'' in the third full paragraph, the sentence that reads ``For communications other than the submission....hhs.gov '' is corrected to read ``For communications other than the submission of the SSCPP...

78 FR 14308 - International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-03-05

.... FDA, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Animal Health Institute, the Japanese Veterinary Pharmaceutical Association, the Japanese Association of Veterinary Biologics, and the Japanese Ministry of...

The US national antimicrobial resistance monitoring system.

PubMed

Gilbert, Jeffrey M; White, David G; McDermott, Patrick F

2007-10-01

The use of antimicrobial agents in food animals can select for resistant bacterial pathogens that may be transmitted to humans via the commercial meat supply. In the USA, the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine regulatory duties require a determination that antimicrobial drugs are safe and effective for use in food animals. In addition, a qualitative assessment of risks to human health from antimicrobial resistance requires development. This risk assessment process is supported by data generated by the FDA's National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System (NARMS) for enteric bacteria. NARMS data on antimicrobial susceptibility among Salmonella, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus is collected. Research activities defining the genetic bases of resistance helps to understand the potential public health risks posed by the spread of antimicrobial resistance from food animal antimicrobial use. These activities help insure that antimicrobials are used judiciously to promote human and animal health.

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.

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

PubMed

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

2013-03-04

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

Is There Evidence to Support Brand to Generic Interchange of the Mycophenolic Acid Products?

PubMed

Phillips, Karen; Reddy, Prabashni; Gabardi, Steven

2017-02-01

The uptake of generic immunosuppressants lags comparatively to other drug classes, despite that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses identical bioequivalence standards for all drugs. Transplant societies acknowledge the cost savings associated with generic immunosuppressants and support their use following heart, lung, kidney, or bone marrow transplantation. Seven studies of the pharmacokinetics or clinical efficacy of generic mycophenolate mofetil compared to the innovator product are published; all studies and products were ex-United States. Three studies did not demonstrate any pharmacokinetic differences between generic and innovator products in healthy subjects, achieving FDA bioequivalence requirements. Two studies in renal allograft recipients demonstrated no difference in area under the curves between generic and innovator products, and in one, the maximum concentration (Cmax) fell outside the FDA regulatory range. Two studies revealed no difference in acute organ rejection or graft function in renal allograft recipients. Patient surveys indicate that cost is a barrier to immunosuppressant adherence. Generics present a viable method to reduce costs to payers, patients, and health care systems. Adherence to immunosuppressants is crucial to prevent graft failure. An affordable regimen potentially confers greater adherence. Concerns regarding the presumed inferiority of generic immunosuppressants should be assuaged by regulatory requirements for bioequivalency testing, transplant society position statements, and pharmacokinetic and clinical studies.

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

PubMed

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

2014-05-01

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

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.

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.

75 FR 54347 - Draft Guidance for Industry: Bar Code Label Requirements-Questions and Answers (Question 12...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-07

...] Draft Guidance for Industry: Bar Code Label Requirements-- Questions and Answers (Question 12 Update... Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft document entitled ``Guidance for Industry: Bar... guidance provides you, manufacturers of a licensed vaccine, with advice concerning compliance with the bar...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-02-04

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

78 FR 32359 - Information Required in Prior Notice of Imported Food

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-05-30

... or animal food based on food safety reasons, such as intentional or unintentional contamination of an... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 1 [Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0179] RIN 0910-AG65 Information Required in Prior Notice of Imported Food AGENCY: Food and Drug...

78 FR 66841 - Turtles Intrastate and Interstate Requirements; Confirmation of Effective Date

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-07

... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 1240 [Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0639] Turtles Intrastate and Interstate Requirements; Confirmation of Effective Date AGENCY... turtle eggs and live turtles with a carapace length of less than 4 inches to remove procedures for...

76 FR 78930 - Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff; Enforcement Policy for Premarket...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-12-20

... enforcement of premarket notification (510(k)) requirements for certain in vitro diagnostic and radiology... profiles and for which it believes 510(k) review is not necessary to assure safety and effectiveness. While FDA intends to exempt these devices from the 510(k) requirement through rulemaking that would...

75 FR 15639 - Revision of the Requirements for Constituent Materials

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-30

... and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, suite 200N, Rockville, MD... DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 610 [Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0099] RIN 0910-AG15 Revision of the Requirements for Constituent Materials AGENCY: Food and...

76 FR 71040 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Record Retention...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-11-16

... to total protein. FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows: Table 1... Requirements for the Soy Protein and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease Health Claim AGENCY: Food and Drug... notice solicits comments on the record retention requirements for the soy protein and coronary heart...

77 FR 28602 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Early Food Safety...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-15

.... Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in... electronically via the Electronic Submission Gateway (ESG); and the guidance document entitled, ``Recommendations... to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed...

75 FR 12555 - Prescription Drug User Fee Act; Public Meeting

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-03-16

... negotiations with the regulated industry on PDUFA reauthorization, we publish a notice in the Federal Register...)(2)) of the FD&C Act requires that before FDA begins negotiations with the regulated industry on...

75 FR 67983 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office of Management and Budget...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-11-04

...; Infant Formula Requirements AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a collection of information entitled ``Infant Formula...

75 FR 4077 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-01-26

... requirements for recordkeeping and records access for FDA-regulated human food, including dietary supplements...) Whether cattle material may contain specified risk materials (SRMs). SRMs include brain, skull, eyes...

21 CFR 312.41 - Comment and advice on an IND.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... the data and information that is needed to meet requirements for a marketing application. (c) Unless the communication is accompanied by a clinical hold order under § 312.42, FDA communications with a...

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...

FDA use of international standards in the premarket review process.

PubMed

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

1998-01-01

"This is an exciting time," says Eric Rechen, policy analyst in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Office of Device Evaluation (ODE). "We're entering an era in which standards will have a more prominent role in the review of medical devices than ever before." During the past 10 years, there has been significant growth in the importance of standards in regulatory processes, as Donald J. Barth, regulatory staff manager for the Medical Products Group at Hewlett Packard Company, notes in setting the stage for discussion of the latest developments. Donald Marlowe, director of the FDA's Office of Science and Technology, and Rechen explain the use of standards in the regulatory review process as part of FDA efforts to ensure public safety in a time of shrinking agency resources. Marlowe discusses provisions of the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 that allow manufacturers to submit a declaration of conformity to a standard to satisfy premarket review requirements. A guidance on the recognition and use of consensus standards, a list of recognized standards, and a list of frequently asked questions are available at the Web site of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) at www.fda.gov/cdrh and via the AAMI Web site at www.aami.org. The information is also available by telephone via CDRH Facts on Demand at 800-899-0381. Rechen provides details about the two new approaches for premarket notifications available under the new 510(k) paradigm. Manufacturers may demonstrate substantial equivalence through special and abbreviated 510(k)s in addition to traditional 510(k)s. A copy of the new 510(k) paradigm is available at the AAMI and CDRH Web sites and through Facts on Demand. As the FDA and many manufacturers enter the new world of abbreviated and special 510(k)s, Larry Kroger, GE Medical Systems, provides his comments based on the 4 years of experience manufacturers of diagnostic x-ray products have had with simplified 510(k)s. A comparison of the European conformity assessment procedures with the new 510(k) paradigm will appear in an upcoming issue of BI&T.

Conflicts of interest in approvals of additives to food determined to be generally recognized as safe: out of balance.

