This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
I am pleased to report that this month’s Drug Channels news roundup was most definitely not written by ChatGPT. No promises about future articles. See our forecast to the right.)
Kirschenbaum — On March 31, the Federal District Court for the District of Maryland upheld CMS’s definition of a “new formulation” under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (MDRP). All of these products are line extensions under CMS’s definition. Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Inc. MJM-22-977 (Dist. times that of Medicaid ( $98 billion and $38.1
Gaulkin — On April 10, the Fourth Circuit unanimously affirmed a summary judgment ruling for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) regarding the agency’s definitions of “line-extension drug” and “new formulation” for purposes of determining rebates that drug manufacturers may owe the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program (MDRP).
This Revised Draft Guidance provides considerations for manufacturers, packers or distributors (dubbed “firms”) of prescription biological reference products, biosimilar products, and interchangeable biosimilar products presenting data and information about such products in promotional materials in a truthful and non-misleading way.
Amongst other things, FDA co-opted many of the same definitions for key terms for implementation of the BPCIA. FDA borrowed this definition from 21 C.F.R. Specifically, Boehringer asked FDA to interpret “strength” for biosimilars to mean “total drug content” to the exclusion of “concentration.”
Updated guidance on promotional labeling for biosimilars and interchangeables emphasizes a similar approach Today, the FDA issued a revised draft guidance on the development of promotional labeling for biosimilars, reference products, and—newly—interchangeable products. regarding its administration, preparation, storage, or safety).
FDA’s new guidance on postapproval manufacturing changes for biosimilars focuses on current practice, new dosage forms Meeting a biosimilar user fee commitment, the FDA is expanding on its recommendations for biosimilar and interchangeable product applicants asking the FDA for post-approval manufacturing changes.
Overall, the final guidance provides many editorial clarifications as well as some noteworthy updates, including discussions on DHTs that meet the definition of a device, selection of a DHT and rationale for use in a clinical investigation, retention and protection of data collected by DHTs, and DHT updates.
To set the stage for this case, we need to go back to March 2020 , when a new definition of “biological product” threw the world of protein products into a tizzy. As a result of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) passed in 2010, the definition of a “biological product” expanded to include “proteins.”
510(k), premarket approval application (PMA), Product Development Protocol (PDP), De Novo, or Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE)] for a device that meets the definition of a cyber device under this section shall include such information as [FDA] may require to ensure that such cyber device meets the cybersecurity requirements. . . .
The definition goes on to list potential options for such tests: cell-based assays, organ chips and microphysiological systems, computer modeling, other nonhuman or human biology-based test methods such as bioprinting, as well as animal tests. For more on FDORA’s other provisions, see HPM’s complete summary here ). FDORA § 3209(a)(2).
Though the Court acknowledged that the definition of the term “drug” is broad enough to include the ProAir HFA inhaler, the Court found that “this broad statutory definition of drug does not suffice to establish the Inhaler Patents claim the drug for which Teva submitted its application.”
FDA interprets the “software” definition to include software that is firmware or programmable logic in addition to software in a medical device (SiMD) or software as a medical device (SaMD). For medical devices that meet the definition of a cyber device, manufacturers are required to submit specific information in premarket submissions.
Pharmacies and Pharmacy Benefit Managers is a definitive, nonpartisan resource that includes the most current information about pharmacy dispensing channels, third-party payers, pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), patients’ financial contributions, government regulations, and much more. The 2023 Economic Report on U.S.
Both ISO 13485 and ISO 9000 contain terms and definitions that are referenced within Part 820. FDA further retained some definitions in the QSMR. FDA further retained some definitions in the QSMR. Certain definitions are also removed from § 820.3, Revised § 820.3
DASCA amended the CSA by revising and adding specified substances to the definition of “anabolic steroid,” providing for the temporary and permanent scheduling of anabolic steroids and adding labeling requirements for products containing anabolic steroids. Implementation of the Designer Anabolic Steroid Control Act of 2014 , 88 Fed.
2023-24 Economic Report on Pharmaceutical Wholesalers and Specialty Distributors Economic Report on Pharmaceutical Wholesalers and Specialty Distributors is the definitive, nonpartisan resource thoroughly updates our annual exploration of the distribution industry’s interactions with—and services for—other participants in our healthcare system.
By Riëtte van Laack — The dietary supplement exclusionary clause is, as its name suggests, a clause in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act) definition of dietary supplement. On August 28 of this year, NPA sued FDA challenging FDA’s determination that NMN is excluded from the dietary supplement definition.
From Chapter 1 (My First Generic Drug Client), through Chapter 4 (The Hatch-Waxman Act), to Chapter 12 (My Prescription for the Future), the 208-page “Breaking the Medicine Monopolies: Reflections of a Generic Drug Pioneer” is definitely worth a read!
Houck — Drugs and substances classified within schedule I of the federal Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) by definition have a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and lack accepted safety for use under medical supervision. By Larry K. 21 U.S.C. § 802(a) (7)(A)).
As applied to manufacturer assistance, CMS did not adopt a single interpretation of the statutory or regulatory definition of “cost sharing.” The Court specifically concluded that the rule “rests on two contradictory interpretations of the statute” and “conflict[s] with the regulatory definition.”
