Over-the-Counter Vaginal Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug Products Containing Nonoxynol 9; Required Labeling, 71769-71785 [07-6111]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points,
signed August 15, 2007, and effective
September 15, 2007, is amended as
follows:
*
*
*
*
*
21 CFR Part 201
Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace
Designated as Surface Areas.
AGENCY:
AAL AK E2
ACTION:
I
*
McGrath, AK [Revised]
*
*
*
Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending
Upward from 700 feet or More Above the
Surface of the Earth.
*
*
*
AAL AK E5
*
*
McGrath, AK [Revised]
McGrath, McGrath Airport, AK
(Lat. 62°57′10″ N., long. 155°36′20″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 8.1-mile
radius of the McGrath Airport and within 4
miles north and 8 miles south of the 123°
bearing from the McGrath Airport, AK
extending from the 8.1-mile radius to 16
miles southeast of the McGrath Airport, AK,
and within 4 miles east and west of the 008°
bearing from the McGrath Airport, AK,
extending from the 8.1-mile radius to 11.2
miles north of the McGrath Airport, AK; and
that airspace extending upward from 1,200
feet above the surface within a 74-mile radius
of the McGrath Airport.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Anchorage, AK, on December 11,
2007.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information
Area Group.
[FR Doc. E7–24410 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
Over-the-Counter Vaginal
Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug
Products Containing Nonoxynol 9;
Required Labeling
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
McGrath, McGrath Airport, AK
(Lat. 62°57′10″ N., long. 155°36′20″ W.)
That airspace within a 7.6-mile radius of
the McGrath Airport. This Class E airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
*
[Docket No. 1980N–0280] (formerly Docket
No. 80N–0280)
RIN 0910–AF44
Final rule.
SUMMARY: 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.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective June 19, 2008.
Compliance Date: The compliance
date for all products subject to this final
rule, including products with annual
sales less than $25,000, is June 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Arlene Solbeck, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Silver Spring,
MD 20993, 301–796–2090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Comments on the Proposed Rule and
FDA’s Responses
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71769
A. Should N9 Remain Available as an
Active Ingredient in OTC Vaginal
Contraceptive Drug Products?
B. What Issues Were Raised by
Comments That Did Not Support
the Proposed Warning Statements?
1. Will Warning Labels Be Seen,
Understood, or Followed?
2. Are the Warnings Supported by the
Scientific Literature?
3. Is FDA Required To Prove Actual
Causation To Justify the Warnings?
C. Should Women Ask a Doctor
Before Using N9 Products?
D. Where Will the Warnings Appear
in the Labeling?
E. Where Will the Condom Usage
Statement Appear in the Labeling?
F. What Were the Comments on
Condoms, Sexual Lubricants, and
Barrier Methods?
1. Do Warnings Apply to Condoms
and Sexual Lubricants?
2. Are Condoms Lubricated With N9
Safe To Use?
3. How Do Warnings Apply to N9
Products Used With Barrier
Methods?
G. Is N9 Safe for Women at Low Risk
for HIV/AIDS and STDs?
H. Is N9 Safe for Rectal Use?
I. Does N9 Increase the Risk of STDs
Other Than HIV?
J. What Issues Did Other Comments
Discuss?
1. Why Did FDA Define Frequent Use
of N9 as ‘‘More Than Once a Day’’?
2. Should ‘‘Pharmacist’’ or ‘‘Health
Care Provider’’ Be Included on the
Label?
3. What Does ‘‘Unprotected Sex’’
Mean?
4. What Does the Word ‘‘Irritation’’
Mean When Referring To ‘‘Vaginal
Irritation’’ in the Warning
Language?
5. Should Warnings Be Printed in
Both English and Spanish?
III. FDA’s Final Conclusions on
Warnings and Other Labeling
Information for OTC Vaginal
Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug
Products Containing N9
A. New Labeling Requirements
B. Statement About Warnings
IV. Analysis of Impacts
V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VI. Environmental Impact
VII. Federalism
VIII. References
I. Background
In the Federal Register of January 16,
2003 (68 FR 2254), FDA (we) published
a proposed rule (the proposed rule) to
require new labeling warning statements
for all OTC vaginal contraceptive drug
products containing N9. These proposed
warning statements are intended to
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
71770
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
advise consumers that vaginal
contraceptives containing N9 do not
protect against infection from HIV, the
virus that causes AIDS, nor against
getting other STDs. The warnings also
would advise consumers that frequent
use of vaginal contraceptives containing
N9 can increase vaginal irritation, and
that increased vaginal irritation from the
use of N9 may increase the possibility
of becoming infected with the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected
partners. The proposed rule contains the
data and scientific evidence that we
considered to require these warnings.
N9 is a nonionic surfactant that works
as a vaginal contraceptive (spermicide)
by damaging the cell membrane of
sperm. As stated in the proposed rule
(68 FR 2254 at 2255), there are in vitro
studies showing that N9 causes damage
to the cell wall of certain STD pathogens
and has activity against certain bacterial
and viral STD pathogens, including
HIV. Because N9 inhibits the replication
of the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STD
pathogens in vitro, it has been suggested
over the years that N9 might help
prevent or reduce the risk of
transmission of the AIDS virus and
other STDs in humans (68 FR 2254 at
2255). Thus, research was undertaken to
see if N9 would prevent HIV and STDs.
In the proposed rule, FDA discussed the
evidence that demonstrates that N9 does
not prevent or reduce the risk of
transmission of the AIDS virus and
other STDs in humans (68 FR 2254 to
2259). FDA also discussed recent
scientific data that suggest that frequent
use of N9 may increase the risk of HIV
infection for women at risk for HIV (68
FR 2254 to 2259). Thus, FDA issued the
proposed rule to provide a clear,
consistent message that N9 is not
effective in preventing HIV
transmission, and that N9 can facilitate
transmission of the disease. We also
proposed labeling (warnings and other
information) to encourage the use of
condoms as a method to help sexually
active persons reduce the risk of
becoming infected with the AIDS virus
(HIV) and other STDs. We requested
feedback on whether the proposed
warnings adequately convey the safety
concerns about N9 and whether there
are additional data to support, expand,
or refute the proposed warnings.
In response to the proposed rule, we
received 153 comments. Two comments
were submitted from industry, 8 from
consumer advocacy groups, 10 from
health associations, 16 from health
professionals, and 117 from individual
consumers. These comments are on
display in the Division of Dockets
Management. For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/
default.htm and insert the docket
number (s), found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5360 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852. We are
responding to the comments, and
discussing some additional data that has
come to our attention, in this document.
The majority of comments from
consumers, consumer advocacy groups,
health organizations, and health
professionals supported FDA for
proposing warnings for N9 vaginal
contraceptive OTC drug products that
inform consumers that N9 does not
protect against HIV and other STDs and
that frequent use (more than once a day)
may increase the risk of infection of HIV
from infected partners. The comments
stated that the proposed warnings will
inform consumers of the risks so that
they can make responsible health care
decisions. Forty-six consumers reported
getting vaginal irritation, burning,
itching, swelling, or increased yeast and
urinary infections after using
contraceptive products containing N9.
These comments stated that the
proposed labeling is necessary to warn
consumers of the risks related to
irritation associated with N9 and to
educate consumers who mistakenly
believe that vaginal contraceptives/
spermicides containing N9 also prevent
STDs.
Some comments did not support the
proposed warnings. Other comments
asked for clarification of the warning
language, recommended changes in the
wording of the warning language, or
provided data to expand the proposed
warnings. After reviewing the
comments, FDA has revised the
proposed warnings in this final rule.
The differences between the warning
language in the proposed and final rules
are as follows:
TABLE 1.—DIFFERENCES IN THE WARNING LANGUAGE IN THE PROPOSED AND FINAL RULES
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
‘‘For vaginal use only
Not for rectal (anal) use’’
We explain the reason for this change in section II.H, comment 12, of
this document.
‘‘Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) alert: This product does not
protect against the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs’’
‘‘Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) alert:
This product does not protect against HIV/AIDS or other STDs and
may increase the risk of getting HIV from an infected partner’’
We discuss this change in section II.B.2, comment 3 of this document.
‘‘Ask a doctor before use if you have
• a new sex partner, multiple sex partners, or unprotected sex. Frequent use (more than once a day) of this product can increase vaginal
irritation, which may increase the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV)
or other STDs from infected partners. Ask a doctor or other health professional for your best birth control method.’’
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
‘‘For vaginal use only’’
‘‘Do not use if you or your sex partner has HIV/AIDS. If you do not
know if you or your sex partner is infected, choose another form of
birth control.’’
‘‘When using this product you may get vaginal irritation (burning,
itching, or a rash)’’
We discuss these changes in sections II.B.2, comment 3 and II.C,
comment 5 of this document.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
71771
TABLE 1.—DIFFERENCES IN THE WARNING LANGUAGE IN THE PROPOSED AND FINAL RULES—Continued
Proposed Rule
Final Rule
• ‘‘Studies have raised safety concerns that frequent use (more than
once a day) of products containing nonoxynol 9 can increase vaginal
irritation, which may increase the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV)
or other STDs from infected partners. Vaginal irritation may include
symptoms such as burning, itching, or a rash, or you may not notice
any symptoms at all. If you use these products frequently and/or have
a new sex partner, multiple sex partners or unprotected sex, see a
doctor or other health professional for your best birth control and
methods to prevent STDs.’’
• ‘‘studies have raised safety concerns that products containing the
spermicide nonoxynol 9 can irritate the vagina and rectum. Sometimes this irritation has no symptoms. This irritation may increase the
risk of getting HIV/AIDS from an infected partner’’
We discuss this change in section II.B.2, comment 3 of this document.
• ‘‘you can use nonoxynol 9 for birth control with or without a diaphragm or condom if you have sex with only one partner who is not
infected with HIV and who has no other sexual partners or HIV risk
factors’’.
We discuss this change in sections II.F.3, comment 10 and II.G,
comment 11 of this document.
• ‘‘use a latex condom without nonoxynol 9 if you or your sex partner
has HIV/AIDS, multiple sex partners, or other HIV risk factors’’.
We discuss this change in section II.F.2, comment 9 of this document.
• ‘‘ask a health professional if you have questions about your best
birth control and STD prevention methods’’.
We discuss this change in section II.J.2, comment 15 of this document.
• ‘‘correct use of a latex condom with every sexual act will help reduce the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs from infected partners’’.
• ‘‘when used correctly every time you have sex, latex condoms
greatly reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of catching or spreading
HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
We discuss this change in section II.F.1, comment 8 of this document.
Use of N9 products may increase the risk of HIV and other STDs.
Use of N9 products is associated with an increased risk of HIV.
We discuss this change in section II.I, comment 13 of this document.
We describe and respond to the
comments received in section II of this
document.
II. Comments on the Proposed Rule and
FDA’s Responses
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
A. Should N9 Remain Available as an
Active Ingredient in OTC Vaginal
Contraceptive Drug Products?
(Comment 1) Some comments stated
that N9 vaginal contraceptive drug
products should be removed from the
OTC market or changed from OTC to
prescription status for the following
reasons:
• N9 does not protect against HIV or
STDs.
• N9 causes damage to the vaginal
lining and increases the risk of
contracting HIV due to this vaginal
irritation.
• Many new cases of HIV and STDs
will develop if contraceptives with N9
are available without consultation with
a health professional.
• Consumers who may not see, read,
understand, or follow the advice
contained on the warning labels need to
be protected from the risks of using N9.
They should have to see a health
professional before using products
containing N9.
Some of these comments also suggested
that, alternatively, manufacturers
should be required to reformulate their
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
products with other safe and effective
spermicides or microbicides.
Many other comments stated that N9
products should remain an OTC
contraceptive option for women at low
risk for HIV infection for the following
reasons:
• N9 products are effective in
preventing pregnancy, particularly
when used with a barrier method such
as a condom or diaphragm.
• N9 products are a contraceptive
option for women who cannot tolerate
hormone-based birth control methods.
• N9 products are a contraceptive
option for women at low risk for HIV
and STDs.
• N9 products represent one of the
few methods available for women that
are controlled by women.
• N9 products offer a ‘‘substantial’’
benefit to a ‘‘small but important’’ group
of users.
(Response) FDA does not agree that
vaginal contraceptive drug products
containing N9 should be removed from
the OTC marketplace. As part of FDA’s
review of the safety and effectiveness of
this class of OTC drugs, the Advisory
Review Panel on OTC Contraceptives
and Other Vaginal Drug Products
classified N9 as Category I (safe and
effective) as a spermicide for the
prevention of pregnancy on December
12, 1980 (45 FR 82014 at 82028).
Comments were received following
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
publication of the panel’s report and
additional scientific data became
available. FDA published the proposed
rule on OTC vaginal contraceptive drug
products on February 2, 1995 (60 FR
6892). In that proposed rule, FDA
considered N9 safe as a vaginal
contraceptive; however, data indicated
that its effectiveness in final product
formulations was highly variable.
Therefore, FDA proposed clinical trials
for N9 spermicidal products to validate
their effectiveness in final formulations.
In November 1996, four FDA advisory
committees (Nonprescription Drugs,
Reproductive Health Drugs, Antiviral
Drugs, and Anti-infective Drugs) met to
discuss the type and quality of data
needed to support and ensure the
spermicidal effectiveness of N9 in final
formulations. The advisory committees
concluded that the existing data
provided evidence of some
effectiveness, but they had concerns
about variability in dose, different
formulations, and duration of effect. The
advisory committees recommended that
FDA allow interim marketing of N9
vaginal contraceptive drug products
pending further clinical trials (68 FR
2254 at 2255).
Current data suggest that the number
of women out of 100 who become
pregnant in the first year of typical use
of N9 spermicide drug products is as
follows (Ref. 1):
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
71772
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
• 16 for the diaphragm with
spermicide.
• 16 to 32 (depending on whether the
women have had prior births) for the
cervical cap with spermicide.
• 29 for spermicides alone (gel,
cream, foam, film, suppository).
The number of women who become
pregnant using no contraception is 85
out of 100 (Ref. 1). The Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
(Ref. 2) report that the combined use of
diaphragms with N9 spermicide
prevents approximately 460,000
pregnancies in the United States each
year. It is important to the public health
that consumers have access to multiple
methods of contraception to choose
from that help prevent unplanned
pregnancy.
FDA is currently reviewing newly
published data regarding the efficacy of
N9 containing spermicides (Ref. 3), and
we will publish our conclusions in a
future issue of the Federal Register.
These data are from a clinical trial
which compares the effectiveness and
safety of five spermicides, which
include three gels containing 52.5
milligrams (mg), 100 mg, and 150 mg of
N9 per dose and a film and a
suppository, each containing 100 mg of
N9 per dose. In the meantime, based on
its history of safety and effectiveness,
we have determined that N9 should
remain on the market while we
complete our review. Based on the
information currently available, we have
also determined that women at low risk
for HIV can safely use N9 products for
their contraceptive needs and that the
intervention of a doctor or health care
provider is not necessary.
B. What Issues Were Raised by
Comments That Did Not Support the
Proposed Warning Statements?
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
1. Will Warning Labels Be Seen,
Understood, or Followed?
(Comment 2) Two comments stated
that FDA’s proposed warnings may not
adequately protect consumers against
the health risks posed by N9 products
because consumers may not see, read,
understand, or follow the advice
contained on the warning labels. One of
the comments referred to a study
sponsored by the National Council on
Patient Information and Education
(NCPIE), conducted in 2001, which
surveyed adult consumers and health
care professionals on the selfmedicating behaviors of the American
public. The comment stated that the
survey clearly established that
consumers do not consistently read
caution labels. The comment also
mentioned a 1997 study by ‘‘Sansgiry et
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
al.’’ of industry labeling practices which
stated, according to the comment, that
as the OTC package size increased, the
font size used for the product increased,
except that the font size for warnings
remained constant. The comment stated
that the study also showed that 22
percent of the product packages
examined used smaller than 6-point font
type for warnings. The comment
concluded from this study that
consumers may have difficulty seeing
and reading the N9 warning language.
The second comment stated that many
consumers consider OTC drug products
to be safe and present no risks because
they are available without a
prescription. Thus, consumers may
ignore the product labeling because of
this false impression. The comment
recommended that FDA use consumer
surveys and focus groups to test for
comprehension of the proposed labeling
before publishing a final rule mandating
specific language.
(Response) FDA thinks that the
warning statements for N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products will be
seen, read, understood, and followed by
consumers. We are aware of the studies
cited by the comment, i.e., the Sansgiry,
Cady, and Patil study (Ref. 4), which
described OTC industry labeling
practices at that time, and the NCPIE
study (Ref. 5) that examined the selfmedicating behaviors of the American
public, including what information
consumers seek when reading an OTC
drug product label. These studies
reinforced the need for FDA to improve
the OTC drug product label and also to
enhance educational programs to teach
consumers about the risks and benefits
of OTC drugs. FDA issued new labeling
requirements for OTC drug products on
March 17, 1999 (64 FR 13254). This
labeling regulation, codified in 21 CFR
201.66, requires OTC drug products to
be labeled with a standardized ‘‘Drug
Facts’’ label. The ‘‘Drug Facts’’ label
offers a more structured, organized, and
compact presentation of the product
information, which allows consumers to
process the information with improved
understanding, and provides clear
signals regarding important information.
The new requirements include a 6-point
minimum type size, and bolded type
headings and subheadings. When the
warning requirements in this final rule
for OTC vaginal contraceptive drug
products containing N9 become
effective, all manufacturers will be
required to revise their label using the
‘‘Drug Facts’’ format. Use of the revised
labeling in the ‘‘Drug Facts’’ format will
enable consumers to better read and
understand the information presented
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and apply the information to the safe
and effective use of OTC vaginal
contraceptive drug products.
Additionally, FDA is involved in
various initiatives to encourage
awareness of the safe and effective use
of drugs and the importance of reading
drug labels. FDA provides consumer
articles, public service announcements,
websites, etc., and also partners with
many organizations to promote better
understanding of the risks and benefits
of drug products. For example, in
cooperation with FDA, the Consumer
Healthcare Products Association
(CHPA) and NCPIE’s ‘‘Be MedWise’’
campaign provide information to
consumers on the new OTC drug labels.