PubMed

Neltner, Thomas G; Alger, Heather M; O'Reilly, James T; Krimsky, Sheldon; Bero, Lisa A; Maffini, Maricel V

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance allows food manufacturers to determine whether additives to food are "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS). Manufacturers are not required to notify the FDA of a GRAS determination, although in some instances they notify the agency. The individuals that companies select to make these determinations may have financial conflicts of interest. To determine the extent to which individuals selected by manufacturers to make GRAS determinations have conflicts of interest between their obligations to ensure that the use of the additive is safe and their financial relationships to the company. DESIGN Using conflict of interest criteria developed by a committee of the Institute of Medicine, we analyzed 451 GRAS notifications that were voluntarily submitted to the FDA between 1997 and 2012. Number of GRAS notices submitted to the FDA; frequency of various types of relationships between decision maker and additive manufacturer; frequency of participation on GRAS panels by individuals; and number of GRAS safety determinations identified by the FDA that were not submitted to the agency. For the 451 GRAS notifications, 22.4% of the safety assessments were made by an employee of an additive manufacturer, 13.3% by an employee of a consulting firm selected by the manufacturer, and 64.3% by an expert panel selected by either a consulting firm or the manufacturer. A standing expert panel selected by a third party made none of these safety assessments. The 290 panels that made GRAS determinations had an average of 3.5 members, with a maximum of 7. Ten individuals served on 27 or more panels; 1 individual served on 128 panels (44.1%). At least 1 of the 10 individuals with the most frequent service was a member of 225 panels (77.6%). Between 1997 and 2012, financial conflicts of interest were ubiquitous in determinations that an additive to food was GRAS. The lack of independent review in GRAS determinations raises concerns about the integrity of the process and whether it ensures the safety of the food supply, particularly in instances where the manufacturer does not notify the FDA of the determination. The FDA should address these concerns.

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-03-09

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

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...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-12-10

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

Advertising for AIDS drugs: it's everywhere lately, but is it helpful?

PubMed

Mirken, B

1998-07-01

The recent proliferation of direct to consumer (DTC) advertisements for prescription drugs, including HIV/AIDS drugs, can present a confusing and unrealistic picture of treatment options and outcomes; however, supporters claim that it stimulates awareness of treatment options and encourages dialogue between doctors and patients. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which regulates DTC advertising, requires that manufacturers disclose a complete description of benefits and adverse effects, similar to the information on the product's label. This balance of information applies to the written portion of the ad, but not to the visual message, which is arguably the most powerful part of the advertisement. Many of the visuals in the AIDS drugs advertisements misconstrue the effect of the virus on the patients. However, the FDA has not yet developed restrictions to more accurately control the visual component of advertisements, in order to depict the downside of disease. Additionally, manufacturers whose advertisements match the wording on their labels have an easier time getting acceptance from the FDA, but use more technical language than the typical lay person can understand. Reliance on the FDA- approved label description, restricts the drug companies from promoting off-label uses of their products, and also does not allow for the constantly changing information of a drug's effectiveness.

"The Google of Healthcare": enabling the privatization of genetic bio/databanking.

PubMed

Spector-Bagdady, Kayte

2016-07-01

23andMe is back on the market as the first direct-to-consumer genetic testing company that "includes reports that meet Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standards…." But, whereas its front-end product is selling individual genetic tests online, its back-end business model is amassing one of the largest privately owned genetic databases in the world. What is the effect, however, of the private control of bio/databases on genetic epidemiology and public health research? The recent federal government notices of proposed rulemaking for: (1) revisions to regulations governing human subjects research and (2) whether certain direct-to-consumer genetic tests should require premarket FDA review, were reviewed and related to the 23andMe product, business model, and consumer agreements. FDA regulatory action so far has focused on the return of consumer test reports but it should also consider the broader misuse of data and information not otherwise protected by human subjects research regulations. As the federal government revises its decades-old human subjects research structure, the Executive Office of the President (EOP) should consider a cohesive approach to regulating private genetic bio/databanks. This strategy should allow the FDA and other agencies to play a role in expanding current regulatory coverage. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

A rational regulatory approach for positron emission tomography imaging probes: from "first in man" to NDA approval and reimbursement.

PubMed

Barrio, Jorge R; Marcus, Carol S; Hung, Joseph C; Keppler, Jennifer S

2004-01-01

We propose a new regulatory approach for positron emission tomography (PET) molecular imaging probes, essential tools in today's medicine. Even though the focus of this paper is on positron-emitting labeled probes, it is also justified to extend this proposed regulatory approach to other diagnostic nuclear medicine radiopharmaceuticals. Key aspects of this proposal include: (1) PET molecular imaging probes would be placed in a "no significant risk" category, similar to that category for devices in current Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, based on overwhelming scientific evidence that demonstrates their faultless safety profile; (2) the FDA-sanctioned Radioactive Drug Research Committee (RDRC) will oversee all diagnostic research with these probes. The newly defined RDRC should approve "first in man" use; supervise a broader spectrum of diagnostic research protocols, including those looking to demonstrate initial efficacy, as well as multicenter clinical trials and the use of molecular imaging probes as a screening tool in drug discovery. The current investigational new drug (IND) mechanism is thus eliminated for these diagnostic probes; (3) when a molecular imaging probe has demonstrated diagnostic efficacy, FDA approval (i.e., NDA) will be sought. The review will be done by a newly constituted Radioactive Drug Advisory Committee (RDAC) composed of experts chosen by the professional societies, who would provide a binding assessment of the adequacy of the safety and efficacy data. When the RDAC recommends its diagnostic use on scientific and medical grounds, the molecular imaging probe becomes FDA approved. After a molecular imaging probe is approved for a diagnostic indication, the existing mechanism to seek reimbursement will be utilized; and (4) the FDA would retain its direct oversight function for traditional manufacturers engaged in commercial distribution of the approved diagnostic molecular imaging probes (i.e., under NDA) to monitor compliance with existing US Pharmacopeia (USP) requirements. With abbreviated and more appropriate regulations, new PET molecular imaging probes for diagnostic use would be then rapidly incorporated into the mainstream diagnostic medicine. Equally importantly, this approach would facilitate the use of molecular imaging in drug discovery and development, which would substantially reduce the costs and time required to bring new therapeutic drugs to market.

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

PubMed

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

2016-07-01

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

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

PubMed

Stewart, Kate A; Neumann, Peter J

2002-01-01

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

Graphic warning labels and the demand for cigarettes.

PubMed

Starr, Martha A; Drake, Keith

2017-03-01

In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed requiring tobacco companies to add graphic warning labels (GWLs) to cigarette packs. GWLs are large prominently placed warnings that use both text and photographic images to depict health risks of smoking. The companies challenged FDA's authority on First Amendment grounds; the courts accepted that FDA could compel companies to add GWLs, but argued that FDA had not established that GWLs would significantly reduce smoking. This paper adds new evidence on the question of whether GWLs would have reduced cigarette demand, by examining whether tobacco companies' share prices fell unusually after news indicating a higher likelihood of having GWLs, and rose on the opposite news. Such findings would be expected if investors viewed GWLs as likely to reduce cigarette demand. An event-study approach is used to determine whether the stock prices of US tobacco companies rose or fell unusually after news events in the period when GWLs were proposed, finalised, challenged and withdrawn. Tobacco companies' stock prices indeed realised significant abnormal returns after GWL news, consistent with expected negative effects on cigarette demand. Our estimates suggest investors expected GWLs to reduce the number of smokers by an extra 2.4-6.9 million in the 10 years after the rule took effect. These findings support the view that the GWLs proposed by FDA would have curbed cigarette consumption in the USA in an appreciable way. 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/.

