The House Subcommittee on Health has announced a hearing entitled “Examining Medical Product Manufacturer Communications” for Wednesday, July 12, 2017, at 10:15am EDT, in which it intends to examine two discussion-draft bills seeking to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) to clarify how drug and device manufacturers can legally discuss uses of
On June 7, 2017, FDA issued a revised guidance document, Form FDA 3674 – Certifications To Accompany Drug, Biological Product, and Device Applications/Submissions, to clarify when sponsors should submit Form FDA 3674 certifications stating that they have complied with their obligations to submit required clinical trial information to clinicaltrials.gov.
As we have mentioned in a previous article, the 21st Century Cures Act (enacted December 13, 2016) gave companies 60 calendar days to make their expanded access policies for certain investigational drugs publicly available. That deadline—Saturday, February 11, 2017—arrives in a matter of days.
On December 29, 2016, FDA issued a new draft guidance regarding drugs and biologics entitled “Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format—Submission of Manufacturing Establishment Information.” 81 FR 96013 (Dec. 29, 2016). The guidance provides an overview of the requirements for a valid electronic submission of manufacturing establishment information (MEI) under section 745(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) as amended by the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA).
Under Section 3032 of the 21st Century Cures Act, manufacturers and distributors of investigational drugs for serious diseases or conditions have 60 calendar days after the date of enactment to publicly post their expanded access (EA) policies for individual patient access. This deadline falls on February 11, 2017. For new investigational drugs, this provision applies upon initiation of a Phase II or Phase III study for that drug.
In a Federal Register notice published September 1, 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a public hearing for November 9-10, 2016 on issues related to industry communications about unapproved uses of approved drugs, biological products and approved, cleared and exempt medical devices. FDA seeks input from a broad array of stakeholders, including
Yesterday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a final rule amending its regulations governing drug establishment registration and listing requirements for U.S. and foreign firms. Also noteworthy is that the final rule expands FDA’s regulations governing National Drug Codes (NDCs). The final rule is available at 81 Fed. Reg. 60170 (Aug. 31, 2016)
On June 2, 2016, FDA issued three final Guidances for Industry—two of the three are aimed at clarifying the expanded access applications and procedures, while the third discusses charging for investigational drugs under an Investigational New Drug (IND) application.
The Second Circuit recently affirmed a lower court ruling dismissing claims brought by retail pharmacies against Johnson & Johnson, Caremark, Express Pharmacy Services of PA, and American Home Products, alleging that lower prices offered to certain “favored purchasers” amounted to unlawful price discrimination under the Robinson-Patman Act. Among other things, the Robinson-Patman Act makes it illegal
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a second enforcement letter regarding a pharmaceutical company executive’s statements on television. On March 12, 2015, the Advertising and Promotional Labeling Branch (APLB) of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) issued an Untitled Letter to Protein Sciences Corporation for a video interview posted to the company’s website. In an interview aired on a LifeTime morning show called “The Balancing Act”, the company’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Dr. Manon Cox, spoke about the company’s drug, Flublok (Influenza Vaccine).
In a split decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment on two antitrust counterclaims brought by Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. (“Mutual”) against Tyco Healthcare Group (“Tyco”), while vacating summary judgment on two others. Although the ruling is just the latest in a long line of cases analyzing sham petitioning issues