2. ‘‘Are the Warnings Supported by the
Scientific Literature?’’
(Comment 3) Three comments stated
that FDA’s proposed warning language
for N9 vaginal contraceptive drug
products implies a link between the use
of N9 and an increased risk of HIV that
is not sufficiently supported by the
scientific literature. These comments
stated that the proposed warnings will
frighten consumers in a manner that
could affect the continued availability of
a safe and effective contraceptive. The
first comment contended that FDA
relies primarily on two studies to
support its position that there is a link
between the use of N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products and an
increased risk of HIV infection as
follows: (1) The Van Damme et al. study
(2002) (Ref. 6) and (2) the Kreiss et al.
study (1992) (Ref. 7). The comment
provided the following reasons why the
Van Damme et al. study should not be
used to support FDA’s proposed
warnings for N9 products:
• Twenty percent of the study
subjects were lost to followup (so the
investigators never determined the HIV
status of these participants).
• The results between the two test
groups (N9 and placebo) were ‘‘barely’’
significant (p=0.047).
• The placebo may have had a
protective effect.
• A much higher number of
unprotected anal sex acts were reported
from one of the study centers (Durban)
where the most HIV seroconversions
(conversions from HIV negative status to
HIV positive status) occurred.
The comment also contended that the
Kreiss et al. study should not be used to
support FDA’s proposed warnings for
N9 products because:
• The study was terminated early
when it was determined that the HIV
seroconversion results became
inconsistent with the hypothesis that N9
has a clinically beneficial effect in
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
preventing HIV. The statistical analysis
of the data at the time the study was
terminated did not support a
statistically significant conclusion that
N9 increased the risk of HIV
transmission.
• The comparator product was
changed midstream, indicating design
problems.
• More women had preexisting
genital ulcers in the N9 test group,
indicating randomization problems.
• The sponge dosage form could raise
safety issues not associated with other
dosage forms.
This comment added that FDA did not
consider the results and conclusions of
two other studies, Roddy et al. (1998)
(Ref. 8) and Richardson et al. (2001)
(Ref. 9). The comment stated that these
studies either support a conclusion
opposite to the Van Damme et al. and
Kreiss et al. studies or weaken the
conclusion that frequent use of N9
vaginal contraceptives increases the risk
of HIV infection from an infected
partner. The comment concluded that
the link between N9 use and an
increased risk of HIV infection is
speculation. The comment requested
that FDA remove the following
proposed warning language that links
N9 use with an increased risk of HIV
infection:
• ‘‘Ask a doctor before use if you have
a new sex partner, multiple sex
partners, or unprotected sex. Frequent
use (more than once a day) of this
product can increase vaginal irritation,
which may increase the risk of getting
the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from
infected partners. Ask a doctor or other
health professional for your best birth
control method.’’
• ‘‘Studies have raised safety
concerns that frequent use (more than
once a day) of products containing
nonoxynol 9 can increase vaginal
irritation, which may increase the risk
of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) or other
STDs from infected partners. Vaginal
irritation may include symptoms such
as burning, itching, or a rash, or you
may not notice any symptoms at all. If
you use these products frequently and/
or have a new sex partner, multiple sex
partners, or unprotected sex, see a
doctor or other health professional for
your best birth control and methods to
prevent STDs.’’
The comment recommended the
following language, which it contended
more accurately reflects the known
science and places the warnings in a
more relevant context:
• ‘‘Ask a doctor before use if you have
frequent sex (more than three times a
day). Frequent use (more than three
times a day) of nonoxynol 9 may
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
increase vaginal irritation, which may
increase the risk of getting the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected
partners. Ask a doctor or other health
professional for your best birth control
method.’’
• ‘‘Studies concerning some
nonoxynol 9 formulations (i.e., gel and
sponge) in high risk populations (i.e.,
prostitutes) have raised very
preliminary safety concerns that
frequent use (more than three times a
day) of products containing nonoxynol
9 can increase vaginal irritation, which
may increase the risk of getting the
AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from
infected partners. Other studies have
shown no such risk for certain
formulations (i.e., nonoxynol 9–
containing film and gel) in these high
risk populations. Vaginal irritation may
include symptoms such as burning,
itching, or a rash, or you may not notice
any symptoms at all. While there is no
clear link between the frequent use of
nonoxynol 9 and the increased risk of
HIV infection or other STDs from
infected partners, if you use these
products frequently, see a doctor or
other health professional for your best
birth control and methods to prevent
STDs.’’
The second comment stated that the
Van Damme et al. study results are
‘‘exploratory’’ and that the study’s
‘‘generalizability’’ is a problem because
the subjects were sex workers and had
highly ‘‘atypical’’ sexual activity. This
comment contended that previous trials
of N9, conducted in sex workers, have
shown conflicting results and, taken
together, do not show a harmful or a
protective effect. The third comment
expressed similar concerns about the
Van Damme study’s generalizability.
(Response) FDA believes that the
proposed warning language, which
implies a link between frequent use of
N9 vaginal contraceptive drug products
and an increased risk of HIV, is
supported by the scientific literature. As
discussed elsewhere in this document,
we are deleting the term ‘‘frequent’’
from the labeling requirements of this
final rule because we believe that if a
woman is at risk of HIV/AIDS, she
should not be using N9 products,
regardless of the frequency of use (see
section J.1 of this document). In the
proposed rule, FDA cited many studies
that demonstrated that daily use of N9
products causes vaginal irritation (i.e.,
inflammatory changes in the epithelial
cells lining the vagina and disruption of
these epithelial cells), and causes
disruption of the vaginal flora (68 FR
2254 at 2254 to 2258). Some studies
suggested that the risk of these adverse
events can be increased by frequent or
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71773
chronic use of N9 products. In general,
the various studies cited in the
proposed rule defined infrequent or low
frequency use as ‘‘use once a day or
less.’’ It appears from these studies that
infrequent use does not result in an
increased rate of epithelial disruption.
Therefore, FDA defined frequent use in
the proposed rule as ‘‘more than once a
day’’ and believes that the scientific
literature supports the statement that
frequent use (more than once a day) can
increase vaginal irritation.
In the proposed rule, FDA discussed
studies that demonstrated that frequent
use of N9 products causes increased
disruption of the vaginal epithelium
which may increase the risk of
transmission of the AIDS virus (HIV).
The most pivotal of these studies is the
Van Damme et al. study (cited at 68 FR
2254 at 2255) (Ref. 6). This was a
randomized, placebo-controlled clinical
trial to assess the effectiveness of a
vaginal gel containing N9 on HIV–1
transmission in female sex workers in
Africa and Thailand, all at high risk for
HIV. The study gel (COL–1492)
contained 52.5 mg N9 (other
constituents included a bioadhesive
carbomer). The placebo gel differed
from COL–1492 in that it did not
contain N9 and had more carbomer. At
enrollment, women received a supply of
study gel (N9 or placebo) and male
condoms to use until the next visit.
Women were asked to return to the
clinic every month for a follow-up visit.
There was no limit on the number of gel
doses that could be used per day. The
primary endpoint of the study was
incident HIV–1 infection. Secondary
objectives included the effectiveness of
this drug in prevention of chlamydial
infection, gonorrhea, trichomoniasis,
and genital ulcer disease, and safety and
acceptability of the gel under situations
of long-term use. The treatment period
was 48 weeks.
A total of 765 women were included
in the primary analysis (376 in the N9
group and 389 in the placebo group) and
563 women completed the 48-week
study. The overall retention rate of the
participants in the study was 71 percent
after 24 weeks and 68 percent after 48
weeks, which is similar to rates
projected by the study investigators for
their sample size (60 percent retention
per year).
Of the 765 women, 59 in the N9 group
and 45 in the placebo group
seroconverted from HIV–1 negative to
HIV–1 positive. Women who used an
N9 vaginal gel had a significantly higher
risk of becoming infected with HIV–1,
compared with women using the
placebo gel (p=0.047). The HIV–1
incidence per 100 women-years was
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
71774
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
14.7 for the N9 group and 10.3 for the
placebo group. This conclusion did not
change when statistical adjustments
were made for differences in the
frequency of vaginal and anal sex not
protected by condoms.
To test the hypothesis of dosedependent toxic effects of N9, the
investigators divided the mean gel use
per working day into three categories
based on tertiles. The investigators
compared HIV–1 incidence per
treatment group and per category of gel
use. HIV–1 incidence increased with
increasing gel use in the N9 group
versus the placebo group. In the N9
group, HIV–1 incidence rose from 8.8
per 100 woman-years in women
reporting mean use of 3.5 or fewer
applicators per day to 30.6 in women
reporting a higher mean daily use
(hazard ratio 3.5; 95% Confidence
Interval (CI) 2.1–5.8; p<0.0001). In the
placebo group, HIV–1 incidence in
those categories was 8.1 and 14.5 per
100 woman-years, respectively (1.8; CI
1.0–3.3, p=0.05). It is important to note
that this analysis simply suggests a dose
response between the amount of gel
used per day and the risk of HIV–1
infection. The data does not support a
conclusion that using less than 3.5
applications of N9 per day is associated
with an incidence risk for HIV–1
infection similar to placebo. Dividing
the data by other methods (e.g., into
quartiles), would identify other amounts
of N9 per day supporting an association
between the amount used and
increasing risk.
The study also investigated the
frequency of N9 use and the incidence
of lesions with epithelial breach, and
whether the risk of HIV transmission
increases with increasing number of
lesions with epithelial breach. They
found that the incidence of lesions with
an epithelial breach rose with increasing
gel use. The increase in incidence of
lesions with an epithelial breach was
seen in both the placebo and N9 groups,
but it happened most rapidly in the N9
group.
FDA finds that one comment’s
concern about certain aspects of the Van
Damme et al. study are valid as follows:
• There was a high loss to followup
rate overall (retention rate was 68
percent at 48 weeks). However, the
study was designed with an assumption
of an annual retention rate of 60
percent.
• There was a higher loss to followup
rate in the N9 group compared to the
placebo group.
• The highest rates of both
seroconversion and retention were
observed at the largest center in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
study (Durban). This center also
reported the highest rate of anal sex.
Although the study was not flawless,
it was a large, well designed,
randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial. Both the treatment
and placebo groups were balanced with
respect to baseline characteristics. Even
with the noted limitations, we believe
that the study is evidence that N9 may
increase the risk of HIV–1 infection in
a population already at increased risk
for HIV–1 infection.
The comment also expressed concerns
about the Kreiss et al. study (Ref. 7) that
we cited in the proposed rule (68 FR
2254 at 2257). In this study, HIV
negative sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya
used either a vaginal sponge containing
1,000 mg N9 or a placebo. Women using
the N9 sponge had a higher conversion
from HIV negative to HIV positive. A
total of 21 women (43 percent) of the N9
group and 19 women (35 percent) of the
placebo group converted from HIV
negative to HIV positive. We
acknowledge the study’s shortcomings,
as noted in the comment. However, we
believe that early termination of the
study for safety reasons (i.e., that the
seroconversion results had become
inconsistent with the hypothesis of
clinically beneficial effects of N9 in
preventing HIV seroconversion) was
ethically appropriate, and suggests an
outcome consistent with the results of
the Van Damme et al. study.
The comment contends that two other
studies, Roddy et al. (Ref. 8) and
Richardson et al. (Ref. 9), support a
conclusion opposite to the Van Damme
et al. and Kreiss et al. studies or weaken
the conclusion that use of N9
spermicide products may increase the
risk of HIV infection from an infected
partner. We do not agree. The Roddy et
al. study was conducted to determine
whether a 70-mg N9 vaginal film
provided protection against HIV,
gonorrhea, or chlamydia. The study
population consisted of 1,170 HIVnegative female sex workers (575 in the
placebo group, 595 in the N9 group)
residing in Cameroon, Africa, who
averaged at least 4 sexual partners per
month. The study results showed no
difference in the rate of HIV
transmission in the N9 group versus the
placebo group (48 vs. 46, respectively),
although the incidence of genital lesions
was slightly higher in the N9 group. The
results from this study, while not
consistent with the data from the Van
Damme et al. study, do not invalidate
the Van Damme et al. study results.
Roddy et al. reported the total number
of sexual acts for placebo and N9 users
but did not report the average number
of sexual acts per day or per week.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
There were 595 study participants in the
N9 group who recorded a total of
147,996 coital acts. The average length
of study followup was 14 months. This
averages out to 1 coital act every 1.7
days. The study participants may not
have used the N9 film often enough to
demonstrate a difference in HIV risk
compared to those using the placebo
product. The results of the Roddy et al.
study do not diminish the importance of
the safety signal observed in the Van
Damme et al. study. We believe that
concerns about an increased risk of HIV
transmission with frequent N9 use
would apply to all products containing
N9, regardless of the formulation. We do
not agree with the comment’s suggestion
that the proposed warnings be revised to
read ‘‘Other studies have shown no such
risk for certain formulations (i.e., N9
film and gel) in these high risk
populations’’.
The Richardson et al. study was
conducted to determine the effect of a
52.5 mg N9 gel on the acquisition of
STDs in HIV negative sex workers in
Kenya. The study enrolled a relatively
small number of subjects (total of 278
women, 139 in the N9 group and 139 in
the placebo group) at only one clinic
site. The sample size and the low extent
of exposure may not have been
sufficient to detect rare events. The
authors stated that women enrolled in
the Richardson et al. study came from
another ongoing prospective cohort
study at the same clinic site. Selection
of subjects from that study population
might have introduced confounding
factors into their study. There was
relatively low frequency of sexual
intercourse and exposure to the test
products (median of twice a week). The
median compliance with product use
was 75 percent in the N9 group and 80
percent in the placebo group (median
compliance was 78 percent; the range
was 0 to 100 percent). However, only 32
percent of the women in the N9 group
and 36 percent of the women in the
placebo group were 100 percent
compliant. It is not clear how reliable
the data collection methods were. The
study did not mention if women kept a
diary of product use and frequency of
sexual intercourse, or if this information
was collected by the study staff during
the follow-up visits. For all of these
reasons, we conclude that this study
cannot be reliably used to support the
comment’s contentions.
In conclusion, FDA does not accept
the first comment’s request to remove
the proposed warning language that
links N9 use with an increased risk of
HIV infection. FDA is providing
information about whether it is safe for
consumers to use these products based
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
on their risk for HIV and STDs. Based
on the available scientific evidence, we
have determined that women should be
advised that use of N9 can cause vaginal
irritation and that use of N9 has been
associated with an increased risk for
HIV transmission in women at high risk
for HIV/AIDS. Use of N9 can result in
irritated and inflamed genital tissue and
may increase a person’s risk of getting
HIV/AIDS if they have sex with an HIV
infected partner. We are, however,
revising the proposed warnings to more
clearly convey the message that N9
spermicides cause vaginal irritation,
may increase the risk of getting HIV
from an infected partner, and should not
be used by women at high risk for HIV/
AIDS. The warnings in § 201.325(b)(2)
and (b)(3) of the proposed rule stated:
• Sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs) alert:
This product does not protect against
HIV/AIDS or other STDs
• Ask a doctor before use if you have
• a new sex partner, multiple sex
partners, or unprotected sex. Frequent
use (more than once a day) of this
product can increase vaginal irritation,
which may increase the risk of
becoming infected with the AIDS virus
(HIV) or other STDs from infected
partners. Ask a doctor or other health
professional for your best birth control
method.
The revised warnings in this final rule
appear under the subheadings ‘‘Sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs) alert,’’ ‘‘Do
not use,’’ and ‘‘When using this
product’’ and state:
Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)
alert: This product does not protect
against HIV/AIDS or other STDs and
may increase the risk of getting HIV
from an infected partner.
Do not use if you or your sex partner
has HIV/AIDS. If you do not know if
you or your sex partner is infected,
choose another form of birth control.
When using this product you may get
vaginal irritation (burning, itching, or a
rash).
We are also revising the additional
labeling information in proposed
§ 201.325(c)(1) (redesignated as
§ 201.325(d)(1) in this final rule) to more
accurately reflect the scientific literature
and to convey the message that N9
spermicides should not be used by
women at risk for HIV. (Rectal use of N9
is discussed later in section II.H,
comment 12 of this document.) The
revised additional labeling information
states:
• ‘‘Studies have raised safety
concerns that products containing the
spermicide nonoxynol 9 can irritate the
vagina and rectum. Sometimes this
irritation has no symptoms. This
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
irritation may increase the risk of getting
HIV/AIDS from an infected partner.’’
3. Is FDA Required To Prove Actual
Causation to Justify the Warnings?
(Comment 4) One comment stated
that the proposed labeling implies a link
between the use of N9 and an increased
risk of HIV infection that is not
sufficiently supported by the scientific
literature. The comment contended that
the link between N9 use and an
increased risk of HIV transmission is
‘‘mere speculation’’ that is not suggested
by a comprehensive review of the
scientific literature. In response to
FDA’s statement that we need not show
actual causation to mandate the
proposed warning, the comment stated
that it disputes a lesser standard unless
FDA can show it will prevent a public
harm. The comment suggested that there
is not a public harm to prevent, so
actual causation must be shown. The
comment further asserted that the proof
to require this warning must be
sufficient to avoid a determination that
the warning language requirement is
arbitrary and capricious under 5 U.S.C.
706, and suggested that FDA has not
provided such proof.
(Response) FDA disagrees with the
comment. Based on a review of the
available data, FDA believes the known
scientific evidence supports its
proposed warnings (see section II.B.2,
comment 3 of this document).
Furthermore, FDA does not need a
causal relationship to be definitely
established to mandate new warnings.
To protect the public health, FDA has
determined that the warnings are
necessary to ensure that these OTC drug
products continue to be safe and
effective for their labeled indications
under ordinary conditions of use as
those terms are defined in the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the act).
The warnings reflect FDA’s conclusion
that there is reasonable evidence of a
causal relation between a clinically
significant hazard and the drug.