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

PubMed

Blankfield, Robert P; Iftikhar, Imran H

2015-01-01

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

Supplemental calcium and risk reduction of hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and preeclampsia: an evidence-based review by the US Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Trumbo, Paula R; Ellwood, Kathleen C

2007-02-01

The labeling of health claims that meet the significant scientific agreement (SSA) standard (authorized health claims) and qualified health claims on conventional foods and dietary supplements requires premarket approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA conducts an evidence-based review to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support an authorized or qualified health claim. An evidence-based review was conducted on the human intervention and observational studies evaluating the role of supplemental calcium in reducing the risk of hypertension, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and preeclampsia. This review provides FDA's evaluation of the current scientific evidence on the role of supplemental calcium in reducing the risk of these three end points. Based on this evidence-based review, the agency concluded that the relationship between calcium and risk of hypertension is inconsistent and inconclusive, and the relationship between calcium and risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension and preeclampsia is highly unlikely.

Improving the Clinical Pharmacologic Assessment of Abuse Potential: Part 1: Regulatory Context and Risk Management.

PubMed

Sellers, Edward M

2018-02-01

This article brings to the attention of drug developers the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) recent final Guidance to Industry on Assessment of Abuse Potential and provides practical suggestions about compliance with the Guidance. The Guidance areas are reviewed, analyzed, and placed in the context of current scientific knowledge and best practices to mitigate regulatory risk. The Guidance provides substantial new detail on what needs to be done at all stages of drug development for central nervous system-active drugs. However, because many psychopharmacologic agents have unique preclinical and clinical features, the plan for each agent needs to be not only carefully prepared but also reviewed and approved by the FDA. Examples are provided where assumptions about interpretation of the Guidance can delay development. If the expertise and experience needed for assessing abuse potential during drug development do not exist within a company, external preclinical and clinical expert should be involved. Consultation with the FDA is encouraged and important because the specific requirements for each drug will vary.

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.

Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration as a Tobacco Regulator

PubMed Central

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

2017-01-01

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

Use of Symbols in Labeling. Final rule.

PubMed

2016-06-15

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is issuing this final rule revising its medical device and certain biological product labeling regulations to explicitly allow for the optional inclusion of graphical representations of information, or symbols, in labeling (including labels) without adjacent explanatory text (referred to in this document as "stand-alone symbols") if certain requirements are met. The final rule also specifies that the use of symbols, accompanied by adjacent explanatory text continues to be permitted. FDA is also revising its prescription device labeling regulations to allow the use of the symbol statement "Rx only" or "[rx] only" in the labeling for prescription devices.

Consumer advertising of psychiatric medications biases the public against nonpharmacological treatment.

PubMed

Lacasse, Jeffrey R

2005-01-01

In the United States, antidepressant medications are heavily promoted through direct-to-consumer advertising, which is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Advertisements for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors frequently contain information inconsistent with the scientific evidence on the treatment of depression with antidepressants. The information presented serves to promote the use of antidepressants by biasing the public against nonpharmacological treatment of depression. While the FDA enforces regulations requiring fair and balanced presentation when comparing one medication to another, there appears to be no action taken against pharmaceutical companies that distort scientific evidence in order to disparage nonmedical approaches to depression.

21 CFR 207.40 - Establishment registration and drug listing requirements for foreign establishments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... part 312 of this chapter, or the investigational new animal drug use provisions in part 511 of this... agent shall assist FDA in communications with the foreign drug establishment, respond to questions...

21 CFR 207.40 - Establishment registration and drug listing requirements for foreign establishments.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... part 312 of this chapter, or the investigational new animal drug use provisions in part 511 of this... agent shall assist FDA in communications with the foreign drug establishment, respond to questions...

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...

78 FR 45729 - Foreign Supplier Verification Programs for Importers of Food for Humans and Animals

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-07-29

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to adopt regulations on foreign supplier verification programs (FSVPs) for importers of food for humans and animals. The proposed regulations would require importers to help ensure that food imported into the United States is produced in compliance with processes and procedures, including reasonably appropriate risk-based preventive controls, that provide the same level of public health protection as those required under the hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls and standards for produce safety sections of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), is not adulterated, and is not misbranded with respect to food allergen labeling. We are proposing these regulations in accordance with the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The proposed regulations would help ensure that imported food is produced in a manner consistent with U.S. standards.

US Food and Drug Administration Clearance of Moderate-Risk Otolaryngologic Devices via the 510(k) Process, 1997-2016.

PubMed

Rathi, Vinay K; Gadkaree, Shekhar K; Ross, Joseph S; Kozin, Elliott D; Sethi, Rosh K; Naunheim, Matthew R; Puram, Sidharth V; Gray, Stacey T

2017-10-01

Objective The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clears moderate-risk devices via the 510(k) process based on substantial equivalence to previously cleared devices; evidence of safety and effectiveness is not required. We characterized the premarket evidence supporting FDA clearance of otolaryngologic devices. Study Design Retrospective cross-sectional analysis. Setting Publicly available FDA documents. Subjects and Methods Recently cleared (1997-2016) moderate-risk otolaryngologic devices were categorized by type (diagnostic/therapeutic), subspecialty, implantable designation (yes/no), and recall history (yes/no). Supporting evidence was categorized by type (clinical/nonclinical/none; nonclinical and clinical mutually inclusive) and public availability of nonclinical and clinical performance data (available/not provided/not applicable). Results Between 1997 and 2016, the FDA cleared 377 moderate-risk otolaryngologic devices. The majority were therapeutic (n = 240/377 [63.7%]) and otologic (n = 311/377 [82.5%]); roughly one-third (n = 121/377 [32.1%]) were implantable. Few (n = 10/377 [2.7%]) devices were subject to recall. FDA documents summarizing premarket evidence were accessible for two-thirds (n = 247/377 [65.5%]) of devices. Among these devices, one-quarter (n = 66/247 [26.7%]) were supported by clinical evidence. The majority (n = 177/247 [71.7%]) were supported by nonclinical evidence, although nearly one-quarter (n = 58/247 [23.5%]) were cleared without supporting evidence. Therapeutic devices were more often cleared without supporting evidence (therapeutic: n = 53/170 [31.2%]; diagnostic: n = 5/77 [6.5%]; P < .0001). Nonclinical and clinical performance data were rarely available (nonclinical: n = 49/247 [19.8%]; clinical: n = 32/247 [13.0%]) within public summaries. Conclusion The FDA cleared most moderate-risk otolaryngologic devices for marketing via the 510(k) process without clinical evidence of safety and effectiveness. Otolaryngologists should be aware of limitations in premarket evidence when considering the adoption of new devices into clinical practice.

Analysis of legal and scientific issues in court challenges to graphic tobacco warnings.

