This morning the FDA released a guidance document entitled Pediatric Information Incorporated Into Human Prescription Drug and Biological Product Labeling (here) which provides direction to firms that are developing labeling for pediatric patients based on findings of required or literature studies or data that are either positive, negative or inconclusive.
Coauthored by Kurt Karst (of FDA Law Blog) and Bob Pollock
The “Petitioned ANDA”—It’s a route to ANDA approval that’s been around since even before the enactment of the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Amendments. For several years after the enactment of Hatch‑Waxman, the petitioned ANDA was a mainstay of the generic drug industry’s drug development paradigm.
Over the last two days, the FDA has announced the recall of two products from two different companies (here and here), each due to the presence of particulate matter in the product. One was confirmed as glass particles and the other as a copper salt (particulates seen at the twelve-month stability station).
On Thursday, March 7, the FDA published a draft supplementary guidance on non-proprietary naming of biological products <here>, which updates the January 2017 Final Guidance on Nonproprietary Naming of Biological Products <here>. Both of these guidance documents address the FDA’s requirement for including a four-letter nonsense suffix in the proper name for biological products.
Required by Section 914 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, the annual report of the impact of 505(q) petitions and petitions for stay of action issued this last Thursday. This report discussed the number of such petition and describes any delays in approval that such petitions may have caused. The report covers FY 2017.
Day Two started with a recap of Day One (see post from yesterday here) by Dr. Nancy Snyderman.
Day Two kicked off with a session entitled Generics Help Patients, How Can Patients Help Generics. This centered on digital virtual prescribing, digital physician visits, and what’s going on in that space.
FDA notes on its User Fee web page (here) that the key date for acceptance of NDAs, BLAs, and ANDAs will be dictated by the first date that FDA could accept fees under the appropriation (after the shut down was over) which is January 28, 2019. The Agency gives the following advice as to how it will treat fee-paying applications and time periods for which fees must be paid (if not submitted at time of original submission of the application) (please see below):
- For ANDAs transmitted to FDA during the lapse period,
The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 requires the FDA to publish a notice of all approved products and their marketing status. The FDA satisfies this requirement by publication of the drug products in the Orange Book; the FDA will publish information in the active section (if the product is currently being marketed) or the discontinued section (if it not being marketed for other than safety or efficacy reasons).
In an unusual move, the FDA posted a guidance document on its webpage describing how to handle tentative approvals titled “ANDA Submissions – Amendments and Requests for Final Approval to Tentatively Approved ANDAs” (here) prior to its announcement in the Federal Register with this accompanying note:
“We are posting this document on the FDA website as Federal Register (FR) publication is not currently available for this document.
The Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) has taken great pride in meeting all of its GDUFA goals (including most, if not all, ANDA review goal dates). But, Houston, we may have a problem!
Here are some facts that may have the OGD worrying into the future:
- December is typically one of the largest months for submissions.
In 2018, the FDA says it approved fifty-nine new molecular entities, which included a whopping thirteen biosimilar products. All of the NME product approvals can be found here.
It is important for you the read the FDA explanation of how the Agency is defining NMEs for the purposes of this report and stay focused on the regulatory implications versus the practical implications of how the FDA is classifying this term.
To all of our readers – Have a happy holiday season and a very happy, healthy, and prosperous New Year. The Lachman blog will be taking a break over the holiday starting Friday, December 21st (unless something extremely urgent occurs) and I hope that all of you will rejoin me in the New Year as we follow the ever-changing landscape of FDA regulatory science,
Many thanks to the FDA for publishing several important new and revised guidances and a proposed rule related to the Biopharmaceutical industry this week. These include a finalized version of the “Deemed to be a License” Guidance for industry (here) with several important revisions and additions relative to the previously published draft,
After just over five years, the FDA is officially withdrawing its controversial proposed labeling rule for generic drugs. The advance publication notice in the Federal Register can be found (here). The proposed rule would have permitted ANDA holders to unilaterally revise its labeling via a CBE-0 supplement to include new or different safety information or warnings.