Courts have upheld FDA’s authority
to issue regulations requiring label
warnings and other affirmative
disclosures (see, e.g. Cosmetic, Toiletry
and Fragrance Ass’n v. Schmidt, 409 F.
Supp. 57 (D.D.C. 1976), aff’d without
opn., Vic. No. 75–1715 (D.C. Cir.,
August 19, 1977), even in the absence of
a proven cause-and-effect relationship
between product usage and harm (see
Council for Responsible Nutrition v.
Goyan, Civ. No. 80–1124 (D.D.C. August
1, 1980) (see also section III.B of this
document). Mandating the warnings
included in this final rule does not
violate the Administrative Procedure
Act’s prohibition against arbitrary and
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71775
capricious conduct, because FDA’s
action is reasonable based on the
sufficiency of the available data and the
need to protect the public health.
C. Should Women Ask a Doctor Before
Using N9 Products?
(Comment 5) Some comments did not
agree with FDA’s proposed warning
language which advises women to ask a
doctor before using N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products if they have
a new sex partner, multiple sex
partners, or unprotected sex. The
comments questioned the need for
women to consult physicians about the
role of N9 in their pregnancy or STD
prevention strategies. One comment
doubted that the average physician
could provide enough special expertise
or insight about the role for N9 in a
planned sexual encounter with a new
partner to offset the inconvenience,
discomfort, or cost of involving a health
professional. Several comments stated
that it was unclear what a woman
should do before she is able to consult
a physician (e.g., avoid sex, use
alternative methods). Some comments
contended that women should be given
enough information in the labeling to
empower them to act directly, without
a health professional intermediary.
These comments recommended
replacing ‘‘Ask a doctor before use’’
with explicit statements such as
‘‘Women who may be at risk of HIV and
who plan to use the product more than
once a day should consider another
form of birth control’’ or ‘‘If you use
these products more often than once a
day and/or have a new sex partner,
multiple sex partners, or unprotected
sex you should consider another form of
birth control’’. The comments suggested
that adding a clarifying statement for
women at low risk and a statement that
reinforces the use of latex condoms is
preferable to having consumers consult
a physician for this information.
(Response) FDA agrees with the
comments that questioned the need for
women to have to consult with a
physician before using N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products if they have
a new sex partner, multiple sex
partners, or unprotected sex. We try to
provide consumers with the appropriate
information on the OTC drug product
label to make informed decisions on the
use of these products. We believe that,
by revising the warning language under
‘‘Ask a doctor before use if you have’’
and placing it under the subheadings
‘‘Do not use’’ and ‘‘When using this
product, ’’ consumers will be able to
make appropriate decisions without
consulting a physician. We consider this
information particularly important for
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
71776
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
women who do not see a physician
regularly, who will not consult a
physician due to the expense, or who
cannot get an appointment or
consultation with a physician in a
timely manner. Therefore, as discussed
in section II.B.2, comment 3 of this
document, we are revising the warnings
under ‘‘Ask a doctor before use if you
have’’ and placing them under the
subheadings ‘‘Do not use’’ and ‘‘When
using this product.’’
We are also revising the additional
labeling information proposed in
§ 201.325(c) to include more
information about the use and safety of
N9, so women will not have to consult
a physician before use. We do not want
to discourage consumers from speaking
with physicians or other health care
providers at any time about important
health issues such as birth control and
STD prevention. Therefore, we are
including a statement in the additional
labeling information that women should
ask a doctor or other health professional
for advice if they choose. The revised
additional labeling statements are
discussed in sections II.B.2, comment 3;
II.F.1, comment 8; II.F.2, comment 9;
II.F.3, comment 10; II.G, comment 11;
and II.J.2, comment 15 of this document.
D. Where Will the Warnings Appear in
the Labeling?
(Comment 6) Several comments
addressed the placement of the
proposed warning statements on the
OTC package. The comments requested
that FDA require prominent placement
of the proposed warning statements on
both the outer carton and package insert
to warn consumers most effectively.
One comment recommended using large
and bold font to help attract the
consumer’s attention and encourage
reading of the package insert.
(Response) FDA is requiring that the
warning statements discussed in section
II.B.2, comment 3 of this document
(under the subheadings ‘‘Do not use’’
and ‘‘When using this product’’), the
warning statements discussed in section
II.H., comment 12 of this document
(‘‘For vaginal use only’’ and ‘‘Not for
rectal (anal) use’’), and the warning
statement under the subheading ‘‘Stop
use and ask a doctor if’’ (under
§ 201.325(b)(4) in the proposed rule (68
FR 2254 at 2262)), appear on the outside
container or wrapper of the retail
package, or on the immediate container
label if there is no outside container or
wrapper, in the Drug Facts labeling
format, in accordance with
§ 201.66(c)(7). We also proposed
additional labeling information in
§ 201.325(c) that could be placed either
on the outside container or wrapper of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
the retail package, under the ‘‘Other
information’’ section of the Drug Facts
labeling, in accordance with
§ 201.66(c)(7), or in a package insert. In
this final rule, the revised condom usage
statement, ‘‘when used correctly every
time you have sex, latex condoms
greatly reduce but do not eliminate the
risk of catching or spreading HIV, the
virus that causes AIDS.’’ must be
located in the Drug Facts labeling under
the heading ‘‘Other information’’ on the
outside container or wrapper of the
retail package. The rest of the additional
labeling information now located in
§ 201.325(d) of this final rule can be
located on the outside container or
wrapper of the retail package, under the
‘‘Other information’’ section of the Drug
Facts labeling in accordance with
§ 201.66(c)(7), or in a package insert. In
instances where the manufacturer
chooses to provide a package insert for
the additional information required in
§ 201.325(d) of this final rule, FDA
recommends that a bolded statement
such as ‘‘before using this product read
the enclosed package insert for complete
directions and information’’ be included
on the outside container or wrapper
labeling to alert consumers and
encourage reading of the package insert.
E. Where Will the Condom Usage
Statement Appear in the Labeling?
(Comment 7) Several comments
requested that the proposed condom
message, ‘‘Correct use of a latex condom
with every sexual act will help reduce
the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV)
and other STDs from infected partners,’’
should directly follow the STD alert on
the outside container or wrapper as well
as appear in a package insert so that
consumers are immediately advised that
STD/HIV protection is available OTC.
(Response) FDA agrees with the
comments that information about HIV/
STD protection (i.e., condom use) is
important information and is now
requiring that it be located on the
outside container or wrapper in close
proximity to the STD alert and other
pertinent warnings. Because the
information is not a warning, the
statement appears in the Drug Facts
labeling, under the heading ‘‘Other
information.’’ In addition, we are
revising the condom usage statement
(see section II.F, comment 8 in this
document).
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
F. What Were the Comments on
Condoms, Sexual Lubricants, and
Barrier Methods?
1. Do Warnings Apply to Condoms and
Sexual Lubricants?
(Comment 8) Some comments
questioned whether FDA’s proposed
warnings apply to the labeling of
condoms lubricated with N9. Several
comments noted that women using
condoms and sexual lubricants
containing N9 may have a risk similar
to those women using vaginal
contraceptives and so both groups need
to receive the same warnings. Some of
these comments stated that FDA should
propose warning language similar to the
proposed warnings for vaginal
contraceptive products for condoms and
sexual lubricants containing N9,
because of the substantial public health
risk posed by N9 containing products
when used rectally.
(Response) This final rule requiring
warnings for all OTC vaginal
contraceptives/spermicides containing
N9 applies to drug products. It does not
apply to condoms lubricated with N9,
which are primarily regulated as
medical devices (not drugs). Through
rulemaking, spermicidal condoms were
classified as Class II medical devices (21
CFR 884.5310) and, as such, FDA’s
Center for Devices and Radiological
Health (CDRH) has primary jurisdiction
over their regulation.
Although this final rule does not
apply to condoms lubricated with N9, it
does contain information for consumers
about using condoms as a method to
help reduce the risk of becoming
infected with the AIDS virus (HIV) and
other STDs. In the January 16, 2003,
proposed rule, FDA discussed the
public health benefit of such
information and proposed the following
condom usage statement for spermicides
containing N9: ‘‘Correct use of a latex
condom with every sexual act will help
reduce the risk of getting the AIDS virus
(HIV) and other STDs from infected
partners’’ (see 68 FR 2254 at 2258 to
2259 and 2262). Subsequently, FDA
reviewed the labeling of condoms (with
and without N9) and issued a revised
draft guidance (Ref. 10) on condom
labeling. Therefore, FDA revised the
proposed condom usage statement to be
consistent with the statement it
recommended in this new guidance.
The new revised condom usage
statement (in § 201.325(c) in this final
rule) reads: ‘‘[bullet] when used
correctly every time you have sex, latex
condoms greatly reduce, but do not
eliminate the risk of catching or
spreading HIV, the virus that causes
AIDS.’’
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Vaginal moisturizers and vaginal
sexual lubricants are currently being
evaluated under the OTC drug review
regulatory process. FDA issued a call for
data notice on December 31, 2003 (68
FR 75585), requesting safety and
effectiveness data on various products,
including vaginal moisturizers and
vaginal lubricants. FDA will publish its
findings in a future issue of the Federal
Register.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
2. Are Condoms Lubricated With N9
Safe to Use?
(Comment 9) Some comments stated
that labeling products containing N9
with a warning that usage promotes the
transmission of HIV or other STDs may
cause sexually active individuals to
question whether or not to use a
condom at all. One comment expressed
concern that after reading FDA’s
proposed warnings, consumers would
perceive that condoms lubricated with
N9 were not safe and would use nothing
rather than use a condom containing
N9. Therefore, several comments stated
that the labeling should remind
consumers that N9 is still effective in
reducing unwanted pregnancies and
that we should continue to endorse the
use of spermicidal condoms. One of the
comments stated that condoms
containing N9 provide important
consumer and public health care
benefits, because N9 in condoms is
intended to provide a secondary means
of pregnancy prevention if the condom
is used incorrectly or breaks.
Other comments were not supportive
of N9 condoms. One comment requested
that FDA take action to address the
health risks posed by N9 as an additive
to condoms and sexual lubricants by
withdrawing them from the
marketplace. This comment stated that
N9 is not necessary to the function of
lubricants and, in the case of condoms,
N9 is not necessary as an additive or
lubricant to their function as a physical
barrier against pregnancy and disease.
Several comments stated that the correct
and consistent use of condoms provides
excellent protection against pregnancy
and HIV even without the addition of
N9. One comment concluded that since
N9 lubricated condoms and sexual
lubricants containing N9 offer no
proven benefit to any user group, and
pose substantial risks to some users, the
risk should be eliminated rather than
relying on a ‘‘labeling’’ solution. One
comment suggested revising the
proposed condom statement to read
‘‘Correct use of a (dry) latex condom, (or
a silicone lubricated latex condom, but
NOT a condom lubricated with N9) with
every vaginal sexual act will help
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
reduce the risk of transmitting the AIDS
virus (HIV) and other STDs.’’
(Response) As discussed in section
II.F.1, comment 8 of this document, this
rulemaking does not apply to condoms
that contain N9. It does, however,
provide for information to be added to
labeling to inform consumers about
using condoms as a method to help
reduce the risk of becoming infected
with the AIDS virus (HIV) and other
STDs. In section II.F.1, comment 8 of
this document, FDA discussed a
condom usage statement to encourage
the use of condoms as a method to help
reduce the risk of becoming infected
with the AIDS virus (HIV) and other
STDs as proposed in the proposed rule.
In the revised draft guidance on condom
labeling (Ref. 10) discussed previously,
FDA recommended the additional
warning ‘‘if you or your partner has
HIV/AIDS, or you do not know if you
or your partner is infected, you should
choose a latex condom without N-9’’.
Because FDA wishes to provide
consistent information to consumers
regarding products that contain N9, we
are including a new labeling statement
in § 201.325(d)(3) for vaginal
contraceptive drug products containing
N9 to read as follows: ‘‘[bullet] use a
latex condom without nonoxynol 9 if
you or your sex partner has HIV/AIDS,
multiple sex partners, or other HIV risk
factors.’’
3. How Do Warnings Apply to N9
Products Used With Barrier Methods?
(Comment 10) Some comments were
concerned with how FDA’s proposed
warnings apply to consumers using an
N9 spermicide product with barrier
methods. The comments pointed out
that FDA’s proposed warning language
for vaginal contraceptive drug products
containing N9 applies to spermicide use
alone, and not to concurrent use of N9
with female barrier methods. The
comments stated concerns about how
consumers who use N9 products with
female barrier methods (such as
diaphragms and cervical caps) would
apply FDA’s proposed warning language
to their use. Several comments stated
that consumers are currently advised
(e.g., in product labeling or by
physicians) to use spermicide with
diaphragms and cervical caps to
improve contraceptive effectiveness and
to insert more spermicide (without
removal of the diaphragm or cervical
cap) if repeat intercourse occurs. The
comments stated that FDA’s proposed
labeling does not provide clear advice
for women (particularly those at low
risk for HIV) who use these barrier
methods. These comments contend that
there is not enough data about the
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71777
effectiveness of diaphragms or caps
without additional spermicide to
recommend discontinuation of the
spermicide. Some comments also stated
that FDA’s proposed warning language
may deter promotion and use of female
barrier methods that require additional
spermicide. One of these comments
stated that a recent report from the CDC
(Ref. 2) estimates that N9 used together
with diaphragms prevents 460,000
pregnancies each year. The comment
stated that the proposed warning
language would have a harmful effect on
women’s health by increasing
unintended pregnancies and even STDs
among women who would otherwise
safely use cervical barriers plus N9, but
might switch to a less effective method
or no method at all. Another comment
stated that clinicians may advise lowrisk clients not to use N9 as an adjunct
to diaphragm use, which may result in
more unintended pregnancies. One
comment suggested that FDA advise
consumers in the labeling that the
studies that have found risks associated
with the use of N9 did not study the
products with a diaphragm or cervical
cap.
(Response) Currently, FDA approved
directions for use for cervical caps (Ref.
11) and diaphragms (21 CFR 884.5350)
specify use of a spermicide with these
devices. FDA believes that women using
cervical caps or diaphragms with N9
products are exposed to the same risks
as women who use N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products alone
because of the nature of the risk. The
warning and other labeling information
statements that are required by this final
rule will inform women how best to use
N9 spermicidal jellies and creams with
barrier contraceptive methods.
FDA agrees with the comments that
women at low risk for HIV should be
able to safely use barrier methods along
with N9 products and should not be
advised to change from a barrier
contraceptive method. There have been
several studies over the years of cervical
caps and diaphragms using N9 that have
shown minimal irritation to the vagina
and cervical mucosa (Refs. 12, 13, and
14). It is important to note that these
were contraceptive studies among
women in stable, monogamous
relationships and that typical subjects
did not use the devices multiple times
a day. In section II.G, comment 11 of
this document, we discuss labeling
revisions that advise women at low risk
for HIV that N9 products continue to be
safe for contraception for them.
Accordingly, FDA is also including
barrier method and condom users at low
risk for HIV in these statements.
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
71778
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
G. Is N9 Safe for Women at Low Risk for
HIV/AIDS and STDs?
(Comment 11) A number of comments
stated that women at low risk for HIV
and STDs should continue to use N9
spermicides as a contraceptive option.
One comment stated that some women
who use N9 containing vaginal
contraceptive drug products for birth
control may face a different (lower) STD
risk profile than the women studied in
the clinical trials, who were at a higher
risk for HIV infection. The comment
stated that the proposed warnings might
exert a harmful net effect on women’s
health by increasing unintended
pregnancy and STDs among women
who would otherwise use N9 products
safely, but might switch to less effective
methods or no method at all because of
the warnings. The comment urged that
the data need to be properly
extrapolated to women at lower risk for
HIV who now use N9 products to
successfully prevent pregnancy.
Another comment stated that until FDA
has additional data on the safety of N9
in low risk settings, women currently
using N9 containing spermicides for
birth control should continue to do so.
Similarly, some comments stated that
women at high risk for HIV infection
should not use N9 products for
contraception, but that these products
should remain a contraceptive option
for women at low risk. These comments
stated that if a woman is not at high risk
for HIV (because she is in a mutually
monogamous relationship with a HIV
negative partner), then use of N9
products poses less of a safety hazard.
Thus, the comments contended that
women at low risk for HIV could safely
use N9 products multiple times in a
single day.
One comment stated that FDA should
qualify the warning language regarding
‘‘frequent use’’ for women who are at no
or low risk for HIV. The comment
suggested that FDA add the following
qualifying statements to the labeling:
‘‘Women at low risk of HIV (i.e., those
in a mutually monogamous relationship
with an HIV negative partner) can safely
use nonoxynol 9 (with or without a
diaphragm) on multiple intercourse
occasions in a single day. Frequent use
of nonoxynol 9 is only problematic for
women exposed to HIV and other
STDs.’’ A similar comment stated that
FDA must carefully word the warnings
to provide consumers with the ability to
accurately assess the risks associated
with the product’s use.
(Response) FDA agrees that many
women who use N9 vaginal
contraceptive and spermicide drug
products containing N9 have lower STD
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
and HIV risk profiles than the women
studied in some of the clinical trials
discussed in the proposed rule (68 FR
2254) (e.g., the Van Damme et al. study).
We also agree that frequent use of N9
products poses no risk of HIV
transmission for an HIV negative
woman who is in a mutually
monogamous relationship with an HIV
negative partner. We believe that a
woman in such a relationship would not
suffer any harm, other than incurring
vaginal irritation or epithelial lesions,
from frequent use of N9. Accordingly,
we are revising the additional labeling
information proposed in § 201.325(c)(1)
(redesignated as § 201.325(d)(2) in this
final rule) to include a new statement
advising women that they can continue
to use N9 vaginal contraceptive and
spermicide drug products if they are at
low risk for HIV. The statement reads:
‘‘[bullet] you can use nonoxynol 9 for
birth control with or without a
diaphragm or condom if you have sex
with only one partner who is not
infected with HIV and who has no other
sexual partners or HIV risk factors.’’