PubMed

Kraemer, John D; Baig, Sabeeh A

2013-09-01

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death in the U.S., yet cigarette health warnings in the U.S. are among the weakest in the world. In 2011, the FDA issued regulations mandating that graphic warnings be displayed on every cigarette pack sold in the U.S. Almost immediately, the tobacco industry challenged the warnings on First Amendment grounds. In March 2013, the FDA withdrew the graphic warning mandate, choosing instead to pursue additional research and then issue requirements for a new set of warnings. These warnings almost certainly will be challenged by the tobacco industry. The current paper describes the legal standards that will be used to assess the warnings, and the empirical questions that must be answered in order to determine whether each standard has been met. The paper also identifies errors the FDA could make in choosing images to be evaluated that would cause the images to be unable to meet the standards, regardless of the scientific evidence the FDA can establish. To be on safest ground, the FDA should adopt images that depict factual health consequences of smoking and should avoid images that could be interpreted as opinions. The FDA will have a high likelihood of prevailing in legal challenges to the warnings if there is evidence demonstrating that graphic warnings are necessary to counter past industry deception or that graphic warnings affect smoking behavior better than textual warnings. Even without evidence of the impact of graphic warnings on behavior, strong evidence that they affect behavioral intent, and that intent predicts behavior, should be sufficient for the warnings to be upheld. Alternatively, evidence that graphic warnings lead to more accurate consumer assessment of smoking risks should also be sufficient. Copyright © 2013 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... of change, the applicant must notify FDA about the change in a supplement under paragraph (b) or (c... alternative under § 201.26 of this chapter satisfies the applicable requirements in paragraphs (a) through (c...) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, an applicant must make a change...

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... of change, the applicant must notify FDA about the change in a supplement under paragraph (b) or (c... alternative under § 201.26 of this chapter satisfies the applicable requirements in paragraphs (a) through (c...) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, an applicant must make a change...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-04-09

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

76 FR 47085 - Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for a Pacemaker Programmer

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-08-04

.... FDA-2011-N-0526] Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for a Pacemaker Programmer... programmers. The agency is also summarizing its proposed findings regarding the degree of risk of illness or.... Background--Regulatory Authorities The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act), as amended by the...

77 FR 39924 - Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Cardiovascular Permanent Pacemaker...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-07-06

.... FDA-2011-N-0505] Effective Date of Requirement for Premarket Approval for Cardiovascular Permanent... application (PMA) or a notice of completion of a product development protocol (PDP) for the cardiovascular...) of the FD&C Act of a PMA or notice of completion of a PDP for the cardiovascular permanent pacemaker...

78 FR 11612 - Medical Devices; Pediatric Uses of Devices; Requirement for Submission of Information on...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-02-19

... information that will have been reviewed by the applicant during the course of its development of the device..., infants, children, adolescents) that suffer from the disease or condition that the device is intended to.... FDA-2009-N-0458] RIN 0910-AG29 Medical Devices; Pediatric Uses of Devices; Requirement for Submission...

Re-evaluating ethical concerns in planned emergency research involving critically ill patients: an interpretation of the guidance document from the United States Food and Drug Administration.

PubMed

Smischney, Nathan J; Onigkeit, James A; Hinds, Richard F; Nicholson, Wayne T

2015-01-01

U.S. federal regulations require that certain ethical elements be followed to protect human research subjects. The location and clinical circumstances of a proposed research study can differ substantially and can have significant implications for these ethical considerations. Both the location and clinical circumstances are particularly relevant for research in intensive care units (ICUs), where patients are often unable to provide informed consent to participate in a proposed research intervention. Our goal is to elaborate on the updated 2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance document regarding an exemption from the requirement of obtaining informed consent from patients or their surrogates and to address certain elements within that document, thereby assisting clinicians in developing a framework for emergency research in accordance with the regulatory bodies at their own institutions and in the United States. Review of the 2011 and updated FDA guidance document on exemption from informed consent. The current process of obtaining informed consent within ICUs needs to be revisited, especially for research in which timely informed consent is not likely. In particular, the process of obtaining informed consent may not be appropriate or even ethical for critically ill patients in extremis who require an intervention for which there is no current acceptable standard of care and clinical equipoise exists. We provide clinicians with a viewpoint that further elaborates on the FDA guidance document. The viewpoints provided herein are those of the authors and are therefore inherently limited by the personal views of a selected few. Other clinicians or researchers may not interpret the FDA guidelines in a similar manner. Moreover, the discussion of a guideline document is a limitation in and of itself. The guidelines set forth by the FDA are precisely that-guidelines. Therefore, they may not be followed as outlined in the guidance document within one's own institution. Our goal is that, by elaborating on the guidelines for planned research involving human subjects in the ICU, institutional regulatory bodies may gain a better understanding in drafting their own document when faced with a clinician or a researcher who wishes to conduct planned research in an ICU. We believe that the interpretations provided will allow clinicians to safely undertake planned research in ICUs without endangering the main tenets of ethical research involving human participants. This research is needed for the advancement of care in the critically ill. Copyright 2015 The Journal of Clinical Ethics. All rights reserved.

Fair Balance and Adequate Provision in Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Online Banner Advertisements: A Content Analysis.

PubMed

Adams, Crystal

2016-02-18

The current direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) guidelines were developed with print, television, and radio media in mind, and there are no specific guidelines for online banner advertisements. This study evaluates how well Internet banner ads comply with existing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for DTCA in other media. A content analysis was performed of 68 banner advertisements. A coding sheet was developed based on (1) FDA guidance documents for consumer-directed prescription drug advertisements and (2) previous DTCA content analyses. Specifically, the presence of a brief summary detailing the drug's risks and side effects or of a "major statement" identifying the drug's major risks, and the number and type of provisions made available to consumers for comprehensive information about the drug were coded. In addition, the criterion of "fair balance," the FDA's requirement that prescription drug ads balance information relating to the drug's risks with information relating to its benefits, was measured by numbering the benefit and risk facts identified in the ads and by examining the presentation of risk and benefit information. Every ad in the sample included a brief summary of risk information and at least one form of adequate provision as required by the FDA for broadcast ads that do not give audiences a brief summary of a drug's risks. No ads included a major statement. There were approximately 7.18 risk facts for every benefit fact. Most of the risks (98.85%, 1292/1307) were presented in the scroll portion of the ad, whereas most of the benefits (66.5%, 121/182) were presented in the main part of the ad. Out of 1307 risk facts, 1292 were qualitative and 15 were quantitative. Out of 182 benefit facts, 181 were qualitative and 1 was quantitative. The majority of ads showed neutral images during the disclosure of benefit and risk facts. Only 9% (6/68) of the ads displayed positive images and none displayed negative images when presenting risks facts. When benefit facts were being presented, 7% (5/68) showed only positive images. No ads showed negative images when the benefit facts were being presented. In the face of ambiguous regulatory guidelines for online banner promotion, drug companies appear to make an attempt to adapt to regulatory guidelines designed for traditional media. However, banner ads use various techniques of presentation to present the advertised drug in the best possible light. The FDA should formalize requirements that drug companies provide a brief summary and include multiple forms of adequate provision in banner ads.

Free Space Optics Communication for Mobile Military Platforms

DTIC Science & Technology

2003-12-01

Federal Communications Commission FDA Food and Drug Administration FOV Field-of-View FSO Free Space Optics FWHM Full Width at Half Maximum Gbps...Physique et de Métrologie des Oscillateurs (LPMO) du CNRS UPR3203, associé à l’Université de Franche -Comté, 15 March 2002 [Schenk 2000] H. Schenk

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

NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS)

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

2012-02-01

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

21 CFR 314.102 - 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...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-07-01

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

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-07-01

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

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...

FDA Kids' Home Page

MedlinePlus

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

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-07-01

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

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...

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-07-01

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

36 CFR 13.980 - Other FDA closures and restrictions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-07-01

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

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...

Emergency Contraception

MedlinePlus

... is not a means of abortion. Most medicine brands require a single dose of 1 pill. Some brands have 2 doses (1 pill followed by a ... pills together. Follow the instructions for each specific brand. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says ...

FDA wants tighter rules for indoor tanning.

PubMed

2013-07-01

Aiming to minimize skin cancer risk and other health drawbacks of tanning beds, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed new rules to increase regulation of the devices and to require warning labels recommending increased screening for cancer.

