Postmarketing Safety Reports for Human Drug and Biological Products; Electronic Submission Requirements, 42184-42203 [E9-19682]
Download as PDF
42184
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 74, No. 161
Friday, August 21, 2009
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 310, 314, and 600
[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0334]
RIN 0910–AF96
Postmarketing Safety Reports for
Human Drug and Biological Products;
Electronic Submission Requirements
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is proposing to
amend its postmarketing safety
reporting regulations for human drug
and biological products to require that
persons subject to mandatory reporting
requirements submit safety reports in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review, and archive. FDA is taking this
action to improve the agency’s systems
for collecting and analyzing
postmarketing safety reports. The
proposed change would help the agency
to more rapidly review postmarketing
safety reports, identify emerging safety
problems, and disseminate safety
information in support of FDA’s public
health mission. In addition, the
proposed amendments would be a key
element in harmonizing FDA’s
postmarketing safety reporting
regulations with international standards
for the electronic submission of safety
information.
DATES: Submit written or electronic
comments on the proposed rule by
November 19, 2009. Submit comments
on information collection issues under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 by
September 21, 2009, (see section ‘‘VII.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995’’ of
this document). See section III.G of this
document for the proposed effective
date of a final rule based on this
proposed rule.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2008–N–
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
0334 and/or RIN number 0910–AF96, by
any of the following methods, except
that comments on information
collection issues under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 must be
submitted to the Office of Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) (see the ‘‘Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995’’ section of this
document).
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the
following ways:
• FAX: 301–827–6870.
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For
paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions]:
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
To ensure more timely processing of
comments, FDA is no longer accepting
comments submitted to the agency by email. FDA encourages you to continue
to submit electronic comments by using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as
described previously, in the ADDRESSES
portion of this document under
Electronic Submissions.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
Docket No. and Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All
comments received may be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov 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, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
The information collection provisions
of this proposed rule have been
submitted to OMB for review. Interested
persons are requested to fax comments
regarding information collection by
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
September 21, 2009, to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB. To ensure that comments on
information collection are received,
OMB recommends that written
comments be faxed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX:
202–395–7285, or e-mailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For information concerning human
drug products: Roger Goetsch,
Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Silver
Spring, MD, 20993–0002, 301–770–
9299, or
For information concerning human
biological products: Stephen
Ripley, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFM–17),
Food and Drug Administration,
1401 Rockville Pike, suite 200N,
Rockville, MD, 20852–1448, 301–
827–6210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
A. Current Postmarketing Safety
Reporting Requirements
1. Description and Timing of Safety
Reports
2. Current Format for the Submission
of Postmarketing Safety Reports
B. Previously Proposed Revisions to
the Postmarketing Safety Reporting
Requirements
C. Rationale for Requiring Electronic
Submission of Postmarketing Safety
Reports
1. Expedited Identification of
Emerging Safety Problems
2. Improved Speed and Efficiency of
Industry and Agency Operations
3. International Harmonization of
Safety Reporting
D. Electronic Format Submission
Initiatives
1. Electronic Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports
2. Comments on the Advance Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)
for Mandatory Electronic
Submission of Postmarketing Safety
Reports to FDA
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
A. Electronic Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
B. Safety Reports Not Covered by the
Proposed Rule
C. Waivers
D. Individual Case Safety Report
(ICSR)—Definition and Required
Information
E. Removal of Paper Format
Provisions
F. Miscellaneous Changes
G. Proposed Implementation
Timeframe
IV. Legal Authority
V. Environmental Impact
VI. Analysis of Impacts
A. Benefits
B. Costs
C. Summary of Benefits and Costs
D. Alternatives Considered
E. Small Business Impact
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
A. Reporting Cost
B. Capital Costs
VIII. Federalism
IX. Request for Comments
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Introduction
When a drug or biological product is
approved and enters the market, the
product is introduced to a larger patient
population in settings different from
clinical trials. New information
generated during the postmarketing
period offers further insight into the
benefits and risks of the product, and
evaluation of this information is
important to ensure the safe use of these
products.
FDA receives information regarding
postmarketing adverse drug
experiences1 from safety reports
submitted to the agency. For nearly 35
years, FDA has received these
postmarketing safety reports on paper.
In recent years, many companies have
voluntarily submitted these reports to
the agency in electronic format.
Data from both electronic and paper
reports are entered into FDA’s Adverse
Event Reporting System (AERS)
database. AERS is a computerized
information database designed to
support FDA’s postmarketing safety
surveillance program for drug and
biological products. The AERS database
is used to store and analyze data
received in postmarketing safety reports.
Safety reporting data submitted on
paper must first be converted into an
electronic format before being entered
into AERS.2
FDA is proposing to require use of an
electronic format for the submission of
postmarketing safety reports (see section
1 For purposes of this preamble, the term adverse
drug experience includes an adverse experience
associated with use of a biological product.