H. Is N9 Safe for Rectal Use?
(Comment 12) Ten comments urged
FDA to require a warning against the
rectal use of vaginal contraceptive drug
products containing N9. This is because
N9 causes serious damage to the rectal
epithelium that may increase the risk of
getting HIV or other STDs. The
comments stated that although the
products are designed for vaginal
contraceptive use, they are routinely
used for lubrication and (mistakenly) for
protection against STDs during anal
intercourse. The comments stated that
these products are used rectally not only
by the male homosexual population, but
also by heterosexual couples who
engage in both vaginal and anal
intercourse. Two comments cited survey
studies (Refs. 15 and 16) showing that
the routine use of these products within
the homosexual male population
continues, due to the prevailing
misperception that N9 protects against
infection by sexually transmitted
pathogens. Gross et al. (Ref. 15)
surveyed 3,093 gay men from 6 U.S.
cities who reported having anal
intercourse during the previous 6
months. Of the 2,953 men in the study
who used lubricants during anal
intercourse, 41 percent actively sought
N9 containing products. In another
survey study conducted in San
Francisco and Oakland in 2001 by
Mansergh et al. (Ref. 16), 41 percent (79)
of 193 men who had anal sex with men
during the previous year used an N9
product without a condom. The men
stated that they believed that N9
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
provided some protection against HIV
transmission. The comment stressed
that these data were collected after the
CDC and the San Francisco Department
of Health issued warnings about the
dangers of using N9 rectally.
In further support of warnings against
rectal use of N9, the comments referred
to several studies in animals (Refs. 17
and 18) and one study in humans (Ref.
19) that showed that rectal application
of N9 products causes damage to the
cells lining the rectum. The comments
stated that this damage may
compromise a barrier that protects
against viral and bacterial infection,
thereby increasing the risk of HIV
transmission. One comment suggested
the following warning: ‘‘Products
containing Nonoxynol–9 should never
be used rectally; to do so may
substantially increase one’s risk of
contracting HIV from an infected
partner.’’ Another comment requested
that a warning against rectal use be
placed on the outer carton as well as in
the package insert.
(Response) FDA agrees that products
containing N9 should not be used
rectally. The studies provided by the
comments show that the rectal use of N9
damages the rectal epithelium in both
animals and humans (Refs. 17, 18, and
19). One study in mice (Ref. 17) showed
that pretreating the rectums of the mice
with 2-percent N9 or with spermicide
products containing N9 before
inoculation with herpes simplex virus 2
(HSV–2) increased the likelihood of
infection and shortened the time until
infection. In this study, the rectal
epithelium appeared to be repaired by 1
hour. The investigators stated that
although they chose to use HSV–2, the
results could be generalized to HIV
transmission in humans because mouse
and human epithelia are
morphologically similar and because the
same type of target cells of HIV,
mononuclear blood cells, are present in
the connective tissue and become more
numerous after tissue damage. A study
in monkeys (Ref. 18) investigated the
effect of multiple applications of a 4percent N9 product, placebo gel, or no
product in three groups of monkeys.
Each group receiving test product or
placebo gel got 1 daily intrarectal
application for 3 consecutive days, at 24
hour intervals. Before each treatment,
animals were given a saline
(pretreatment) rectal lavage. Test
product was recovered by rectal lavage
15 minutes after administration.
Examination of rectal lavage samples
indicated an increase in the presence of
epithelial cells and sheets of epithelium
15 minutes after N9 application, as
compared with placebo gel and no-
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
product groups. The investigators noted
that 1 day after the first exposure,
epithelial sloughing was no longer
evident, suggesting that repair had
occurred rapidly. However, the
investigators noted the continued
presence of sloughed epidermal sheets
24 hours after repeated product
application, indicating a cumulative
effect of N9 on rectal tissues.
In a small study in humans, Phillips
et al. (Ref. 19) investigated the effects of
rectal application of two OTC products
containing 2-percent and 1-percent N9,
respectively, and two control
formulations (not containing N9) in four
subjects (three men, one woman). The
experimental procedures were selfadministered. After a baseline saline
rectal lavage, the four formulations were
evaluated by placing each test
formulation in the rectum for 15
minutes via a syringe, at a minimum of
72 hours between test formulations.
After 15 minutes and again 8 to 10
hours later, rectal lavage was performed.
The investigators showed that the rectal
lavage collected 15 minutes after N9
application revealed sheets of
epithelium.
Sheets of rectal epithelium were not
present in lavage fluid collected 8 to 12
hours later, or after treatment with
control formulations. The authors
concluded that N9 caused rapid
exfoliation of the rectal epithelium in
humans, which is likely to make users
more susceptible to HIV infection.
Recently, Phillips et al. (Ref. 20)
studied the effects of rectal use of an
OTC vaginal contraceptive drug product
containing 2-percent N9 in 18 human
subjects. Thirteen of the study
participants underwent rectal
evaluation at baseline and then at 15
minutes or at 2 hours after N9 treatment.
The remaining study participants
underwent rectal evaluation at 8 hours
after treatment. A physician applied the
test formulation and did the rectal
evaluation, which included biopsies as
well as lavage. The investigators
observed sheets of epithelium in lavage
specimens collected at 15 minutes after
N9 treatment. They observed less
material in specimens collected at 2
hours, but what they collected appeared
to be degraded cells and bacteria. In
specimens collected at 8 hours there
was no evidence of cellular material.
Similarly, biopsies collected at 15
minutes appeared to be different from
baseline biopsies; the epithelial tissue
appeared missing or separated from the
underlying submucosa. At 2 and 8 hours
after treatment, the epithelium appeared
similar to the baseline specimens,
suggesting that the epithelium can
repair itself within 2 hours. The
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
investigators concluded that N9 use
should be avoided during anal sex,
because the rectal epithelium, which is
rapidly exfoliated after a single use of 2percent N9, protects HIV target cells in
the submucosa from HIV infection.
We conclude that these data
demonstrate that N9 is an irritant to
cells lining the rectum. The rectal
epithelial damage that occurs with N9
exposure could increase the risk of
getting HIV from an infected partner.
Furthermore, a one-time rectal
application of N9 is sufficient to cause
rapid sloughing of extensive areas of the
rectal epithelium. Accordingly, FDA is
requiring a warning to inform users that
these products should not be used
rectally. This warning is required to be
prominently displayed on the outside
container or wrapper of the retail
package or the immediate container
label if there is no outside container or
wrapper, in accordance with the
requirements of § 201.66(c). The
warning states: ‘‘Not for rectal (anal)
use’’ [in bold type]. This warning
follows the warning that reads ‘‘For
vaginal use only’’ [in bold type]. In
addition, as discussed in section II.B.2,
comment 3 of this document, we are
revising the additional labeling
proposed in § 201.325(c)(1) to convey
the message that studies show that N9
can irritate the vagina and rectum and
that this may increase the risk of getting
HIV/AIDS from an infected partner.
71779
warning, which we retain, that N9 does
not protect against HIV or other STDs.
J. What Issues Did Other Comments
Discuss?
1. Why Did FDA Define Frequent Use of
N9 as ‘‘More Than Once a Day’’?
(Comment 14) Many comments
addressed the definition of ‘‘frequent
use’’ in the proposed warning language
for N9 containing vaginal contraceptive
drug products. FDA recommended that
‘‘frequent use’’ be defined as ‘‘more than
once a day.’’ Several comments stated
that this definition is reasonable. One
comment pointed out that many normal
men and women from ‘‘middle
America,’’ not just prostitutes, have sex
several times a day with their partners,
and these consumers need to be
protected from the risks of using N9.
Other comments stated that FDA’s
rationale for proposing ‘‘frequent use’’
as ‘‘more than once a day’’ is unclear.
One comment contended that in the Van
Damme et al. study (Ref. 6), in which
investigators concluded that there was a
statistically significant increase in the
risk of HIV infection from infected
partners, N9 gel use was ‘‘more than 3.5
times a day.’’ The comment stated that
when the product was used less
frequently than 3.5 times a day, there
was no difference in risk of HIV
transmission between the N9 and
placebo users.
Therefore, the comment stated that
I. Does N9 Use Increase the Risk of STDs the definition of frequent use should be
Other Than HIV?
changed to ‘‘no more than 3 times a
day.’’ One comment contended that in
(Comment 13) Two comments
contended that there is no evidence that the Van Damme et al. study, subjects
averaged 3.6 coital acts a day, with a
N9 increases the risk of getting other
mean of 70 sexual acts a month, which
STDs, such as Neisseria gonorrhea
(gonorrhea) and Chlamydia trachomatis is atypical of the sexual activity for the
majority of women worldwide. Some
(chlamydia). The comments asked FDA
comments questioned whether the
to delete all referrals to a possible
increased risk of getting STDs other than results for commercial sex workers in
HIV in its proposed warnings for vaginal Africa and Thailand can be reasonably
extrapolated to the general U.S.
contraceptive drug products containing
population and questioned how the
N9.
(Response) FDA agrees. While the Van proposed definition of frequent use,
Damme et al. study (Ref. 6) suggested
‘‘more than once a day’’ was
that frequent use of N9 increased the
extrapolated from the study data.
Other comments claimed that
risk of HIV infection compared with use
frequent use, defined as ‘‘more than
of placebo in the population studied, it
once a day,’’ overstates the risk for many
did not show sufficient evidence of an
women and seems very restrictive. One
increased risk of gonorrhea or
comment proposed that women be
chlamydia infection. FDA is not aware
informed that low frequency use of N9
of evidence suggesting a link between
N9 use and increased risk of STDs other products has not been shown to increase
HIV infection rates, though it may
than HIV at this time. Accordingly, we
are revising the warnings for N9 vaginal increase vaginal irritation. Another
comment stated that if a woman is not
contraceptive and spermicide drug
at risk for HIV, then frequent use of N9
products to delete any reference to a
poses no additional hazard. The
possible increased risk of getting STDs
comment proposed that women at low
other than HIV when N9 is used by
risk for HIV could safely use N9 several
people at risk for these infections.
times in a single day.
However, this does not affect the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
71780
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
(Response) FDA proposed to define
frequent use as ‘‘more than once a day’’
because studies cited in the proposed
rule (68 FR 2254 at 2257 to 2258)
showed that if N9 is used more than
once a day, the risk of vaginal irritation
and epithelial lesions increases. When
this occurs, the risk of HIV infection
from infected partners increases
according to studies discussed in the
proposed rule (68 FR 2254 at 2258). The
one comment erroneously concludes
from the Van Damme et al. study that
the risk was only present if women used
N9 more than 3.5 times per day. As
noted previously, the investigators
analyzed dose response by dividing N9
use into categories based on tertiles. The
use category of greater than 3.5 times
per day identified the lower limit of the
upper tertile. The analysis does not
identify a dose below which there is not
an increased risk. We are not aware of
any available data to assist us in
identifying a dose of N9 where there is
no increased risk for HIV–1 infection in
a susceptible population. Because of the
nature of the risk, we believe that if a
woman is at risk for HIV/AIDS, she
should not be using N9 products,
regardless of the frequency of use.
In this final rule, we are eliminating
references to ‘‘frequent use’’ and
revising the warning statements as
described in section II.B.2, comment 3
of this document. We also agree with
the comments that if a woman is not at
risk for HIV, then frequent use of N9
poses no additional hazard of HIV
infection. Thus, women at low risk for
HIV can use N9 for birth control, with
or without a diaphragm or condom,
regardless of frequency. Accordingly,
we are revising the labeling information
to include a statement for women at low
risk for HIV/AIDS (see section II.G,
comment 11 of this document). It is also
important to note that as explained in
the response to section II.B.2, comment
3 of this document, the comment
regarding risk only being present if
women used N9 more than 3.5 times a
day is erroneous.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
2. Should ‘‘Pharmacist’’ or ‘‘Health Care
Provider’’ Be Included on the Label?
(Comment 15) Some comments
requested that the proposed warnings
that begin with the words ‘‘Ask a
doctor’’ and ‘‘Stop use and ask a doctor’’
be revised to include ‘‘health care
provider,’’ because consumers receive
health information from providers other
than doctors. Other comments suggested
that FDA include the term
‘‘pharmacists’’ in the labeling because
pharmacists are the most accessible
health providers for consumers.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
(Response) In this final rule, we
revised the warnings proposed after the
subheading ‘‘Ask a doctor before use if
you have’’ and moved them to after the
subheadings ‘‘Do not use’’ and ‘‘When
using this product.’’ Therefore, whether
the subheading states ‘‘Ask a doctor
before use’’ or ‘‘Ask a health care
provider before use’’ is moot. Regarding
the use of the terms ‘‘doctor’’ and
‘‘health care provider’’ in the
subheadings ‘‘Ask a doctor before use if
you have’’ and ‘‘Stop use and ask a
doctor if,’’ FDA addressed this issue in
the final rule for labeling of OTC human
drugs (64 FR 13254 at 13261 to 13262).
FDA acknowledged that in addition to
physicians, other licensed professionals
play an important role in delivering
clinical services directly to consumers.
FDA decided not to endeavor to list
each specific practitioner who is
licensed and qualified and decided that
‘‘doctor’’ is sufficiently broad and
inclusive for this warning. Nonetheless,
we are including in the ‘‘Other
information’’ statements in § 201.325(d)
of this final rule, a statement that
contains the term ‘‘health professional’’
and advises women to ask a ‘‘health
professional’’ if they have questions
about their birth control and STD
prevention methods. The statement
reads: ‘‘[bullet] ask a health professional
if you have questions about your best
birth control and STD prevention
methods’’.
3. What Does ‘‘Unprotected Sex’’ Mean?
(Comment 16) Several comments
questioned use of the words
‘‘unprotected sex’’ in the proposed
warning language. The comments asked
FDA to clarify whether ‘‘unprotected
sex’’ means sex without a condom or
sex without birth control.
The comments contended that the
words ‘‘unprotected sex’’ are confusing
in the proposed ‘‘Other information’’
statement ‘‘if you use these products
frequently and/or have a new sex
partner, multiple sex partners, or
unprotected sex, see a doctor or other
health professional for your best birth
control and methods to prevent STDs’’
because sex with N9 is not unprotected
sex. One comment recommended using
the words ‘‘unprotected vaginal
intercourse.’’ Another comment
recommended replacing ‘‘unprotected
sex’’ with the phrase ‘‘sex without
condoms.’’
(Response) FDA agrees that the
wording ‘‘unprotected sex’’ could be
clearer. As discussed in sections II.B.2.,
comment 3, II.C., comment 5, II.F.2.,
comment 9, II.F.3., comment 10, II.G.,
comment 11 and II.J.2., comment 15 of
this document, FDA revised the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
wording of the warnings and ‘‘Other
information’’ statements and the words
‘‘unprotected sex’’ are no longer used.
4. What Does the Word ‘‘Irritation’’
Mean When Referring To ‘‘Vaginal
Irritation’’ in the Warning Language?
(Comment 17) Two comments
recommended that FDA not use the
term ‘‘irritation’’ when referring to
‘‘vaginal irritation’’ in the warning
language. The comments stated that
epithelial disruption and inflammation
can occur in the absence of perceived
symptoms of irritation. Therefore,
women who do not perceive what they
believe is ‘‘irritation’’ might mistakenly
believe they are safe from N9 hazards.
The comments suggested that the
proposed warning language (‘‘Frequent
use (more than once a day) of this
product may increase vaginal irritation,
which may increase the risk of getting
the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from
infected partners’’) be revised to read
‘‘Frequent use of this product (more
than once a day) can damage the cells
lining the vagina, a condition that may
increase one’s risk of becoming infected
with HIV or other STDs if exposed to an
infected partner.’’
(Response) FDA understands the
comments’ concerns, but considers the
term ‘‘irritation’’ the proper term to use
in the warning language. This term is
used throughout the scientific literature
to describe the effects of N9 on the
vaginal epithelia. Because ‘‘irritation’’ is
also used widely in educational
literature written for consumers, we
believe that this term has more meaning
for consumers than ‘‘damage to the cells
lining the vagina.’’ We recognize that
vaginal irritation may be asymptomatic;
therefore, to protect women at risk for
HIV, we advise them in § 201.325(b) in
this final rule not to use N9
contraceptive products at all. We are
also including in the ‘‘Other
information’’ statements in § 201.325(d)
of this final rule a statement that advises
women that sometimes this irritation
has no symptoms.
5. Should Warnings Be Printed in Both
English and Spanish?
(Comment 18) One comment stated
that it would be helpful to have
warnings in Spanish as well as English
on the package label and the package
insert, with toll-free numbers and/or
internet websites so that consumers may
obtain additional data or clarification.
(Response) FDA allows manufacturers
to print their package label and labeling
in languages other than English.
However, manufacturers must adhere to
certain requirements in 21 CFR
201.15(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3). Thus,
FDA permits a dual label, e.g., a
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
complete English label can be
accompanied with a complete label in
Spanish, side by side. A package insert
can be printed in English on one side,
and Spanish on the other. Also,
manufacturers may include toll-free
numbers and internet websites in
product labeling. If a manufacturer
wants to include this type of
information within the Drug Facts box,
it must be done in accordance with
§ 201.66(c)(9).
III. FDA’s Final Conclusions on
Warnings and Other Labeling
Information for OTC Vaginal
Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug
Products Containing N9
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
A. Labeling Requirements
FDA is amending part 201 (21 CFR
part 201) by adding § 201.325 entitled
‘‘Over-the-counter drugs for vaginal
contraceptive and spermicide use
containing nonoxynol 9 as the active
ingredient; required warnings and
labeling information.’’ This section will
require new warnings and other labeling
information for all OTC vaginal
contraceptive and spermicide drug
products containing N9 as the active
ingredient, whether marketed under a
New Drug Application (NDA) or the
ongoing OTC drug review. The required
warnings must be prominently
displayed on the outside container or
wrapper of the retail package, or the
immediate container label if there is no
outside container or wrapper, in
accordance with the requirements of
§ 201.66(c), FDA’s labeling regulation
(Drug Facts) for OTC drug products.