77 FR 59622 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Regulations...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-09-28

... Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (Tobacco Control Act) (Pub. L. 111-31). Section 102 of... burden to act as a placeholder in the event FDA exercises its authority to enforce the requirements of...

75 FR 50770 - Guidance for Industry on Organ-Specific Warnings: Internal Analgesic, Antipyretic, and...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-17

... labeling requirements in plain language and provides answers to common questions on how to comply with the... consistent with FDA's good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the agency...

Institutional corruption of pharmaceuticals and the myth of safe and effective drugs.

PubMed

Light, Donald W; Lexchin, Joel; Darrow, Jonathan J

2013-01-01

Over the past 35 years, patients have suffered from a largely hidden epidemic of side effects from drugs that usually have few offsetting benefits. The pharmaceutical industry has corrupted the practice of medicine through its influence over what drugs are developed, how they are tested, and how medical knowledge is created. Since 1906, heavy commercial influence has compromised congressional legislation to protect the public from unsafe drugs. The authorization of user fees in 1992 has turned drug companies into the FDA's prime clients, deepening the regulatory and cultural capture of the agency. Industry has demanded shorter average review times and, with less time to thoroughly review evidence, increased hospitalizations and deaths have resulted. Meeting the needs of the drug companies has taken priority over meeting the needs of patients. Unless this corruption of regulatory intent is reversed, the situation will continue to deteriorate. We offer practical suggestions including: separating the funding of clinical trials from their conduct, analysis, and publication; independent FDA leadership; full public funding for all FDA activities; measures to discourage R&D on drugs with few, if any, new clinical benefits; and the creation of a National Drug Safety Board. © 2013 American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Inc.

Radiation countermeasure agents: an update (2011 – 2014)

PubMed Central

Newman, Victoria L; Romaine, Patricia LP; Wise, Stephen Y; Seed, Thomas M

2014-01-01

Introduction Despite significant scientific advances over the past 60 years towards the development of a safe, nontoxic and effective radiation countermeasure for the acute radiation syndrome (ARS), no drug has been approved by the US FDA. A radiation countermeasure to protect the population at large from the effects of lethal radiation exposure remains a significant unmet medical need of the US citizenry and, thus, has been recognized as a high priority area by the government. Area covered This article reviews relevant publications and patents for recent developments and progress for potential ARS treatments in the area of radiation countermeasures. Emphasis is placed on the advanced development of existing agents since 2011 and new agents identified as radiation countermeasure for ARS during this period. Expert opinion A number of promising radiation countermeasures are currently under development, seven of which have received US FDA investigational new drug status for clinical investigation. Four of these agents, CBLB502, Ex-RAD, HemaMax and OrbeShield, are progressing with large animal studies and clinical trials. G-CSF has high potential and well-documented therapeutic effects in countering myelosuppression and may receive full licensing approval by the US FDA in the future. PMID:25315070

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

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

PubMed Central

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

2013-01-01

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

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

78 FR 66366 - Draft Guidance for Industry: Use of Donor Screening Tests To Test Donors of Human Cells, Tissues...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-11-05

...The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the availability of a draft document entitled ``Guidance for Industry: Use of Donor Screening Tests to Test Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps) for Infection with Treponema pallidum (Syphilis),'' dated October 2013. The draft guidance document provides establishments that make donor eligibility determinations for donors of HCT/Ps (HCT/P Establishments), with updated recommendations concerning donor testing for evidence of Treponema pallidum (T. pallidum) infection, the etiologic agent of syphilis. HCT/P Establishments must, as required under Federal regulations, test a donor specimen for evidence of T. pallidum infection using appropriate FDA-licensed, approved, or cleared donor screening tests, in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, unless an exception to this requirement applies. The draft guidance clarifies that FDA does not consider diagnostic tests or pre-amendment devices (which have not been licensed, approved, or cleared) to be adequate for use in donor testing for T. pallidum infection under the criteria specified in Federal regulations. The recommendations in this guidance, when finalized, will supersede those recommendations for testing HCT/P donors for evidence of T. pallidum infection contained in the document entitled ``Guidance for Industry: Eligibility Determination for Donors of Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products (HCT/Ps),'' dated August 2007.

21 CFR 1.280 - How must you submit prior notice?

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... to FDA. You must submit all prior notice information in the English language, except that an... Commercial System (ABI/ACS); or (2) The FDA PNSI at http://www.access.fda.gov. You must submit prior notice through the FDA Prior Notice System Interface (FDA PNSI) for articles of food imported or offered for...

78 FR 65329 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-10-31

... Safety Testing of Sunlamp Products'' Form FDA 3632 ``Guide for Preparing Product Reports on Lasers and Products Containing Lasers'' Form FDA 3633''General Variance Request'' Form FDA 3634 ``Television Products Annual Report'' Form FDA 3635 ``Laser Light Show Notification'' Form FDA 3636 ``Guide for Preparing...

78 FR 35279 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Electronic Products

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2013-06-12

... Lasers and Products Containing Lasers'' FDA Form 3633 ``General Variance Request'' FDA Form 3634 ``Television Products Annual Report'' FDA Form 3635 ``Laser Light Show Notification'' FDA Form 3636 ``Guide for Preparing Annual Reports on Radiation Safety Testing of Laser and Laser Light Show Products'' FDA Form 3637...

75 FR 26964 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-05-13

... of Sunlamps and Sunlamp Products'' FDA Form 3632 ``Guide for Preparing Product Reports on Lasers and Products Containing Lasers'' FDA Form 3633 ``General Variance Request'' FDA Form 3634 ``Television Products Annual Report'' FDA Form 3635 ``Laser Light Show Notification'' FDA Form 3636 ``Guide for Preparing...

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...

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2011-05-24

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

21 CFR 830.100 - FDA accreditation of an issuing agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

Why (not) go east? Comparison of findings from FDA Investigational New Drug study site inspections performed in Central and Eastern Europe with results from the USA, Western Europe, and other parts of the world

PubMed Central

Caldron, Paul H; Gavrilova, Svetlana I; Kropf, Siegfried

2012-01-01

Since the mid-1990s, investigational sites in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have been increasingly utilized by pharmaceutical companies because of their high productivity in terms of patient enrolment into clinical trials. Based on the FDA’s publicly accessible Clinical Investigator Inspection List, we present an analysis of findings and outcome classifications from FDA inspections during Investigational New Drug (IND) studies and compare the results for the CEE region to those from Western European countries and the USA. Data from all 5531 FDA clinical trials inspections that occurred between 1994 (when the FDA first performed inspections in CEE) and the end of 2010 were entered into the database for comparative analysis. Of these, 4865 routine data audit (DA) inspections were analyzed: 401 from clinical trials performed in Western Europe, 230 in CEE, 3858 in the USA, and 376 in other countries. The average number of deficiencies per inspection ranged between 0.99 for CEE and 1.97 in Western Europe. No deficiencies were noted during 16.6%, 39.0%, and 21.5% of the inspections in Western Europe, CEE and USA, respectively. The percentages of inspections after which no follow-up action was indicated were 36.9% for Western Europe, 55.7% for CEE, and 44.3% for US sites. CEE was also the region with the lowest percentage of inspections that required official or voluntary action. On the basis of FDA inspection data, the high productivity of CEE sites appears to be accompanied by regulatory compliance as well as by data quality standards that are not inferior to those in Western regions. PMID:22563236

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.