Among other topics, the memorandum summarizes CMS’s proposed regulations for both these Part B and Part D inflation rebate programs, including: Key definitions; The drugs to which the rebates apply; Methods of calculating and applying rebates; Processes for reporting, reconciling, and paying rebates; and Penalties and enforcement.
A major component of AAFCO is its work on ingredient definitions, specifying what ingredients may be use in animal feed under what conditions. AAFCO’s ingredient definitions are not federal regulations and do not have the force or effect of federal law. The goal is to create uniformity to facilitate interstate commerce.
Other orphan drugs, which, by definition, address an unmet medical need, “only” receive 9 years of market exclusivity. Reduced market exclusivity would foster generic and biosimilar competition through earlier market access. Generic and biosimilar developers benefit from earlier market entry.
Moreover, ingredients used in pet food must be approved by FDA, affirmed or listed as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) by FDA, or go through the AAFCO definition process. PFI’s president has stated that “[t]he biggest issue is the inconsistency in state interpretation of AAFCO label definitions.
As captured in the definition of the PDURS itself, the software must be “disseminated by or on behalf of a drug sponsor.” This definition is carried forward in the new PDURS framework: “A software function [per the Cures Act] is any distinct purpose of the software—in this case, prescription drug use-related software.
If enacted, the legislation would amend the FMIA and PPIA to establish definitions for “imitation” and “cell-cultured” meat and poultry products, and revise the definitions of “meat” and “poultry” to exclude such products. This particular federal legislative effort, however, continues the debate.
FDA provides definitions for the three datasets. Update practices and training of end users also need to be addressed. Data management practices should include how the manufacturer plans to obtain and use training, tuning, and test data to support each AI-DSF modification.
Even if the company did obtain approval, such approval would likely be after generic competition for Farxiga enters the market, in which case the definition of a qualifying single source drug would no longer apply to Farxiga. AstraZeneca argued it would very likely have products in future lists of drugs selected for negotiations.
The proposed legislation appears to be an effort to resolve issues created by FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine’s (CVM) interpretation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act) definition of food.
Change to the IVD definition First, the mechanics of the change. The crux of the proposed rule lies in the addition of ten words: “ including when the manufacturer of these products is a laboratory.” These words would be added to the definition of “ in vitro diagnostic [IVD] products” in 21 C.F.R.
In fairness, we’d note that FDA reports that inspections are on the rise—but definitely not back to pre-pandemic levels. The Subcommittee majority has held prior hearings and written letters about these problems, as the issue has vexed FDA in recent years.
Thus, ironically the definition of “simple” is anything but and is almost certain to lead to debates about what, exactly, is simple. The design and procedures of the device are appropriate for use by healthcare professionals in near-patient settings outside a centralized laboratory.
FDA uses that definition to designate small businesses eligible for a reduced user fee. Sections 738(d)(2)(A) and (e)(2)(A) of the FD&C Act define a “small business” as an entity that reported $100 million or less of gross receipts or sales in its most recent income tax return.
The Draft Guidance also describes the types of data that may constitute clinical data supporting a 510(k), drawing on previous recommendations of the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (see “ Clinical Evidence – Key Definitions and Concepts ”). electronic health records, claims).
Medical gas manufacturers and 503B outsourcing facilities—both of which meet the definition of “manufacturer”—are excluded from the Quality Report. drugs subject to an open drug efficacy study implementation ( DESI ) program proceeding).
The PR goes on to state that the FD&C Act definition of a device does not turn on where or by whom a test system is “manufactured.” FDA recognizes that the FD&C Act exempts licensed healthcare practitioners from certain device regulations if they manufacture devices solely for use in the course of their professional practice.
Percent on an Operational Basis, Due to Biosimilar Competition; Global Skyrizi Net Revenues Were $674 Million; Global Rinvoq Net Revenues Were $378 Million – Second-Quarter Global Net Revenues from the Hematologic Oncology Portfolio Were $1.816 Billion, an Increase of 14.1 percent on an operational basis, due to biosimilar competition.
802(54)(G) (which references CMS’s statutory definition of “practice of telemedicine”). This time around, DEA is acting jointly with SAMHSA, which agency “concurs” with the temporary rule, and has advised DEA that no additional rulemaking is necessary at this time other than the temporary rule, nor are amendments required to 21 U.S.C. §
The Court acknowledged that the determination as to whether it concerns a public or private right has not been “definitively explained” but stressed that the public right is an exception and should be interpreted narrowly. The dissent agreed that the critical question is whether the matter concerns a private or public right.
We are not reproducing the questions that were simple recitations of regulatory definitions or FDA’s arguments in the Final Rule. Previously Submitted Questions FDA then proceeded to answer questions that were submitted to the agency before the webinar.
International ERS/ATS guidelines on definition, evaluation and treatment of severe asthma. J Intern Med 2012;272:121–32. 7 Wenzel S. Severe Asthma in Adults. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005; 172; 149–60. 8 Chung KF, Wenzel SE, Brozek JL, et al. Eur Respir J 2014; 43: 343–73. 9 Price D, Fletcher M, van der Molen T.
Unlike like the definition of “simple test,” the Special Controls are anything but simple. As we stated previously, this submission took well over nine (9) months to review and develop the Special Controls. After reviewing the Special Controls, we understand what took so long.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 15,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content