FDA is requiring that the following new
warnings be added to the labeling of all
marketed OTC vaginal contraceptive/
spermicide drug products containing
N9:
1. Under the heading ‘‘Warnings’’ the
warning ‘‘Not for rectal (anal) use’’ [in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
bold type]’’ will follow the warning
‘‘For vaginal use only’’ [in bold type].
2. Under the heading ‘‘Warnings’’ the
warning ‘‘Sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs) alert [in bold type]: This product
does not [this word in bold type] protect
against HIV/AIDS or other STDs and
may increase the risk of getting HIV
from an infected partner’’.
3. Under the subheading ‘‘Do not
use,’’ the warning ‘‘Do not use [in bold
type] if you or your sex partner has HIV/
AIDS. If you do not know if you or your
sex partner is infected, choose another
form of birth control.’’
4. Under the subheading ‘‘When using
this product,’’ the warning ‘‘When using
this product [in bold type][optional,
bullet] you may get vaginal irritation
(burning, itching, or a rash)’’.
5. Under the subheading ‘‘Stop use
and ask a doctor if,’’ the warning ‘‘Stop
use and ask a doctor if [in bold
type][optional, bullet] you or your
partner get burning, itching, a rash, or
other irritation of the vagina or penis.’’
FDA is also requiring additional
labeling information. This information
is to appear either on the outside
container or wrapper of the retail
package, under the ‘‘Other information’’
section of the Drug Facts labeling in
accordance with § 201.66(c)(7), or in a
package insert. The only exception is
the statement in § 201.325(c) about the
correct use of latex condoms, which
must appear on the outside container or
wrapper of the retail package or the
immediate container label if there is no
outside container or wrapper, under the
‘‘Other information’’ section of the
‘‘Drug Facts’’ labeling. The additional
labeling information is as follows:
• ‘‘studies have raised safety concerns
that products containing the spermicide
nonoxynol 9 can irritate the vagina and
rectum. Sometimes this irritation has no
symptoms. This irritation may increase
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71781
the risk of getting HIV/AIDS from an
infected partner’’.
• ‘‘you can use nonoxynol 9 for birth
control with or without a diaphragm or
condom if you have sex with only one
partner who is not infected with HIV
and who has no other sexual partners or
HIV risk factors’’.
• ‘‘when used correctly every time
you have sex, latex condoms greatly
reduce, but do not eliminate, the risk of
catching or spreading HIV, the virus that
causes AIDS. [this information must
appear on the outside container or
wrapper labeling in the Drug Facts
labeling under ‘‘Other information’’].
• ‘‘use a latex condom without
nonoxynol 9 if you or your sex partner
has HIV/AIDS, multiple sex partners, or
other HIV risk factors’’.
• ‘‘ask a health professional if you
have questions about your best birth
control and STD prevention methods’’.
FDA is also recommending that all of
the required warnings and other
labeling information be included in a
package insert. Many marketed OTC
vaginal contraceptive and spermicide
drug products already have a package
insert that contains information on how
to use the product, and this new
information could readily be
incorporated in the package insert.
The following is an example of the
Drug Facts labeling (for content
purposes only) for a vaginal
contraceptive/spermicide drug product
containing N9 that incorporates all of
the required new warnings and labeling
information on the Drug Facts label. The
quantity of active ingredient per dosage
unit, the font sizes for title, headings,
subheadings, condensed text, and
bullets, and other graphic features, must
be in accordance with § 201.66.
BILLING CODE 6111–01–S
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
BILLING CODE 6111–01–C
B. Statement About Warnings
Mandating warnings in an OTC drug
product regulation does not require a
finding that any or all of the OTC drug
products covered by the regulation
actually caused an adverse event, and
FDA does not so find. Nor does FDA’s
requirement of warnings repudiate the
prior OTC drug monographs and
regulations under which the affected
drug products have been lawfully
marketed. Rather, as a consumer
protection agency, FDA has determined
that warnings are necessary to ensure
that these OTC drug products continue
to be safe and effective for their labeled
indications under ordinary conditions
of use as those terms are defined in the
act. This judgment balances the benefits
of these drug products against their
potential risks. (See 21 CFR 330.10(a).)
FDA’s decision to act in this instance
need not meet the standard of proof
required to prevail in a private tort
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
action (Glastetter v. Novartis
Pharmaceuticals Corp., 252 F.3d
986,991 (8th Cir. 2001)). To mandate
warnings, or take similar regulatory
action, FDA need not show, nor do we
allege, actual causation. For an
expanded discussion of case law
supporting FDA’s authority to require
such warnings, see the December 6,
2002 (67 FR 72555), final rule entitled
‘‘Labeling of DiphenhydramineContaining Drug Products for Over-theCounter Human Use.’’
IV. Analysis of Impacts
In accordance with Executive Order
12866, FDA has previously analyzed the
potential economic effects of this final
rule. As announced in the proposal, the
agency has determined that the rule is
not a significant regulatory action as
defined by the Order. The agency has
not received any new information or
comments that would alter its previous
determination.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FDA has examined the impacts of this
final rule under Executive Order 12866,
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601–612), and the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4).
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies
to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and,
when regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity). The
agency believes this final rule is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the one-time costs to
comply with this rule are small, the
agency certifies that the final rule will
not have a significant economic impact
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
ER19DE07.033
71782
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
on a substantial number of small
entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year.’’ The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $127
million, using the most current (2006)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this final rule to result in any 1-year
expenditure that would meet or exceed
this amount.
The purpose of this final rule is to
require additional labeling for OTC
vaginal contraceptive and spermicide
drug products containing N9. The
labeling includes new warnings and
other important information about using
these products. These products are
currently packaged in an outer carton
that should have sufficient space to
accommodate this additional labeling.
FDA is aware that most of the currently
marketed products already include a
consumer package insert. Therefore, to
allow firms greater flexibility, FDA is
allowing some of the new information to
appear in the package insert. There are
a limited number of products currently
marketed that will be affected by this
final rule, and the incremental one-time
costs are minimal. The one-time costs
include designing the new carton,
designing a new package insert, and the
inventory loss of any unused current
labeling. FDA assumes the same
weighted average cost to relabel,
inflated to reflect current dollars, that it
estimated for the final rule requiring
uniform label formats of OTC drug
products (64 FR 13254 at 13279 to
13281) (i.e., $3,600 x 1.1641 ($4,190) per
stock keeping unit (SKU) (individual
products, packages, and sizes)).
Inventory loss was estimated using data
from a study supporting the previously
mentioned rule. With a 6-month
implementation period, inventory loss
was estimated to be between $582 and
$3,492 per SKU, depending on product
sales, for an estimated weighted average
inventory loss of $2,386. The inventory
1 The annual PPI for pulp, paper, and allied
products (the major cost driver for labeling) rose by
16.4 percent between 1998 and 2005 (from 174.1 to
202.6) https://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost,
extracted December 5, 2006. (FDA has verified the
Web site address, but we are not responsible for
subsequent changes to the Web site after this
document publishes in the Federal Register.)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
loss and redesign costs for the package
insert are estimated to be about $1,606
per SKU2.
FDA’s Drug Listing System identifies
15 manufacturers and distributors of
OTC vaginal contraceptive and
spermicide drug products containing N9
that together produce approximately 40
SKUs. At a relabeling cost of $4,190 per
SKU and an inventory loss of $2,386 per
SKU, estimated total one-time cost of
relabeling would be $263,040 (40 x
($4,190 + $2,386))3. Even if all required
wording is revised on the outer carton,
manufacturers may revise their package
inserts as well to conform to the revised
language. This adds another $64,240 (40
x $1,606) to the one-time cost, for an
estimated total of $327,2804.
As FDA is providing the language of
the labeling to be used, all firms should
have the necessary skills and personnel
to perform the required relabeling either
in-house or by contractual arrangement.
The final rule does not require any new
reporting or recordkeeping activities. No
additional professional skills are
needed.
About 9 firms affected by this final
rule meet the Small Business
Administration’s definition of a small
entity (fewer than 750 employees). The
actual impact on these firms will vary
depending on the number and nature of
the products they manufacture or
distribute. All nine entities market
additional types of products and have
only one or two SKUs affected by this
final rule. The average incremental cost
per SKU to comply with this final rule
is estimated to be $8,182 ($327,280/40
SKUs). Actual costs to the small entities
will likely be lower because distributors
of low sales volume OTC drug products
usually market their products in
packaging that costs less than the
industry average.
While the costs to individual
manufacturers to relabel their products
are minimal, the potential benefits to
consumers who use these products are
substantial. FDA considers it essential
that users be aware that these products
do not protect against the AIDS virus
(HIV) or other STDs. The monetary
benefit of potentially preventing any
cases of AIDS or STDs is significant
compared to the minor cost of relabeling
these products to provide the new
required information.
2The original values from the uniform label
formats rule (64 FR 13254), inventory loss between
$500 and $3,000 and a weighted average of $2,050,
were inflated by 16.4 percent.
3In the proposal for this rule, the estimated total
one-time cost of relabeling was reported in error as
$266,000, the actual value should have been
$226,000.
4In the proposed rule this value was reported as
$321,000, but should have been $281,200.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71783
FDA considered but rejected several
labeling alternatives: (1) A shorter or
longer implementation period, and (2)
an exemption from coverage for small
entities. FDA considers it important that
this information appear in product
labeling as soon as possible, but
acknowledges that implementation in a
timeframe any less than 6 months
would be very difficult for affected
manufacturers. However, because of the
importance of this new labeling
information, FDA considers a period of
12 months too long to implement this
new labeling. FDA rejected an
exemption for small entities because the
new labeling is also needed by
consumers who purchase products
marketed by those entities.
The analysis shows that this final rule
is not economically significant under
Executive Order 12866 and that FDA
has considered the burden to small
entities. Based on this analysis, FDA
does not believe manufacturers will
incur a significant economic impact.
Therefore, FDA certifies that the final
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. No further
analysis is required under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
605(b)).
V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
FDA concludes that the labeling
requirements in this document are not
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget because they
do not constitute a ‘‘collection of
information’’ under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). Rather, the labeling statements
are a ‘‘public disclosure of information
originally supplied by the Federal
government to the recipient for the
purpose of disclosure to the public’’ (5
CFR 1320.3(c)(2)).
VI. Environmental Impact
FDA has determined under 21 CFR
25.31(a) that this action is of a type that
does not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
VII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this final rule in
accordance with the principles set forth
in Executive Order 13132. FDA has
determined that the rule will have a
preemptive effect on State law. Section
4(a) of the Executive order requires
agencies to ‘‘construe * * * a Federal
statute to preempt State law only where
the statute contains an express
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
71784
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
preemption provision or there is some
other clear evidence that the Congress
intended preemption of State law, or
where the exercise of State authority
conflicts with the exercise of Federal
authority under the Federal statute.’’
Section 751 of the the act (21 U.S.C.
379r) is an express preemption
provision. Section 751(a) of the act (21
U.S.C. 379r(a)) provides that: ‘‘* * * no
State or political subdivision of a State
may establish or continue in effect any
requirement— * * * (1) that relates to
the regulation of a drug that is not
subject to the requirements of section
503(b)(1) or 503(f)(1)(A); and (2) that is
different from or in addition to, or that
is otherwise not identical with, a
requirement under this Act, the Poison
Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (15
U.S.C. 1471 et seq.), or the Fair
Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C.
1451 et seq.).’’
Currently, this provision operates to
preempt States from imposing
requirements related to the regulation of
nonprescription drug products. (See
section 751(b) through (e) of the act for
the scope of the express preemption
provision, the exemption procedures,
and the exceptions to the provision.)
This final rule would establish new
warning statements and other labeling
for all OTC vaginal contraceptive drug
products. Although this final rule would
have a preemptive effect, in that it
would preclude States from
promulgating requirements related to
labeling for OTC vaginal contraceptive
drug products that are different from or
in addition to, or not otherwise identical
with a requirement in the final rule, this
preemptive effect is consistent with
what Congress set forth in section 751
of the act. Section 751(a) of the act
displaces both State legislative
requirements and State common law
duties. We also note that even where the
express preemption provision is not
applicable, implied preemption may
arise. See Geier v. American Honda Co.,
529 US 861 (2000).
FDA believes that the preemptive
effect of the final rule would be
consistent with Executive Order 13132.
Section 4(e) of the Executive order
provides that ‘‘when an agency proposes
to act through adjudication or
rulemaking to preempt State law, the
agency shall provide all affected State
and local officials notice and an
opportunity for appropriate
participation in the proceedings.’’ FDA
provided the States with an opportunity
for appropriate participation in this
rulemaking when it sought input from
all stakeholders through publication of
the proposed rule in the Federal
Register of January 16, 2003 (68 FR
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
2254). FDA received comments from
three State groups on the proposal and
considered those comments in drafting
this final rule.
In addition, on May 12, 2006, FDA’s
Division of Federal and State Relations
provided notice via fax and email
transmission to elected officials of State
governments and their representatives
of national organization. The notice
provided the States with further
opportunity for input on the rule. It
advised the States of the publication of
the proposed rule and encouraged State
and local governments to review the
notice and to provide any comments to
the docket (Docket No. 1980N–0280
(formerly Docket No. 80N–0280)),
opened in the January 16, 2003, Federal
Register proposed rule, by a date 30
days from the date of the notice (i.e., by
June 12, 2006), or to contact certain
named individuals. FDA received no
comments in response to this notice.
The notice has been filed in the above
numbered docket.
In conclusion, the agency believes
that it has complied with all of the
applicable requirements under the
Executive order and has determined that
the preemptive effects of this rule are
consistent with Executive Order 13132.
VIII. References
The following references are on
display in the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm
1061, Rockville, MD 20852, under
Docket No. 1980N–0280, and may be
seen by interested persons between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
1. Hatcher R. A. et al., Contraceptive
Technology, 18th revised ed., Ardent
Media, New York, NY, p. 792, 2004.
2. CDC, ‘‘Nonoxynol–9 Spermicide
Contraception Use—United States,
1999,’’ Morbidity and Mortality Weekly
Report, 51(18):389–392, 2002.
3. Raymond, E., P. Chen, and J. Luoto,
‘‘Contraceptive Effectiveness of Five
Nonoxynol–9 Spermicides: A
Randomized Trial,’’ Obstetrics and
Gynecology, 103:430–439, 2004.
4. Sansgiry, S. S., P. S. Cady, and S.
Patil, ‘‘Readability of Over-the-Counter
Medication Labels,’’ Journal of the
American Pharmaceutical Association,
NS37(5):522–528, 1997.
5. A National Survey of Consumers
and Health Professionals: ‘‘Attitudes
and Beliefs About the Use of Over-theCounter Medicines: A Dose of Reality,’’
prepared for The National Council on
Patient Information and Education
(NCPIE), www.harrisinteractive.com,
2002.
6. Van Damme, L. et al.,
‘‘Effectiveness of COL–1492, A
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Nonoxynol–9 Vaginal Gel, on HIV–1
Transmission in Female Sex Workers: A
Randomized Controlled Trial,’’ The
Lancet, 360:971–977, 2002.
7. Kreiss, J. et al., ‘‘Efficacy of
Nonoxynol 9 Contraceptive Sponge Use
in Preventing Heterosexual Acquisition
of HIV in Nairobi Prostitutes,’’ Journal
of the American Medical Association,
268:477–482, 1992.
8. Roddy, R. E. et al., ‘‘A Controlled
Trial of Nonoxynol 9 Film to Reduce
Male-to-Female Transmission of
Sexually Transmitted Diseases,’’ New
England Journal of Medicine,
339(8):504–510, 1998.
9. Richardson, B. A. et al.,
‘‘Evaluation of a Low-Dose Nonoxynol 9
Gel for the Prevention of Sexually
Transmitted Diseases, a Randomized
Trial,’’ Sexually Transmitted Diseases,
28:394–400, 2001.
10. FDA, Draft Guidance for Industry
and FDA Staff: Class II Special Controls
Guidance Document: Labeling for Male
Condoms Made of Natural Rubber Latex,
Center for Devices and Radiological
Health (CDRH), 2005.
11. FDA, FemCap Barrier
Contraceptive, User Manual and
Instructions for Use, 2003.
12. Bounds, W. et al., ‘‘The
Diaphragm With and Without
Spermicide: A Randomized,
Comparative Efficacy Trial,’’ Journal of
Reproductive Medicine, 40:11:764–774,
1995.
13. Richwald, G. A. et al.,
‘‘Effectiveness of the Cavity-Rim
Cervical Cap: Results of a Large Clinical
Study,’’ Obstetrics and Gynecology,
74:2:143–148, 1989.
14. Bernstein, G., ‘‘Use-Effectiveness
Study of Cervical Caps: Final Report,’’
Washington, DC: National Institute of
Child Health and Human Development,
contract no. NO1–HD–1–2804, 1986.
15. Gross, M. et al., ‘‘Rectal
Microbicides for U.S. Gay Men. Are
Clinical Trials Needed?,’’ Sexually
Transmitted Diseases, 25:6:296–302,
1998.
16. Mansergh, G. et al., ‘‘Rectal Use of
Nonoxynol–9 Among Men Who Have
Sex With Men,’’ AIDS, 17:6:905–909,
2003.
17. Phillips, D. M. and V. R.
Zacharopoulos, ‘‘Nonoxynol–9
Enhances Rectal Infection by Herpes
Simples Virus in Mice,’’ Contraception,
57:341–348, 1998.
18. Patton, D. et al., ‘‘Rectal
Applications of Nonoxynol–9 Cause
Tissue Disruption in a Monkey Model,’’
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 29:581–
587, 2002.
19. Phillips, D. et al., ‘‘Nonoxynol–9
Causes Rapid Exfoliation of Sheets of
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 243 / Wednesday, December 19, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Rectal Epithelium,’’ Contraception,
62:149–154, 2002.