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

PubMed

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

2014-01-01

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

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

PubMed

Kim, Hyosun

2015-08-25

For the purpose of understanding the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) concerns regarding online promotion of prescription drugs advertised directly to consumers, this study examines notices of violations (NOVs) and warning letters issued by the FDA to pharmaceutical manufacturers. The FDA's warning letters and NOVs, which were issued to pharmaceutical companies over a 10-year period (2005 to 2014) regarding online promotional activities, were content-analyzed. Six violation categories were identified: risk information, efficacy information, indication information, product labeling, material information issues, and approval issues. The results reveal that approximately 95% of the alleged violations were found on branded drug websites, in online paid advertisements, and in online videos. Of the total 179 violations, the majority of the alleged violations were concerned with the lack of risk information and/or misrepresentation of efficacy information, suggesting that achieving a fair balance of benefit versus risk information is a major problem with regard to the direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) of prescription drugs. In addition, the character space limitations of online platforms, eg, sponsored links on search engines, pose challenges for pharmaceutical marketers with regard to adequately communicating important drug information, such as indication information, risk information, and product labeling. Presenting drug information in a fair and balanced manner remains a major problem. Industry guidance should consider addressing visibility and accessibility of information in the web environment to help pharmaceutical marketers meet the requirements for direct-to-consumer promotion and to protect consumers from misleading drug information. Promotion via social media warrants further attention, as pharmaceutical manufacturers have already begun actively establishing a social media presence, and the FDA has thus begun to keep tabs on social media promotions of prescription drugs. © 2015 by Kerman University of Medical Sciences.

Medical Services: Medical, Dental, and Veterinary Care

DTIC Science & Technology

2002-01-28

requirements to fixed military treatment facility laboratories in Europe and Korea. Clarifies Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare ...which meets the requirements of the licensing and accrediting agencies (for example, FDA, AABB, Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare ...as officer in charge or equivalent status when no pharmacist is on duty at the facility. (2) Policies are established to ensure— (a) Rational

75 FR 58396 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for Office of Management and Budget Review...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-09-24

..., [email protected] . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has... of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 360e) sets forth the requirements... necessary to meet this requirement is 20 hours. Application in Sec. 814.20(a) through (c) and (e) The...

Food and Drug Administration Regulation of Diabetes-Related mHealth Technologies

PubMed Central

Brooke, M. Jason; Thompson, Bradley Merrill

2013-01-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-08-28

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

21 CFR 60.34 - FDA action on petitions.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

Information for Consumers (Drugs)

MedlinePlus

... Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) REMS is a risk management plan required by FDA for certain prescription drugs, that uses tools beyond routine professional labeling to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh its risks. Index to Drug - Specific Information List of drugs ...

FDA marketing claims, and the practitioner.

PubMed

Runner, Susan

2006-03-01

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

Drug safety: Pregnancy rating classifications and controversies.

PubMed

Wilmer, Erin; Chai, Sandy; Kroumpouzos, George

2016-01-01

This contribution consolidates data on international pregnancy rating classifications, including the former US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Swedish, and Australian classification systems, as well as the evidence-based medicine system, and discusses discrepancies among them. It reviews the new Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule (PLLR) that replaced the former FDA labeling system with narrative-based labeling requirements. PLLR emphasizes on human data and highlights pregnancy exposure registry information. In this context, the review discusses important data on the safety of most medications used in the management of skin disease in pregnancy. There are also discussions of controversies relevant to the safety of certain dermatologic medications during gestation. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

FDA Warns About Stem Cell Therapies

MedlinePlus

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

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

PubMed

Wilson, Carolyn A; Simonyan, Vahan

2014-01-01

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

Environmental Impact Analysis Process. Environmental Assessment for Defense Satellite Communications System III With Integrated Apogee Boost System

DTIC Science & Technology

1995-07-01

spectabilis Royal fern C FDA n/o Remirea maritima Beach star E FDA, FNAI o Scaevola plumeria Scaevola T FDA o Tillandsia simulata Wildpine; air plant...unnamed) T FDA n/o Tillandsia utriculata Giant wildpine; giant air plant C FDA o 1 E = Endangered; T = Threatened; T(S/A) = Threatened due to

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-10-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-10-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2013 CFR

2013-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-10-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-10-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-10-01

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

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

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

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

75 FR 46952 - Prescription Drug User Fee Rates for Fiscal Year 2011

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2010-08-04

... average change in pay per FTE (4.53 percent) is the highest of the three factors, it becomes the inflation... pay change for the previous fiscal year for Federal employees stationed in the Washington, DC metropolitan area; or (3) the average annual change in cost, per full time equivalent (FTE) FDA position, of...

Non-Ionizing Radiation Used in Microwave Ovens

MedlinePlus

... Human Services (HHS), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) sets ... public health. These standards can be viewed on FDA's Code of Federal Regulations on Microwave Ovens . FDA ...

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

PubMed

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

2016-05-01

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

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...

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

EPA Pesticide Factsheets

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

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...

Differences between dietary supplement and prescription drug omega-3 fatty acid formulations: a legislative and regulatory perspective.

PubMed

Collins, Nancy; Tighe, Ann P; Brunton, Stephen A; Kris-Etherton, Penny M

2008-12-01

The medical management of many diseases and conditions can include either restriction or provision of specific essential nutrients. When such nutrients are needed, there are often both prescription and nonprescription products available, as in the case of nicotinic acid or omega-3 fatty acids. Although they may seem to contain similar ingredients, there may be important differences between the prescription and dietary-supplement preparations. The manufacturing of prescription pharmaceutical products is regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which mandates standards for consistency and quality assurance. Dietary supplements are available to consumers under the provisions of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, for which the FDA has the burden of proving a dietary supplement is harmful rather than requiring the manufacturer prove that the supplement is safe. Consumers and medical professionals should be aware of the important qualitative and quantitative differences between the FDA-approved prescription formulations and dietary supplements, particularly when an essential nutrient is part of the medical management of a disease or condition.

Over-the-counter vaginal contraceptive and spermicide drug products containing nonoxynol 9; required labeling. Final rule.

PubMed

2007-12-19

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is issuing a final rule establishing new warning statements and other labeling information for all over-the-counter (OTC) vaginal contraceptive drug products (also known as spermicides, hereinafter referred to as vaginal contraceptives or vaginal contraceptives/spermicides) containing nonoxynol 9 (N9). These warning statements will advise consumers that vaginal contraceptives/spermicides containing N9 do not protect against infection from the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), or against getting other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The warnings and labeling information will also advise consumers that use of vaginal contraceptives and spermicides containing N9 can irritate the vagina and rectum and may increase the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) from an infected partner. This final rule is part of FDA's ongoing review of OTC drug products. FDA is issuing this final rule after considering public comments on its proposed regulation, and all relevant data and information on N9 that have come to our attention.

Shaking Up the Debate: Ensuring the Ethical Use of DBS Intervention Criteria for Mid-Stage Parkinson's Patients.

PubMed

Eijkholt, Marleen; Cabrera, Laura Y; Ramirez-Zamora, Adolfo; Pilitsis, Julie G

2017-07-01

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established treatment for the management of severe motor fluctuations in advanced Parkinson's disease (PD). Until recently, device regulation, medical, and insurance practices limited DBS to patients with advanced stages of PD. In February 2016 this changed, however, when the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted formal approval for the use of brain stimulator in mid-stage PD patients. In this article, we examine whether DBS in mid-stage PD can be ethically justified beyond the FDA approval. We scrutinize the current risk-benefit profile, the costs-benefit profile, and the capacity for informed consent requirement, to ask if use of subthalamic nucleus (STN) in mid-stage DBS is ethically appropriate. We propose that mid-stage DBS decisions could be appropriate under a shared decision-making model, which embraces a broad quality of life perspective. Although it might be too premature to know how the FDA decision will affect medical and insurance practices, we conclude by arguing that revisions to persisting guidelines seems justified both on scientific and ethical grounds. © 2017 International Neuromodulation Society.

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

PubMed

2000-04-07

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

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.

21 CFR 821.55 - Confidentiality.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2012 CFR

2012-04-01

... information will not be further disclosed except as the health aspects of the patient requires. Such... Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES... identifying information for the purpose of tracking. (b) Records and other information submitted to FDA under...

21 CFR 821.55 - Confidentiality.

Code of Federal Regulations, 2014 CFR

2014-04-01

... information will not be further disclosed except as the health aspects of the patient requires. Such... Drugs FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES (CONTINUED) MEDICAL DEVICES... identifying information for the purpose of tracking. (b) Records and other information submitted to FDA under...

Edible Films: Why, What and How!

USDA-ARS?s Scientific Manuscript database

Edible films are becoming more and more important in our life to protect nutritional food from deterioration. Due to strict FDA requirements components of agriculutral products, i.e., cabohydrates, fats and proteins are the most suitable components for this purpose. The chapter describes the histo...

Is It Really FDA Approved?

MedlinePlus

... has been demonstrated that the device is substantially equivalent to a legally marketed predicate device that does not require premarket approval. Devices that present a low risk of harm to the user (Class I) (for example non-powered breast pumps, elastic bandages, tongue depressors, and ...

77 FR 29352 - Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Irradiation in...

Federal Register 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014

2012-05-17

...] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Irradiation in the... information collection provisions of FDA's requirements for food irradiation processors. DATES: Submit either... of information technology. Irradiation in the Production, Processing, and Handling of Food--21 CFR...

A predictive index of biomarkers for ictogenesis from tier I safety pharmacology testing that may warrant tier II EEG studies.

PubMed

Gauvin, David V; Zimmermann, Zachary J; Yoder, Joshua; Harter, Marci; Holdsworth, David; Kilgus, Quinn; May, Jonelle; Dalton, Jill; Baird, Theodore J

2018-05-08

Three significant contributions to the field of safety pharmacology were recently published detailing the use of electroencephalography (EEG) by telemetry in a critical role in the successful evaluation of a compound during drug development (1] Authier, Delatte, Kallman, Stevens & Markgraf; JPTM 2016; 81:274-285; 2] Accardi, Pugsley, Forster, Troncy, Huang & Authier; JPTM; 81: 47-59; 3] Bassett, Troncy, Pouliot, Paquette, Ascaha, & Authier; JPTM 2016; 70: 230-240). These authors present a convincing case for monitoring neocortical biopotential waveforms (EEG, ECoG, etc) during preclinical toxicology studies as an opportunity for early identification of a central nervous system (CNS) risk during Investigational New Drug (IND) Enabling Studies. This review is about "ictogenesis" not "epileptogenesis". It is intended to characterize overt behavioral and physiological changes suggestive of drug-induced neurotoxicity/ictogenesis in experimental animals during Tier 1 safety pharmacology testing, prior to first dose administration in man. It is the presence of these predictive or comorbid biomarkers expressed during the requisite conduct of daily clinical or cage side observations, and in early ICH S7A Tier I CNS, pulmonary and cardiovascular safety study designs that should initiate an early conversation regarding Tier II inclusion of EEG monitoring. We conclude that there is no single definitive clinical marker for seizure liability but plasma exposures might add to set proper safety margins when clinical convulsions are observed. Even the observation of a study-related full tonic-clonic convulsion does not establish solid ground to require the financial and temporal investment of a full EEG study under the current regulatory standards. For purposes of this review, we have adopted the FDA term "sponsor" as it refers to any person who takes the responsibility for and initiates a nonclinical investigations of new molecular entities; FDA uses the term "sponsor" primarily in relation to investigational new drug application submissions. Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

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...

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.

Streptococcus endophthalmitis outbreak after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab: one-year outcomes and investigative results.

PubMed

Goldberg, Roger A; Flynn, Harry W; Miller, Darlene; Gonzalez, Serafin; Isom, Ryan F

2013-07-01

To report the 1-year clinical outcomes of an outbreak of Streptococcus endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab, including visual acuity outcomes, microbiological testing, and compound pharmacy investigations by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Retrospective consecutive case series. Twelve eyes of 12 patients who developed endophthalmitis after receiving intravitreal bevacizumab prepared by a single compounding pharmacy. Medical records of patients were reviewed; phenotypic and DNA analyses were performed on microbes cultured from patients and from unused syringes. An inspection report by the FDA based on site visits to the pharmacy that prepared the bevacizumab syringes was summarized. Visual acuity, interventions received, time to intervention, microbiological consistency, and FDA inspection findings. Between July 5 and 8, 2011, 12 patients developed endophthalmitis after intravitreal bevacizumab from syringes prepared by a single compounding pharmacy. All patients received initial vitreous tap and injection, and 8 patients (67%) subsequently underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). After 12 months follow-up, outcomes have been poor. Seven patients (58%) required evisceration or enucleation, and only 1 patient regained pre-injection visual acuity. Molecular testing using real-time polymerase chain reaction, partial sequencing of the groEL gene, and multilocus sequencing of 7 housekeeping genes confirmed the presence of a common strain of Streptococcus mitis/oralis in vitreous specimens and 7 unused syringes prepared by the compounding pharmacy at the same time. An FDA investigation of the compounding pharmacy noted deviations from standard sterile technique, inconsistent documentation, and inadequate testing of equipment required for safe preparation of medications. In this outbreak of endophthalmitis, outcomes have been generally poor, and PPV did not improve visual results at 1-year follow-up. Molecular testing confirmed a common strain of S. mitis/oralis. Contamination seems to have occurred at the compounding pharmacy, where numerous problems in sterile technique were noted by public health investigators. Copyright © 2013 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Streptococcus Endophthalmitis Outbreak after Intravitreal Injection of Bevacizumab: One-year Outcomes and Investigative Results

PubMed Central

Goldberg, Roger A.; Flynn, Harry W.; Miller, Darlene; Gonzalez, Serafin; Isom, Ryan F.

2013-01-01

Purpose To report the one-year clinical outcomes of an outbreak of Streptococcus endophthalmitis after intravitreal injection of bevacizumab, including visual acuity outcomes, microbiological testing and compound pharmacy investigations by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Design Retrospective consecutive case series. Participants 12 eyes of 12 patients who developed endophthalmitis after receiving intravitreal bevacizumab prepared by a single compounding pharmacy. Methods Medical records of patients were reviewed; phenotypic and DNA analyses were performed on microbes cultured from patients and from unused syringes. An inspection report by the FDA based on site-visits to the pharmacy that prepared the bevacizumab syringes was summarized. Main Outcome Measures Visual acuity, interventions received, time-to-intervention; microbiological consistency; FDA inspection findings. Results Between July 5 and July 8, 2011, 12 patients developed endophthalmitis after intravitreal bevacizumab from syringes prepared by a single compounding pharmacy. All patients received initial vitreous tap and injection, and eight (67%) subsequently underwent pars plana vitrectomy (PPV). After twelve months follow-up, outcomes have been poor: 7 patients (58%) required evisceration or enucleation, and only one patient regained pre-injection visual acuity. Molecular testing using real time polymerase chain reaction, partial sequencing of the groEL gene, and multilocus sequencing of 7 housekeeping genes confirmed the presence of a common strain of Streptococcus mitis/oralis in vitreous specimens and seven unused syringes prepared by the compounding pharmacy at the same time. An FDA investigation of the compounding pharmacy noted deviations from standard sterile technique, inconsistent documentation, and inadequate testing of equipment required for safe preparation of medications. Conclusions In this outbreak of endophthalmitis, outcomes have been generally poor and PPV did not improve visual results at one year follow-up. Molecular testing confirmed a common strain of Streptococcus mitis/oralis. Contamination appears to have occurred at the compounding pharmacy, where numerous problems in sterile technique were noted by public health investigators. PMID:23453511

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.