20. Phillips, D. M. et al., ‘‘Lubricants
Containing N–9 May Enhance Rectal
Transmission of HIV and Other STIs,’’
Contraception, 70:107–110, 2004.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 201
Drugs, Labeling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
I Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 201 is
amended as follows:
PART 201—LABELING
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 201 continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 358, 360, 360b, 360gg–360ss, 371,
374, 379e; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 262, 264.
2. Section 201.66 is amended by
adding paragraph (c)(5)(ii)(H) to read as
follows:
I
§ 201.66 Format and content requirements
for over-the-counter (OTC) drug product
labeling.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) * * *
(H) Sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs) warning for vaginal
contraceptive and spermicide drug
products containing nonoxynol 9 set
forth in § 201.325(b)(2). This warning
shall follow the subheading ‘‘Sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs) alert:’’
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. Section 201.325 is added to subpart
G to read as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
§ 201.325 Over-the-counter drugs for
vaginal contraceptive and spermicide use
containing nonoxynol 9 as the active
ingredient; required warnings and labeling
information.
(a) Studies indicate that use of vaginal
contraceptive drug products containing
nonoxynol 9 does not protect against
infection from the human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus
that causes acquired immunodeficiency
syndrome (AIDS), or against the
transmission of other sexually
transmitted diseases (STDs). Studies
also indicate that use of vaginal
contraceptive drug products containing
nonoxynol 9 can increase vaginal
irritation, such as the disruption of the
vaginal epithelium, and also can cause
epithelial disruption when used in the
rectum. These effects may increase the
risk of transmission of the AIDS virus
(HIV) from an infected partner.
Therefore, consumers should be warned
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:31 Dec 18, 2007
Jkt 214001
that these products do not protect
against the transmission of the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs, that use of
these products can increase vaginal and
rectal irritation, which may increase the
risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) from
an HIV infected partner, and that the
products are not for rectal use.
Consumers should also be warned that
these products should not be used by
persons who have HIV/AIDS or are at
high risk for HIV/AIDS.
(b) The labeling of OTC vaginal
contraceptive and spermicide drug
products containing nonoxynol 9 as the
active ingredient, whether subject to the
ongoing OTC drug review or an
approved drug application, must
contain the following warnings under
the heading ‘‘Warnings,’’ in accordance
with 21 CFR 201.66.
(1) ‘‘[bullet] For vaginal use only
[bullet] Not for rectal (anal) use’’ [both
warnings in bold type].
(2) ‘‘Sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs) alert [in bold type]: This product
does not [word ‘‘not’’ in bold type]
protect against HIV/AIDS or other STDs
and may increase the risk of getting HIV
from an infected partner’’.
(3) ‘‘Do not use’’ [in bold type] if you
or your sex partner has HIV/AIDS. If
you do not know if you or your sex
partner is infected, choose another form
of birth control’’.
(4) ‘‘When using this product [in bold
type] [optional, bullet] you may get
vaginal irritation (burning, itching, or a
rash)’’.
(5) ‘‘Stop use and ask a doctor if [in
bold type] [optional, bullet] you or your
partner get burning, itching, a rash, or
other irritation of the vagina or penis’’.
(c) The labeling of this product states
under the ‘‘Other information’’ section
of the Drug Facts labeling in accordance
with § 201.66(c)(7), ‘‘[bullet] when used
correctly every time you have sex, latex
condoms greatly reduce, but do not
eliminate, the risk of catching or
spreading HIV, the virus that causes
AIDS.
(d) The labeling of this product
includes the following statements either
on the outside container or wrapper of
the retail package, under the ‘‘Other
information’’ section of the Drug Facts
labeling in accordance with
§ 201.66(c)(7), or in a package insert:
(1) ‘‘[bullet] studies have raised safety
concerns that products containing the
spermicide nonoxynol 9 can irritate the
vagina and rectum. Sometimes this
irritation has no symptoms. This
irritation may increase the risk of getting
HIV/AIDS from an infected partner’’.
(2) ‘‘[bullet] you can use nonoxynol 9
for birth control with or without a
diaphragm or condom if you have sex
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
71785
with only one partner who is not
infected with HIV and who has no other
sexual partners or HIV risk factors’’.
(3) ‘‘[bullet] use a latex condom
without nonoxynol 9 if you or your sex
partner has HIV/AIDS, multiple sex
partners, or other HIV risk factors’’.
(4) ‘‘[bullet] ask a health professional
if you have questions about your best
birth control and STD prevention
methods’’.
(e) Any drug product subject to this
section that is not labeled as required
and that is initially introduced or
initially delivered for introduction into
interstate commerce after June 19, 2008,
is misbranded under section 502 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the act) (21 U.S.C. 352), is a new drug
under section 505 of the act (21 U.S.C.
355), and is subject to regulatory action.
Dated: December 10, 2007.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 07–6111 Filed 12–18–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 124
[Public Notice 6031]
Amendment to the International Traffic
in Arms Regulations: Regarding Dual
and Third Country Nationals
Department of State.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of State is
amending the text of the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to
allow access to defense articles and
services for dual and third country
nationals of certain countries through
revisions in procedures for technical
assistance agreements and
manufacturing licensing agreements.
This regulatory change will reduce the
burden on exporters of defense articles
and on foreign parties to the agreements
by reducing the number of individual
Non Disclosure Agreements (NDA’s)
which must be executed and maintained
on file.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective December 19, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit comments at any time by any of
the following methods:
• E-mail:
DDTCResponseTeam@state.gov with an
appropriate subject line.
• Mail: Department of State,
Directorate of Defense Trade Controls,
Office of Defense Trade Controls Policy,
ATTN: Regulatory change, ITAR
E:\FR\FM\19DER1.SGM
19DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 19, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71769-71785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-6111]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 201
[Docket No. 1980N-0280] (formerly Docket No. 80N-0280)
RIN 0910-AF44
Over-the-Counter Vaginal Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug
Products Containing Nonoxynol 9; Required Labeling
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: 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.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective June 19, 2008.
Compliance Date: The compliance date for all products subject to
this final rule, including products with annual sales less than
$25,000, is June 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arlene Solbeck, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-2090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA's Responses
A. Should N9 Remain Available as an Active Ingredient in OTC
Vaginal Contraceptive Drug Products?
B. What Issues Were Raised by Comments That Did Not Support the
Proposed Warning Statements?
1. Will Warning Labels Be Seen, Understood, or Followed?
2. Are the Warnings Supported by the Scientific Literature?
3. Is FDA Required To Prove Actual Causation To Justify the
Warnings?
C. Should Women Ask a Doctor Before Using N9 Products?
D. Where Will the Warnings Appear in the Labeling?
E. Where Will the Condom Usage Statement Appear in the Labeling?
F. What Were the Comments on Condoms, Sexual Lubricants, and
Barrier Methods?
1. Do Warnings Apply to Condoms and Sexual Lubricants?
2. Are Condoms Lubricated With N9 Safe To Use?
3. How Do Warnings Apply to N9 Products Used With Barrier Methods?
G. Is N9 Safe for Women at Low Risk for HIV/AIDS and STDs?
H. Is N9 Safe for Rectal Use?
I. Does N9 Increase the Risk of STDs Other Than HIV?
J. What Issues Did Other Comments Discuss?
1. Why Did FDA Define Frequent Use of N9 as ``More Than Once a
Day''?
2. Should ``Pharmacist'' or ``Health Care Provider'' Be Included on
the Label?
3. What Does ``Unprotected Sex'' Mean?
4. What Does the Word ``Irritation'' Mean When Referring To
``Vaginal Irritation'' in the Warning Language?
5. Should Warnings Be Printed in Both English and Spanish?
III. FDA's Final Conclusions on Warnings and Other Labeling Information
for OTC Vaginal Contraceptive and Spermicide Drug Products Containing
N9
A. New Labeling Requirements
B. Statement About Warnings
IV. Analysis of Impacts
V. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VI. Environmental Impact
VII. Federalism
VIII. References
I. Background
In the Federal Register of January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2254), FDA (we)
published a proposed rule (the proposed rule) to require new labeling
warning statements for all OTC vaginal contraceptive drug products
containing N9. These proposed warning statements are intended to
[[Page 71770]]
advise consumers that vaginal contraceptives containing N9 do not
protect against infection from HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, nor
against getting other STDs. The warnings also would advise consumers
that frequent use of vaginal contraceptives containing N9 can increase
vaginal irritation, and that increased vaginal irritation from the use
of N9 may increase the possibility of becoming infected with the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected partners. The proposed rule
contains the data and scientific evidence that we considered to require
these warnings.
N9 is a nonionic surfactant that works as a vaginal contraceptive
(spermicide) by damaging the cell membrane of sperm. As stated in the
proposed rule (68 FR 2254 at 2255), there are in vitro studies showing
that N9 causes damage to the cell wall of certain STD pathogens and has
activity against certain bacterial and viral STD pathogens, including
HIV. Because N9 inhibits the replication of the AIDS virus (HIV) and
other STD pathogens in vitro, it has been suggested over the years that
N9 might help prevent or reduce the risk of transmission of the AIDS
virus and other STDs in humans (68 FR 2254 at 2255). Thus, research was
undertaken to see if N9 would prevent HIV and STDs. In the proposed
rule, FDA discussed the evidence that demonstrates that N9 does not
prevent or reduce the risk of transmission of the AIDS virus and other
STDs in humans (68 FR 2254 to 2259). FDA also discussed recent
scientific data that suggest that frequent use of N9 may increase the
risk of HIV infection for women at risk for HIV (68 FR 2254 to 2259).
Thus, FDA issued the proposed rule to provide a clear, consistent
message that N9 is not effective in preventing HIV transmission, and
that N9 can facilitate transmission of the disease. We also proposed
labeling (warnings and other information) to encourage the use of
condoms as a method to help sexually active persons reduce the risk of
becoming infected with the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs. We
requested feedback on whether the proposed warnings adequately convey
the safety concerns about N9 and whether there are additional data to
support, expand, or refute the proposed warnings.
In response to the proposed rule, we received 153 comments. Two
comments were submitted from industry, 8 from consumer advocacy groups,
10 from health associations, 16 from health professionals, and 117 from
individual consumers. These comments are on display in the Division of
Dockets Management. For access to the docket to read background
documents or comments received, go to https://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/
default.htm and insert the docket number (s), found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5360 Fishers
Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. We are responding to the comments,
and discussing some additional data that has come to our attention, in
this document.
The majority of comments from consumers, consumer advocacy groups,
health organizations, and health professionals supported FDA for
proposing warnings for N9 vaginal contraceptive OTC drug products that
inform consumers that N9 does not protect against HIV and other STDs
and that frequent use (more than once a day) may increase the risk of
infection of HIV from infected partners. The comments stated that the
proposed warnings will inform consumers of the risks so that they can
make responsible health care decisions. Forty-six consumers reported
getting vaginal irritation, burning, itching, swelling, or increased
yeast and urinary infections after using contraceptive products
containing N9. These comments stated that the proposed labeling is
necessary to warn consumers of the risks related to irritation
associated with N9 and to educate consumers who mistakenly believe that
vaginal contraceptives/spermicides containing N9 also prevent STDs.
Some comments did not support the proposed warnings. Other comments
asked for clarification of the warning language, recommended changes in
the wording of the warning language, or provided data to expand the
proposed warnings. After reviewing the comments, FDA has revised the
proposed warnings in this final rule. The differences between the
warning language in the proposed and final rules are as follows:
Table 1.--Differences in the Warning Language in the Proposed and Final
Rules
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Rule Final Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``For vaginal use only'' ``For vaginal use only
Not for rectal (anal) use''
We explain the reason for this
change in section II.H, comment
12, of this document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Sexually transmitted diseases ``Sexually transmitted diseases
(STDs) alert: This product does (STDs) alert:
not protect against the AIDS virus This product does not protect
(HIV) or other STDs'' against HIV/AIDS or other STDs and
may increase the risk of getting
HIV from an infected partner''
We discuss this change in section
II.B.2, comment 3 of this
document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``Ask a doctor before use if you ``Do not use if you or your sex
have partner has HIV/AIDS. If you do
a new sex partner, not know if you or your sex
multiple sex partners, or partner is infected, choose
unprotected sex. Frequent use another form of birth control.''
(more than once a day) of this ``When using this product you may
product can increase vaginal get vaginal irritation (burning,
irritation, which may increase the itching, or a rash)''
risk of getting the AIDS virus We discuss these changes in
(HIV) or other STDs from infected sections II.B.2, comment 3 and
partners. Ask a doctor or other II.C, comment 5 of this document.
health professional for your best
birth control method.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 71771]]
``Studies have raised ``studies have raised
safety concerns that frequent use safety concerns that products
(more than once a day) of products containing the spermicide
containing nonoxynol 9 can nonoxynol 9 can irritate the
increase vaginal irritation, which vagina and rectum. Sometimes this
may increase the risk of getting irritation has no symptoms. This
the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs irritation may increase the risk
from infected partners. Vaginal of getting HIV/AIDS from an
irritation may include symptoms infected partner''
such as burning, itching, or a We discuss this change in section
rash, or you may not notice any II.B.2, comment 3 of this
symptoms at all. If you use these document.
products frequently and/or have a ``you can use nonoxynol 9
new sex partner, multiple sex for birth control with or without
partners or unprotected sex, see a a diaphragm or condom if you have
doctor or other health sex with only one partner who is
professional for your best birth not infected with HIV and who has
control and methods to prevent no other sexual partners or HIV
STDs.'' risk factors''.
We discuss this change in sections
II.F.3, comment 10 and II.G,
comment 11 of this document.
``use a latex condom
without nonoxynol 9 if you or your
sex partner has HIV/AIDS, multiple
sex partners, or other HIV risk
factors''.
We discuss this change in section
II.F.2, comment 9 of this
document.
``ask a health
professional if you have questions
about your best birth control and
STD prevention methods''.
We discuss this change in section
II.J.2, comment 15 of this
document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
``when used correctly
``correct use of a latex every time you have sex, latex
condom with every sexual act will condoms greatly reduce, but do not
help reduce the risk of getting eliminate, the risk of catching or
the AIDS virus (HIV) and other spreading HIV, the virus that
STDs from infected partners''. causes AIDS.
We discuss this change in section
II.F.1, comment 8 of this
document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Use of N9 products may increase the Use of N9 products is associated
risk of HIV and other STDs. with an increased risk of HIV.
We discuss this change in section
II.I, comment 13 of this document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We describe and respond to the comments received in section II of
this document.
II. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA's Responses
A. Should N9 Remain Available as an Active Ingredient in OTC Vaginal
Contraceptive Drug Products?
(Comment 1) Some comments stated that N9 vaginal contraceptive drug
products should be removed from the OTC market or changed from OTC to
prescription status for the following reasons:
N9 does not protect against HIV or STDs.
N9 causes damage to the vaginal lining and increases the
risk of contracting HIV due to this vaginal irritation.
Many new cases of HIV and STDs will develop if
contraceptives with N9 are available without consultation with a health
professional.
Consumers who may not see, read, understand, or follow the
advice contained on the warning labels need to be protected from the
risks of using N9. They should have to see a health professional before
using products containing N9.
Some of these comments also suggested that, alternatively,
manufacturers should be required to reformulate their products with
other safe and effective spermicides or microbicides.
Many other comments stated that N9 products should remain an OTC
contraceptive option for women at low risk for HIV infection for the
following reasons:
N9 products are effective in preventing pregnancy,
particularly when used with a barrier method such as a condom or
diaphragm.
N9 products are a contraceptive option for women who
cannot tolerate hormone-based birth control methods.
N9 products are a contraceptive option for women at low
risk for HIV and STDs.
N9 products represent one of the few methods available for
women that are controlled by women.
N9 products offer a ``substantial'' benefit to a ``small
but important'' group of users.
(Response) FDA does not agree that vaginal contraceptive drug
products containing N9 should be removed from the OTC marketplace. As
part of FDA's review of the safety and effectiveness of this class of
OTC drugs, the Advisory Review Panel on OTC Contraceptives and Other
Vaginal Drug Products classified N9 as Category I (safe and effective)
as a spermicide for the prevention of pregnancy on December 12, 1980
(45 FR 82014 at 82028). Comments were received following publication of
the panel's report and additional scientific data became available. FDA
published the proposed rule on OTC vaginal contraceptive drug products
on February 2, 1995 (60 FR 6892). In that proposed rule, FDA considered
N9 safe as a vaginal contraceptive; however, data indicated that its
effectiveness in final product formulations was highly variable.
Therefore, FDA proposed clinical trials for N9 spermicidal products to
validate their effectiveness in final formulations.
In November 1996, four FDA advisory committees (Nonprescription
Drugs, Reproductive Health Drugs, Antiviral Drugs, and Anti-infective
Drugs) met to discuss the type and quality of data needed to support
and ensure the spermicidal effectiveness of N9 in final formulations.
The advisory committees concluded that the existing data provided
evidence of some effectiveness, but they had concerns about variability
in dose, different formulations, and duration of effect. The advisory
committees recommended that FDA allow interim marketing of N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products pending further clinical trials (68 FR 2254
at 2255).
Current data suggest that the number of women out of 100 who become
pregnant in the first year of typical use of N9 spermicide drug
products is as follows (Ref. 1):
[[Page 71772]]
16 for the diaphragm with spermicide.
16 to 32 (depending on whether the women have had prior
births) for the cervical cap with spermicide.
29 for spermicides alone (gel, cream, foam, film,
suppository).
The number of women who become pregnant using no contraception is 85
out of 100 (Ref. 1). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) (Ref. 2) report that the combined use of diaphragms with N9
spermicide prevents approximately 460,000 pregnancies in the United
States each year. It is important to the public health that consumers
have access to multiple methods of contraception to choose from that
help prevent unplanned pregnancy.