Fluorescein Diacetate Microplate Assay in Cell Viability Detection.

PubMed

Chen, Xi; Yang, Xiu-Ying; Fang, Lian-Hua; DU, Guan-Hua

2016-12-20

Objective To investigate the application of the fluorescein diacetate (FDA) microplate assay in cell viability detection. Methods Cells were seeded in a 96-well culture plate until detection. After incubated with FDA,the plate was detected by fluorescence microplate analyzer. The effects of FDA incubation duration,concentration,and other factors on the assay's accuracy and stability were assessed. We also compared the results of FDA with methyl thiazolyl(MTT) in terms of cell numbers and H 2 O 2 injury. Results Within 0-30 minutes,the fluorescence-cell number coefficient of FDA assay increased with duration and reached 0.99 in 27-30 minutes. The optimum concentration of final FDA in this study was 10-30 μg/ml. On cell viability detection,the result of FDA method was equivalent to MTT method. As to H 2 O 2 injury assay,the sensitivity of FDA method was superior to MTT on the higher concentration H 2 O 2 treatment due to a relative shorter duration for detection. Conclusion As a stable and reliable method,FDA is feasible for cell variability detection under varied conditions.

Estimating the incremental net health benefit of requirements for cardiovascular risk evaluation for diabetes therapies

PubMed Central

Chawla, Anita J; Mytelka, Daniel S; McBride, Stephan D; Nellesen, Dave; Elkins, Benjamin R; Ball, Daniel E; Kalsekar, Anupama; Towse, Adrian; Garrison, Louis P

2014-01-01

Purpose To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of pre-approval requirements for safety data to detect cardiovascular (CV) risk contained in the December 2008 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance for developing type 2 diabetes drugs compared with the February 2008 FDA draft guidance from the perspective of diabetes population health. Methods We applied the incremental net health benefit (INHB) framework to quantify the benefits and risks of investigational diabetes drugs using a common survival metric (life-years [LYs]). We constructed a decision analytic model for clinical program development consistent with the requirements of each guidance and simulated diabetes drugs, some of which had elevated CV risk. Assuming constant research budgets, we estimate the impact of increased trial size on drugs investigated. We aggregate treatment benefit and CV risks for each approved drug over a 35-year horizon under each guidance. Results The quantitative analysis suggests that the December 2008 guidance adversely impacts diabetes population health. INHB was −1.80 million LYs, attributable to delayed access to diabetes therapies (−0.18 million LYs) and fewer drugs (−1.64 million LYs), but partially offset by reduced CV risk exposure (0.02 million LYs). Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. Conclusion The health outcomes impact of all potential benefits and risks should be evaluated in a common survival measure, including health gain from avoided adverse events, lost health benefits from delayed or forgone efficacious products, and impact of alternative policy approaches. Quantitative analysis of the December 2008 FDA guidance for diabetes therapies indicates that negative impact on patient health will result. © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. PMID:24892175

Estimating the incremental net health benefit of requirements for cardiovascular risk evaluation for diabetes therapies.

PubMed

Chawla, Anita J; Mytelka, Daniel S; McBride, Stephan D; Nellesen, Dave; Elkins, Benjamin R; Ball, Daniel E; Kalsekar, Anupama; Towse, Adrian; Garrison, Louis P

2014-03-01

To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of pre-approval requirements for safety data to detect cardiovascular (CV) risk contained in the December 2008 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance for developing type 2 diabetes drugs compared with the February 2008 FDA draft guidance from the perspective of diabetes population health. We applied the incremental net health benefit (INHB) framework to quantify the benefits and risks of investigational diabetes drugs using a common survival metric (life-years [LYs]). We constructed a decision analytic model for clinical program development consistent with the requirements of each guidance and simulated diabetes drugs, some of which had elevated CV risk. Assuming constant research budgets, we estimate the impact of increased trial size on drugs investigated. We aggregate treatment benefit and CV risks for each approved drug over a 35-year horizon under each guidance. The quantitative analysis suggests that the December 2008 guidance adversely impacts diabetes population health. INHB was -1.80 million LYs, attributable to delayed access to diabetes therapies (-0 .18 million LYs) and fewer drugs (-1.64 million LYs), but partially offset by reduced CV risk exposure (0.02 million LYs). Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. The health outcomes impact of all potential benefits and risks should be evaluated in a common survival measure, including health gain from avoided adverse events, lost health benefits from delayed or for gone efficacious products, and impact of alternative policy approaches. Quantitative analysis of the December 2008 FDA guidance for diabetes therapies indicates that negative impact on patient health will result. Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Combining automatic table classification and relationship extraction in extracting anticancer drug-side effect pairs from full-text articles.

PubMed

Xu, Rong; Wang, QuanQiu

2015-02-01

Anticancer drug-associated side effect knowledge often exists in multiple heterogeneous and complementary data sources. A comprehensive anticancer drug-side effect (drug-SE) relationship knowledge base is important for computation-based drug target discovery, drug toxicity predication and drug repositioning. In this study, we present a two-step approach by combining table classification and relationship extraction to extract drug-SE pairs from a large number of high-profile oncological full-text articles. The data consists of 31,255 tables downloaded from the Journal of Oncology (JCO). We first trained a statistical classifier to classify tables into SE-related and -unrelated categories. We then extracted drug-SE pairs from SE-related tables. We compared drug side effect knowledge extracted from JCO tables to that derived from FDA drug labels. Finally, we systematically analyzed relationships between anti-cancer drug-associated side effects and drug-associated gene targets, metabolism genes, and disease indications. The statistical table classifier is effective in classifying tables into SE-related and -unrelated (precision: 0.711; recall: 0.941; F1: 0.810). We extracted a total of 26,918 drug-SE pairs from SE-related tables with a precision of 0.605, a recall of 0.460, and a F1 of 0.520. Drug-SE pairs extracted from JCO tables is largely complementary to those derived from FDA drug labels; as many as 84.7% of the pairs extracted from JCO tables have not been included a side effect database constructed from FDA drug labels. Side effects associated with anticancer drugs positively correlate with drug target genes, drug metabolism genes, and disease indications. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

21 CFR 201.57 - Specific requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2010 CFR

2010-04-01

... § 201.56(b)(1) and must be implemented according to the schedule specified in § 201.56(c), except for the requirement in paragraph (c)(18) of this section to reprint any FDA-approved patient labeling at... to the labeling sections described in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(5), and (c)(6) of this...

21 CFR 201.57 - Specific requirements on content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and...

Code of Federal Regulations, 2011 CFR

2011-04-01

... § 201.56(b)(1) and must be implemented according to the schedule specified in § 201.56(c), except for the requirement in paragraph (c)(18) of this section to reprint any FDA-approved patient labeling at... to the labeling sections described in paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(5), and (c)(6) of this...