FDA is currently reviewing newly published data regarding the
efficacy of N9 containing spermicides (Ref. 3), and we will publish our
conclusions in a future issue of the Federal Register. These data are
from a clinical trial which compares the effectiveness and safety of
five spermicides, which include three gels containing 52.5 milligrams
(mg), 100 mg, and 150 mg of N9 per dose and a film and a suppository,
each containing 100 mg of N9 per dose. In the meantime, based on its
history of safety and effectiveness, we have determined that N9 should
remain on the market while we complete our review. Based on the
information currently available, we have also determined that women at
low risk for HIV can safely use N9 products for their contraceptive
needs and that the intervention of a doctor or health care provider is
not necessary.
B. What Issues Were Raised by Comments That Did Not Support the
Proposed Warning Statements?
1. Will Warning Labels Be Seen, Understood, or Followed?
(Comment 2) Two comments stated that FDA's proposed warnings may
not adequately protect consumers against the health risks posed by N9
products because consumers may not see, read, understand, or follow the
advice contained on the warning labels. One of the comments referred to
a study sponsored by the National Council on Patient Information and
Education (NCPIE), conducted in 2001, which surveyed adult consumers
and health care professionals on the self-medicating behaviors of the
American public. The comment stated that the survey clearly established
that consumers do not consistently read caution labels. The comment
also mentioned a 1997 study by ``Sansgiry et al.'' of industry labeling
practices which stated, according to the comment, that as the OTC
package size increased, the font size used for the product increased,
except that the font size for warnings remained constant. The comment
stated that the study also showed that 22 percent of the product
packages examined used smaller than 6-point font type for warnings. The
comment concluded from this study that consumers may have difficulty
seeing and reading the N9 warning language. The second comment stated
that many consumers consider OTC drug products to be safe and present
no risks because they are available without a prescription. Thus,
consumers may ignore the product labeling because of this false
impression. The comment recommended that FDA use consumer surveys and
focus groups to test for comprehension of the proposed labeling before
publishing a final rule mandating specific language.
(Response) FDA thinks that the warning statements for N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products will be seen, read, understood, and
followed by consumers. We are aware of the studies cited by the
comment, i.e., the Sansgiry, Cady, and Patil study (Ref. 4), which
described OTC industry labeling practices at that time, and the NCPIE
study (Ref. 5) that examined the self-medicating behaviors of the
American public, including what information consumers seek when reading
an OTC drug product label. These studies reinforced the need for FDA to
improve the OTC drug product label and also to enhance educational
programs to teach consumers about the risks and benefits of OTC drugs.
FDA issued new labeling requirements for OTC drug products on March 17,
1999 (64 FR 13254). This labeling regulation, codified in 21 CFR
201.66, requires OTC drug products to be labeled with a standardized
``Drug Facts'' label. The ``Drug Facts'' label offers a more
structured, organized, and compact presentation of the product
information, which allows consumers to process the information with
improved understanding, and provides clear signals regarding important
information. The new requirements include a 6-point minimum type size,
and bolded type headings and subheadings. When the warning requirements
in this final rule for OTC vaginal contraceptive drug products
containing N9 become effective, all manufacturers will be required to
revise their label using the ``Drug Facts'' format. Use of the revised
labeling in the ``Drug Facts'' format will enable consumers to better
read and understand the information presented and apply the information
to the safe and effective use of OTC vaginal contraceptive drug
products.
Additionally, FDA is involved in various initiatives to encourage
awareness of the safe and effective use of drugs and the importance of
reading drug labels. FDA provides consumer articles, public service
announcements, websites, etc., and also partners with many
organizations to promote better understanding of the risks and benefits
of drug products. For example, in cooperation with FDA, the Consumer
Healthcare Products Association (CHPA) and NCPIE's ``Be MedWise''
campaign provide information to consumers on the new OTC drug labels.
2. ``Are the Warnings Supported by the Scientific Literature?''
(Comment 3) Three comments stated that FDA's proposed warning
language for N9 vaginal contraceptive drug products implies a link
between the use of N9 and an increased risk of HIV that is not
sufficiently supported by the scientific literature. These comments
stated that the proposed warnings will frighten consumers in a manner
that could affect the continued availability of a safe and effective
contraceptive. The first comment contended that FDA relies primarily on
two studies to support its position that there is a link between the
use of N9 vaginal contraceptive drug products and an increased risk of
HIV infection as follows: (1) The Van Damme et al. study (2002) (Ref.
6) and (2) the Kreiss et al. study (1992) (Ref. 7). The comment
provided the following reasons why the Van Damme et al. study should
not be used to support FDA's proposed warnings for N9 products:
Twenty percent of the study subjects were lost to followup
(so the investigators never determined the HIV status of these
participants).
The results between the two test groups (N9 and placebo)
were ``barely'' significant (p=0.047).
The placebo may have had a protective effect.
A much higher number of unprotected anal sex acts were
reported from one of the study centers (Durban) where the most HIV
seroconversions (conversions from HIV negative status to HIV positive
status) occurred.
The comment also contended that the Kreiss et al. study should not be
used to support FDA's proposed warnings for N9 products because:
The study was terminated early when it was determined that
the HIV seroconversion results became inconsistent with the hypothesis
that N9 has a clinically beneficial effect in
[[Page 71773]]
preventing HIV. The statistical analysis of the data at the time the
study was terminated did not support a statistically significant
conclusion that N9 increased the risk of HIV transmission.
The comparator product was changed midstream, indicating
design problems.
More women had preexisting genital ulcers in the N9 test
group, indicating randomization problems.
The sponge dosage form could raise safety issues not
associated with other dosage forms.
This comment added that FDA did not consider the results and
conclusions of two other studies, Roddy et al. (1998) (Ref. 8) and
Richardson et al. (2001) (Ref. 9). The comment stated that these
studies either support a conclusion opposite to the Van Damme et al.
and Kreiss et al. studies or weaken the conclusion that frequent use of
N9 vaginal contraceptives increases the risk of HIV infection from an
infected partner. The comment concluded that the link between N9 use
and an increased risk of HIV infection is speculation. The comment
requested that FDA remove the following proposed warning language that
links N9 use with an increased risk of HIV infection:
``Ask a doctor before use if you have a new sex partner,
multiple sex partners, or unprotected sex. Frequent use (more than once
a day) of this product can increase vaginal irritation, which may
increase the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from
infected partners. Ask a doctor or other health professional for your
best birth control method.''
``Studies have raised safety concerns that frequent use
(more than once a day) of products containing nonoxynol 9 can increase
vaginal irritation, which may increase the risk of getting the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected partners. Vaginal irritation
may include symptoms such as burning, itching, or a rash, or you may
not notice any symptoms at all. If you use these products frequently
and/or have a new sex partner, multiple sex partners, or unprotected
sex, see a doctor or other health professional for your best birth
control and methods to prevent STDs.''
The comment recommended the following language, which it contended more
accurately reflects the known science and places the warnings in a more
relevant context:
``Ask a doctor before use if you have frequent sex (more
than three times a day). Frequent use (more than three times a day) of
nonoxynol 9 may increase vaginal irritation, which may increase the
risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected
partners. Ask a doctor or other health professional for your best birth
control method.''
``Studies concerning some nonoxynol 9 formulations (i.e.,
gel and sponge) in high risk populations (i.e., prostitutes) have
raised very preliminary safety concerns that frequent use (more than
three times a day) of products containing nonoxynol 9 can increase
vaginal irritation, which may increase the risk of getting the AIDS
virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected partners. Other studies have
shown no such risk for certain formulations (i.e., nonoxynol 9-
containing film and gel) in these high risk populations. Vaginal
irritation may include symptoms such as burning, itching, or a rash, or
you may not notice any symptoms at all. While there is no clear link
between the frequent use of nonoxynol 9 and the increased risk of HIV
infection or other STDs from infected partners, if you use these
products frequently, see a doctor or other health professional for your
best birth control and methods to prevent STDs.''
The second comment stated that the Van Damme et al. study results
are ``exploratory'' and that the study's ``generalizability'' is a
problem because the subjects were sex workers and had highly
``atypical'' sexual activity. This comment contended that previous
trials of N9, conducted in sex workers, have shown conflicting results
and, taken together, do not show a harmful or a protective effect. The
third comment expressed similar concerns about the Van Damme study's
generalizability.
(Response) FDA believes that the proposed warning language, which
implies a link between frequent use of N9 vaginal contraceptive drug
products and an increased risk of HIV, is supported by the scientific
literature. As discussed elsewhere in this document, we are deleting
the term ``frequent'' from the labeling requirements of this final rule
because we believe that if a woman is at risk of HIV/AIDS, she should
not be using N9 products, regardless of the frequency of use (see
section J.1 of this document). In the proposed rule, FDA cited many
studies that demonstrated that daily use of N9 products causes vaginal
irritation (i.e., inflammatory changes in the epithelial cells lining
the vagina and disruption of these epithelial cells), and causes
disruption of the vaginal flora (68 FR 2254 at 2254 to 2258). Some
studies suggested that the risk of these adverse events can be
increased by frequent or chronic use of N9 products. In general, the
various studies cited in the proposed rule defined infrequent or low
frequency use as ``use once a day or less.'' It appears from these
studies that infrequent use does not result in an increased rate of
epithelial disruption. Therefore, FDA defined frequent use in the
proposed rule as ``more than once a day'' and believes that the
scientific literature supports the statement that frequent use (more
than once a day) can increase vaginal irritation.
In the proposed rule, FDA discussed studies that demonstrated that
frequent use of N9 products causes increased disruption of the vaginal
epithelium which may increase the risk of transmission of the AIDS
virus (HIV). The most pivotal of these studies is the Van Damme et al.
study (cited at 68 FR 2254 at 2255) (Ref. 6). This was a randomized,
placebo-controlled clinical trial to assess the effectiveness of a
vaginal gel containing N9 on HIV-1 transmission in female sex workers
in Africa and Thailand, all at high risk for HIV. The study gel (COL-
1492) contained 52.5 mg N9 (other constituents included a bioadhesive
carbomer). The placebo gel differed from COL-1492 in that it did not
contain N9 and had more carbomer. At enrollment, women received a
supply of study gel (N9 or placebo) and male condoms to use until the
next visit. Women were asked to return to the clinic every month for a
follow-up visit. There was no limit on the number of gel doses that
could be used per day. The primary endpoint of the study was incident
HIV-1 infection. Secondary objectives included the effectiveness of
this drug in prevention of chlamydial infection, gonorrhea,
trichomoniasis, and genital ulcer disease, and safety and acceptability
of the gel under situations of long-term use. The treatment period was
48 weeks.
A total of 765 women were included in the primary analysis (376 in
the N9 group and 389 in the placebo group) and 563 women completed the
48-week study. The overall retention rate of the participants in the
study was 71 percent after 24 weeks and 68 percent after 48 weeks,
which is similar to rates projected by the study investigators for
their sample size (60 percent retention per year).
Of the 765 women, 59 in the N9 group and 45 in the placebo group
seroconverted from HIV-1 negative to HIV-1 positive. Women who used an
N9 vaginal gel had a significantly higher risk of becoming infected
with HIV-1, compared with women using the placebo gel (p=0.047). The
HIV-1 incidence per 100 women-years was
[[Page 71774]]
14.7 for the N9 group and 10.3 for the placebo group. This conclusion
did not change when statistical adjustments were made for differences
in the frequency of vaginal and anal sex not protected by condoms.
To test the hypothesis of dose-dependent toxic effects of N9, the
investigators divided the mean gel use per working day into three
categories based on tertiles. The investigators compared HIV-1
incidence per treatment group and per category of gel use. HIV-1
incidence increased with increasing gel use in the N9 group versus the
placebo group. In the N9 group, HIV-1 incidence rose from 8.8 per 100
woman-years in women reporting mean use of 3.5 or fewer applicators per
day to 30.6 in women reporting a higher mean daily use (hazard ratio
3.5; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.1-5.8; p<0.0001). In the placebo
group, HIV-1 incidence in those categories was 8.1 and 14.5 per 100
woman-years, respectively (1.8; CI 1.0-3.3, p=0.05). It is important to
note that this analysis simply suggests a dose response between the
amount of gel used per day and the risk of HIV-1 infection. The data
does not support a conclusion that using less than 3.5 applications of
N9 per day is associated with an incidence risk for HIV-1 infection
similar to placebo. Dividing the data by other methods (e.g., into
quartiles), would identify other amounts of N9 per day supporting an
association between the amount used and increasing risk.
The study also investigated the frequency of N9 use and the
incidence of lesions with epithelial breach, and whether the risk of
HIV transmission increases with increasing number of lesions with
epithelial breach. They found that the incidence of lesions with an
epithelial breach rose with increasing gel use. The increase in
incidence of lesions with an epithelial breach was seen in both the
placebo and N9 groups, but it happened most rapidly in the N9 group.
FDA finds that one comment's concern about certain aspects of the
Van Damme et al. study are valid as follows:
There was a high loss to followup rate overall (retention
rate was 68 percent at 48 weeks). However, the study was designed with
an assumption of an annual retention rate of 60 percent.
There was a higher loss to followup rate in the N9 group
compared to the placebo group.
The highest rates of both seroconversion and retention
were observed at the largest center in the study (Durban). This center
also reported the highest rate of anal sex.
Although the study was not flawless, it was a large, well designed,
randomized, placebo-controlled, multi-center clinical trial. Both the
treatment and placebo groups were balanced with respect to baseline
characteristics. Even with the noted limitations, we believe that the
study is evidence that N9 may increase the risk of HIV-1 infection in a
population already at increased risk for HIV-1 infection.
The comment also expressed concerns about the Kreiss et al. study
(Ref. 7) that we cited in the proposed rule (68 FR 2254 at 2257). In
this study, HIV negative sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya used either a
vaginal sponge containing 1,000 mg N9 or a placebo. Women using the N9
sponge had a higher conversion from HIV negative to HIV positive. A
total of 21 women (43 percent) of the N9 group and 19 women (35
percent) of the placebo group converted from HIV negative to HIV
positive. We acknowledge the study's shortcomings, as noted in the
comment. However, we believe that early termination of the study for
safety reasons (i.e., that the seroconversion results had become
inconsistent with the hypothesis of clinically beneficial effects of N9
in preventing HIV seroconversion) was ethically appropriate, and
suggests an outcome consistent with the results of the Van Damme et al.
study.
The comment contends that two other studies, Roddy et al. (Ref. 8)
and Richardson et al. (Ref. 9), support a conclusion opposite to the
Van Damme et al. and Kreiss et al. studies or weaken the conclusion
that use of N9 spermicide products may increase the risk of HIV
infection from an infected partner. We do not agree. The Roddy et al.
study was conducted to determine whether a 70-mg N9 vaginal film
provided protection against HIV, gonorrhea, or chlamydia. The study
population consisted of 1,170 HIV-negative female sex workers (575 in
the placebo group, 595 in the N9 group) residing in Cameroon, Africa,
who averaged at least 4 sexual partners per month. The study results
showed no difference in the rate of HIV transmission in the N9 group
versus the placebo group (48 vs. 46, respectively), although the
incidence of genital lesions was slightly higher in the N9 group. The
results from this study, while not consistent with the data from the
Van Damme et al. study, do not invalidate the Van Damme et al. study
results. Roddy et al. reported the total number of sexual acts for
placebo and N9 users but did not report the average number of sexual
acts per day or per week. There were 595 study participants in the N9
group who recorded a total of 147,996 coital acts. The average length
of study followup was 14 months. This averages out to 1 coital act
every 1.7 days. The study participants may not have used the N9 film
often enough to demonstrate a difference in HIV risk compared to those
using the placebo product. The results of the Roddy et al. study do not
diminish the importance of the safety signal observed in the Van Damme
et al. study. We believe that concerns about an increased risk of HIV
transmission with frequent N9 use would apply to all products
containing N9, regardless of the formulation. We do not agree with the
comment's suggestion that the proposed warnings be revised to read
``Other studies have shown no such risk for certain formulations (i.e.,
N9 film and gel) in these high risk populations''.
The Richardson et al. study was conducted to determine the effect
of a 52.5 mg N9 gel on the acquisition of STDs in HIV negative sex
workers in Kenya. The study enrolled a relatively small number of
subjects (total of 278 women, 139 in the N9 group and 139 in the
placebo group) at only one clinic site. The sample size and the low
extent of exposure may not have been sufficient to detect rare events.
The authors stated that women enrolled in the Richardson et al. study
came from another ongoing prospective cohort study at the same clinic
site. Selection of subjects from that study population might have
introduced confounding factors into their study. There was relatively
low frequency of sexual intercourse and exposure to the test products
(median of twice a week). The median compliance with product use was 75
percent in the N9 group and 80 percent in the placebo group (median
compliance was 78 percent; the range was 0 to 100 percent). However,
only 32 percent of the women in the N9 group and 36 percent of the
women in the placebo group were 100 percent compliant. It is not clear
how reliable the data collection methods were. The study did not
mention if women kept a diary of product use and frequency of sexual
intercourse, or if this information was collected by the study staff
during the follow-up visits. For all of these reasons, we conclude that
this study cannot be reliably used to support the comment's
contentions.
In conclusion, FDA does not accept the first comment's request to
remove the proposed warning language that links N9 use with an
increased risk of HIV infection. FDA is providing information about
whether it is safe for consumers to use these products based
[[Page 71775]]
on their risk for HIV and STDs. Based on the available scientific
evidence, we have determined that women should be advised that use of
N9 can cause vaginal irritation and that use of N9 has been associated
with an increased risk for HIV transmission in women at high risk for
HIV/AIDS. Use of N9 can result in irritated and inflamed genital tissue
and may increase a person's risk of getting HIV/AIDS if they have sex
with an HIV infected partner. We are, however, revising the proposed
warnings to more clearly convey the message that N9 spermicides cause
vaginal irritation, may increase the risk of getting HIV from an
infected partner, and should not be used by women at high risk for HIV/
AIDS. The warnings in Sec. 201.325(b)(2) and (b)(3) of the proposed
rule stated:
Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) alert:
This product does not protect against HIV/AIDS or other STDs
Ask a doctor before use if you have
a new sex partner, multiple sex partners, or unprotected
sex. Frequent use (more than once a day) of this product can increase
vaginal irritation, which may increase the risk of becoming infected
with the AIDS virus (HIV) or other STDs from infected partners. Ask a
doctor or other health professional for your best birth control method.
The revised warnings in this final rule appear under the subheadings
``Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) alert,'' ``Do not use,'' and
``When using this product'' and state:
Sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) alert: This product does not
protect against HIV/AIDS or other STDs and may increase the risk of
getting HIV from an infected partner.
Do not use if you or your sex partner has HIV/AIDS. If you do not
know if you or your sex partner is infected, choose another form of
birth control.
When using this product you may get vaginal irritation (burning,
itching, or a rash).
We are also revising the additional labeling information in
proposed Sec. 201.325(c)(1) (redesignated as Sec. 201.325(d)(1) in
this final rule) to more accurately reflect the scientific literature
and to convey the message that N9 spermicides should not be used by
women at risk for HIV. (Rectal use of N9 is discussed later in section
II.H, comment 12 of this document.) The revised additional labeling
information states:
``Studies have raised safety concerns that products
containing the spermicide nonoxynol 9 can irritate the vagina and
rectum. Sometimes this irritation has no symptoms. This irritation may
increase the risk of getting HIV/AIDS from an infected partner.''
3. Is FDA Required To Prove Actual Causation to Justify the Warnings?
(Comment 4) One comment stated that the proposed labeling implies a
link between the use of N9 and an increased risk of HIV infection that
is not sufficiently supported by the scientific literature. The comment
contended that the link between N9 use and an increased risk of HIV
transmission is ``mere speculation'' that is not suggested by a
comprehensive review of the scientific literature. In response to FDA's
statement that we need not show actual causation to mandate the
proposed warning, the comment stated that it disputes a lesser standard
unless FDA can show it will prevent a public harm. The comment
suggested that there is not a public harm to prevent, so actual
causation must be shown. The comment further asserted that the proof to
require this warning must be sufficient to avoid a determination that
the warning language requirement is arbitrary and capricious under 5
U.S.C. 706, and suggested that FDA has not provided such proof.
(Response) FDA disagrees with the comment. Based on a review of the
available data, FDA believes the known scientific evidence supports its
proposed warnings (see section II.B.2, comment 3 of this document).
Furthermore, FDA does not need a causal relationship to be definitely
established to mandate new warnings. To protect the public health, FDA
has determined that the warnings are necessary to ensure that these OTC
drug products continue to be safe and effective for their labeled
indications under ordinary conditions of use as those terms are defined
in the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the act). The warnings
reflect FDA's conclusion that there is reasonable evidence of a causal
relation between a clinically significant hazard and the drug.
Courts have upheld FDA's authority to issue regulations requiring
label warnings and other affirmative disclosures (see, e.g. Cosmetic,
Toiletry and Fragrance Ass'n v. Schmidt, 409 F. Supp. 57 (D.D.C. 1976),
aff'd without opn., Vic. No. 75-1715 (D.C. Cir., August 19, 1977), even
in the absence of a proven cause-and-effect relationship between
product usage and harm (see Council for Responsible Nutrition v. Goyan,
Civ. No. 80-1124 (D.D.C. August 1, 1980) (see also section III.B of
this document). Mandating the warnings included in this final rule does
not violate the Administrative Procedure Act's prohibition against
arbitrary and capricious conduct, because FDA's action is reasonable
based on the sufficiency of the available data and the need to protect
the public health.
C. Should Women Ask a Doctor Before Using N9 Products?
(Comment 5) Some comments did not agree with FDA's proposed warning
language which advises women to ask a doctor before using N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products if they have a new sex partner, multiple
sex partners, or unprotected sex. The comments questioned the need for
women to consult physicians about the role of N9 in their pregnancy or
STD prevention strategies. One comment doubted that the average
physician could provide enough special expertise or insight about the
role for N9 in a planned sexual encounter with a new partner to offset
the inconvenience, discomfort, or cost of involving a health
professional. Several comments stated that it was unclear what a woman
should do before she is able to consult a physician (e.g., avoid sex,
use alternative methods). Some comments contended that women should be
given enough information in the labeling to empower them to act
directly, without a health professional intermediary. These comments
recommended replacing ``Ask a doctor before use'' with explicit
statements such as ``Women who may be at risk of HIV and who plan to
use the product more than once a day should consider another form of
birth control'' or ``If you use these products more often than once a
day and/or have a new sex partner, multiple sex partners, or
unprotected sex you should consider another form of birth control''.
The comments suggested that adding a clarifying statement for women at
low risk and a statement that reinforces the use of latex condoms is
preferable to having consumers consult a physician for this
information.
(Response) FDA agrees with the comments that questioned the need
for women to have to consult with a physician before using N9 vaginal
contraceptive drug products if they have a new sex partner, multiple
sex partners, or unprotected sex. We try to provide consumers with the
appropriate information on the OTC drug product label to make informed
decisions on the use of these products. We believe that, by revising
the warning language under ``Ask a doctor before use if you have'' and
placing it under the subheadings ``Do not use'' and ``When using this
product, '' consumers will be able to make appropriate decisions
without consulting a physician. We consider this information
particularly important for
[[Page 71776]]
women who do not see a physician regularly, who will not consult a
physician due to the expense, or who cannot get an appointment or
consultation with a physician in a timely manner. Therefore, as
discussed in section II.B.2, comment 3 of this document, we are
revising the warnings under ``Ask a doctor before use if you have'' and
placing them under the subheadings ``Do not use'' and ``When using this
product.''
We are also revising the additional labeling information proposed
in Sec. 201.325(c) to include more information about the use and
safety of N9, so women will not have to consult a physician before use.
We do not want to discourage consumers from speaking with physicians or
other health care providers at any time about important health issues
such as birth control and STD prevention. Therefore, we are including a
statement in the additional labeling information that women should ask
a doctor or other health professional for advice if they choose. The
revised additional labeling statements are discussed in sections
II.B.2, comment 3; II.F.1, comment 8; II.F.2, comment 9; II.F.3,
comment 10; II.G, comment 11; and II.J.2, comment 15 of this document.
D. Where Will the Warnings Appear in the Labeling?
(Comment 6) Several comments addressed the placement of the
proposed warning statements on the OTC package. The comments requested
that FDA require prominent placement of the proposed warning statements
on both the outer carton and package insert to warn consumers most
effectively. One comment recommended using large and bold font to help
attract the consumer's attention and encourage reading of the package
insert.
(Response) FDA is requiring that the warning statements discussed
in section II.B.2, comment 3 of this document (under the subheadings
``Do not use'' and ``When using this product''), the warning statements
discussed in section II.H., comment 12 of this document (``For vaginal
use only'' and ``Not for rectal (anal) use''), and the warning
statement under the subheading ``Stop use and ask a doctor if'' (under
Sec. 201.325(b)(4) in the proposed rule (68 FR 2254 at 2262)), appear
on the outside container or wrapper of the retail package, or on the
immediate container label if there is no outside container or wrapper,
in the Drug Facts labeling format, in accordance with Sec.
201.66(c)(7). We also proposed additional labeling information in Sec.
201.325(c) that could be placed either on the outside container or
wrapper of the retail package, under the ``Other information'' section
of the Drug Facts labeling, in accordance with Sec. 201.66(c)(7), or
in a package insert. In this final rule, the revised condom usage
statement, ``when used correctly every time you have sex, latex condoms
greatly reduce but do not eliminate the risk of catching or spreading
HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.'' must be located in the Drug Facts
labeling under the heading ``Other information'' on the outside
container or wrapper of the retail package. The rest of the additional
labeling information now located in Sec. 201.325(d) of this final rule
can be located on the outside container or wrapper of the retail
package, under the ``Other information'' section of the Drug Facts
labeling in accordance with Sec. 201.66(c)(7), or in a package insert.
In instances where the manufacturer chooses to provide a package insert
for the additional information required in Sec. 201.325(d) of this
final rule, FDA recommends that a bolded statement such as ``before
using this product read the enclosed package insert for complete
directions and information'' be included on the outside container or
wrapper labeling to alert consumers and encourage reading of the
package insert.
E. Where Will the Condom Usage Statement Appear in the Labeling?
(Comment 7) Several comments requested that the proposed condom
message, ``Correct use of a latex condom with every sexual act will
help reduce the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs
from infected partners,'' should directly follow the STD alert on the
outside container or wrapper as well as appear in a package insert so
that consumers are immediately advised that STD/HIV protection is
available OTC.
(Response) FDA agrees with the comments that information about HIV/
STD protection (i.e., condom use) is important information and is now
requiring that it be located on the outside container or wrapper in
close proximity to the STD alert and other pertinent warnings. Because
the information is not a warning, the statement appears in the Drug
Facts labeling, under the heading ``Other information.'' In addition,
we are revising the condom usage statement (see section II.F, comment 8
in this document).
F. What Were the Comments on Condoms, Sexual Lubricants, and Barrier
Methods?
1. Do Warnings Apply to Condoms and Sexual Lubricants?
(Comment 8) Some comments questioned whether FDA's proposed
warnings apply to the labeling of condoms lubricated with N9. Several
comments noted that women using condoms and sexual lubricants
containing N9 may have a risk similar to those women using vaginal
contraceptives and so both groups need to receive the same warnings.
Some of these comments stated that FDA should propose warning language
similar to the proposed warnings for vaginal contraceptive products for
condoms and sexual lubricants containing N9, because of the substantial
public health risk posed by N9 containing products when used rectally.
(Response) This final rule requiring warnings for all OTC vaginal
contraceptives/spermicides containing N9 applies to drug products. It
does not apply to condoms lubricated with N9, which are primarily
regulated as medical devices (not drugs). Through rulemaking,
spermicidal condoms were classified as Class II medical devices (21 CFR
884.5310) and, as such, FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological
Health (CDRH) has primary jurisdiction over their regulation.
Although this final rule does not apply to condoms lubricated with
N9, it does contain information for consumers about using condoms as a
method to help reduce the risk of becoming infected with the AIDS virus
(HIV) and other STDs. In the January 16, 2003, proposed rule, FDA
discussed the public health benefit of such information and proposed
the following condom usage statement for spermicides containing N9:
``Correct use of a latex condom with every sexual act will help reduce
the risk of getting the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs from infected
partners'' (see 68 FR 2254 at 2258 to 2259 and 2262). Subsequently, FDA
reviewed the labeling of condoms (with and without N9) and issued a
revised draft guidance (Ref. 10) on condom labeling. Therefore, FDA
revised the proposed condom usage statement to be consistent with the
statement it recommended in this new guidance. The new revised condom
usage statement (in Sec. 201.325(c) in this final rule) reads:
``[bullet] when used correctly every time you have sex, latex condoms
greatly reduce, but do not eliminate the risk of catching or spreading
HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.''
[[Page 71777]]
Vaginal moisturizers and vaginal sexual lubricants are currently
being evaluated under the OTC drug review regulatory process. FDA
issued a call for data notice on December 31, 2003 (68 FR 75585),
requesting safety and effectiveness data on various products, including
vaginal moisturizers and vaginal lubricants. FDA will publish its
findings in a future issue of the Federal Register.
2. Are Condoms Lubricated With N9 Safe to Use?
(Comment 9) Some comments stated that labeling products containing
N9 with a warning that usage promotes the transmission of HIV or other
STDs may cause sexually active individuals to question whether or not
to use a condom at all. One comment expressed concern that after
reading FDA's proposed warnings, consumers would perceive that condoms
lubricated with N9 were not safe and would use nothing rather than use
a condom containing N9. Therefore, several comments stated that the
labeling should remind consumers that N9 is still effective in reducing
unwanted pregnancies and that we should continue to endorse the use of
spermicidal condoms. One of the comments stated that condoms containing
N9 provide important consumer and public health care benefits, because
N9 in condoms is intended to provide a secondary means of pregnancy
prevention if the condom is used incorrectly or breaks.
Other comments were not supportive of N9 condoms. One comment
requested that FDA take action to address the health risks posed by N9
as an additive to condoms and sexual lubricants by withdrawing them
from the marketplace. This comment stated that N9 is not necessary to
the function of lubricants and, in the case of condoms, N9 is not
necessary as an additive or lubricant to their function as a physical
barrier against pregnancy and disease. Several comments stated that the
correct and consistent use of condoms provides excellent protection
against pregnancy and HIV even without the addition of N9. One comment
concluded that since N9 lubricated condoms and sexual lubricants
containing N9 offer no proven benefit to any user group, and pose
substantial risks to some users, the risk should be eliminated rather
than relying on a ``labeling'' solution. One comment suggested revising
the proposed condom statement to read ``Correct use of a (dry) latex
condom, (or a silicone lubricated latex condom, but NOT a condom
lubricated with N9) with every vaginal sexual act will help reduce the
risk of transmitting the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs.''
(Response) As discussed in section II.F.1, comment 8 of this
document, this rulemaking does not apply to condoms that contain N9. It
does, however, provide for information to be added to labeling to
inform consumers about using condoms as a method to help reduce the
risk of becoming infected with the AIDS virus (HIV) and other STDs. In
section II.F.1, comment 8 of this document, FDA discussed a condom
usage statement to encourage the use of condoms as a method to help
reduce the risk of becoming infected with the AIDS virus (HIV) and
other STDs as proposed in the proposed rule. In the revised draft
guidance on condom labeling (Ref. 10) discussed previously, FDA
recommended the additional warning ``if you or your partner has HIV/
AIDS, or you do not know if you or your partner is infected, you should
choose a latex condom without N-9''. Because FDA wishes to provide
consistent information to consumers regarding products that contain N9,
we are including a new labeling statement in Sec. 201.325(d)(3) for
vaginal contraceptive drug products containing N9 to read as follows:
``[bullet] use a latex condom without nonoxynol 9 if you or your sex
partner has HIV/AIDS, multiple sex partners, or other HIV risk
factors.''
3. How Do Warnings Apply to N9 Products Used With Barrier Methods?
(Comment 10) Some comments were concerned with how FDA's proposed
warnings apply to consumers using an N9 spermicide product with barrier
methods. The comments pointed out that FDA's proposed warning language
for vaginal contraceptive drug products containing N9 applies to
spermicide use alone, and not to concurrent use of N9 with female
barrier methods. The comments stated concerns about how consumers who
use N9 products with female barrier methods (such as diaphragms and
cervical caps) would apply FDA's proposed warning language to their
use. Several comments stated that consumers are currently advised
(e.g., in product labeling or by physicians) to use spermicide with
diaphragms and cervical caps to improve contraceptive effectiveness and
to insert more spermicide (without removal of the diaphragm or cervical
cap) if repeat intercourse occurs. The comments stated that FDA's
proposed labeling does not provide clear advice for women (particularly
those at low risk for HIV) who use these barrier methods. These
comments contend that there is not enough data about the effectiveness
of diaphragms or caps without additional spermicide to recommend
discontinuation of the spermicide. Some comments also stated that FDA's
proposed warning language may deter promotion and use of female barrier
methods that require additional spermicide. One of these comments
stated that a recent report from the CDC (Ref. 2) estimates that N9
used together with diaphragms prevents 460,000 pregnancies each year.
The comment stated that the proposed warning language would have a
harmful effect on women's health by increasing unintended pregnancies
and even STDs among women who would otherwise safely use cervical
barriers plus N9, but might switch to a less effective method or no
method at all. Another comment stated that clinicians may advise low-
risk clients not to use N9 as an adjunct to diaphragm use, which may
result in more unintended pregnancies. One comment suggested that FDA
advise consumers in the labeling that the studies that have found risks
associated with the use of N9 did not study the products with a
diaphragm or cervical cap.
(Response) Currently, FDA approved directions for use for cervical
caps (Ref. 11) and diaphragms (21 CFR 884.5350) specify use of a
spermicide with these devices. FDA believes that women using cervical
caps or diaphragms with N9 products are exposed to the same risks as
women who use N9 vaginal contraceptive drug products alone because of
the nature of the risk. The warning and other labeling information
statements that are required by this final rule will inform women how
best to use N9 spermicidal jellies and creams with barrier
contraceptive methods.
FDA agrees with the comments that women at low risk for HIV should
be able to safely use barrier methods along with N9 products and should
not be advised to change from a barrier contraceptive method. There
have been several studies over the years of cervical caps and
diaphragms using N9 that have shown minimal irritation to the vagina
and cervical mucosa (Refs. 12, 13, and 14). It is important to note
that these were contraceptive studies among women in stable, monogamous
relationships and that typical subjects did not use the devices
multiple times a day. In section II.G, comment 11 of this document, we
discuss labeling revisions that advise women at low risk for HIV that
N9 products continue to be safe for contraception for them.
Accordingly, FDA is also including barrier method and condom users at
low risk for HIV in these statements.
[[Page 71778]]
G. Is N9 Safe for Women at Low Risk for HIV/AIDS and STDs?
(Comment 11) A number of comments stated that women at low risk for
HIV and STDs should continue to use N9 spermicides as a contraceptive
option. One comment stated that some women who use N9 containing
vaginal contraceptive drug products for birth control may face a
different (lower) STD risk profile than the women studied in the
clinical trials, who were at a higher risk for HIV infection. The
comment stated that the proposed warnings might exert a harmful net
effect on women's health by increasing unintended pregnancy and STDs
among women who would otherwise use N9 products safely, but might
switch to less effective methods or no method at all because of the
warnings. The comment urged that the data need to be properly
extrapolated to women at lower risk for HIV who now use N9 products to
successfully prevent pregnancy. Another comment stated that until FDA
has additional data on the safety of N9 in low risk settings, women
currently using N9 containing spermicides for birth control should
continue to do so. Similarly, some comments stated that women at high
risk for HIV infection should not use N9 products for contraception,
but that these products should remain a contraceptive option for women
at low risk. These comments stated that if a woman is not at high risk
for HIV (because she is in a mutually monogamous relationship with a
HIV negative partner), then use of N9 products poses less of a safety
hazard. Thus, the comments contended that women at low risk for HIV
could safely use N9 products multiple times in a single day.
One comment stated that FDA should qualify the warning language