2 Additional information regarding the AERS
database may be found at: https://www.fda.gov/cder/
aers/default.htm.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
II of this document), which would be an
important step toward improving the
agency’s systems for collecting and
analyzing these reports. The proposal
would:
• Eliminate the time and costs
associated with submitting paper
reports (for industry) and converting
data from paper reports into electronic
format for review and analysis (for the
agency),
• Expedite the agency’s access to
safety information and provide data to
the agency in a format that would
support more efficient and
comprehensive reviews, and
• Enhance our ability to rapidly
communicate information about
suspected problems to health care
providers, consumers, applicants, and
sponsors within the United States and
internationally in support of FDA’s
public health mission.
The proposed rule would require that
postmarketing safety reports be
submitted to us in an electronic format
that we can process, review, and
archive. Consistent with FDA’s current
practice for firms that already submit
these reports in electronic format
voluntarily, technical specifications
referenced in FDA guidance documents
will describe how to submit such
reports to the agency.3 As necessary, the
agency will revise the technical
specifications referenced in FDA
guidance documents to address
changing technical specifications or any
additional specifications that may be
needed for mandatory electronic safety
reporting. Using guidance documents to
communicate these technical
specifications will permit FDA to be
more responsive to rapidly occurring
changes in the technological
environment.
Currently, the technical specifications
referenced in guidance documents rely
upon and adopt certain safety reporting
and transmission standards
recommended by the International
Conference on Harmonisation of
Technical Requirements for Registration
of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
(ICH). ICH was formed to facilitate the
harmonization of technical
requirements for the registration of
3 The most current information on submitting
postmarketing safety reports in electronic format
can be found in the draft guidance on ‘‘Providing
Regulatory Submissions in Electronic Format—
Postmarketing Individual Case Safety Reports’’ (73
FR 33436, June 12, 2008) and the ‘‘Periodic safety
update reports’’ section of the guidance on
‘‘Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic
Format—Human Pharmaceutical Product
Applications and Related Submissions Using the
eCTD Specifications’’ (Revision 2, June 2008). We
intend to finalize the draft guidance document in
the near future.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42185
pharmaceutical products among the
three ICH regions: The European Union,
Japan, and the United States. In this
proposed rule, we reaffirm our intention
to continue to rely on these ICHrecommended standards, in addition to
providing other options (see section
II.D.1 of this document). We believe the
continued use of ICH standards will
promote harmonization of safety
reporting among regulatory agencies and
facilitate the international exchange of
postmarketing safety information.
Accordingly, this proposed rule is
consistent with ongoing agency
initiatives to encourage the widest
possible use of electronic technology
and to promote international
harmonization of safety reporting for
human drug and biological products
through reliance on ICH standards. (See
section II.C.3 of this document for
additional discussion of ICH.).
In this document, we provide
background information on the current
status of FDA’s postmarketing safety
reporting requirements (current
regulations and previously proposed
revisions) (sections II.A and II.B of this
document). We also discuss the
rationale for proposing this rule (section
II.C of this document). Additionally, we
describe electronic postmarketing safety
reporting initiatives (section II.D of this
document), including an advanced
notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) that we issued in 1998.
Finally, we describe the proposed rule
(section III of this document).
II. Background
A. Current Postmarketing Safety
Reporting Requirements
The current postmarketing safety
reporting requirements for drug and
biological products are summarized
below. The proposed electronic
reporting amendments would leave the
substantive aspects of these
requirements largely unchanged.
1. Description and Timing of Safety
Reports
Under existing regulations in part
310, 314, and 600 (21 CFR part 310, 314,
and 600), specifically §§ 310.305,
314.80, 314.98, and 600.80,
manufacturers, packers, distributors,4
4 For § 600.80, ‘‘distributor’’ also includes shared
manufacturers, joint manufacturers, or any other
participant involved in divided manufacturing.
5 In this document, the term ‘‘applicant’’ is used
instead of the term ‘‘licensed manufacturer’’ for
persons with approved BLAs.
6 ICSR attachments include published articles
that must accompany ICSRs based on scientific
literature (§§ 314.80(d) and 600.80(d)), as well as
other supporting information such as relevant
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
Continued
21AUP1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
42186
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
and applicants5 with approved new
drug applications (NDAs), abbreviated
new drug applications (ANDAs), and
biological license applications (BLAs)
and those that market prescription drugs
for human use without an approved
application are required to submit
postmarketing safety reports of adverse
drug experiences to FDA. These safety
reports include individual case safety
reports (ICSRs), and other related
documents (ICSR attachments6) for each
adverse drug experience. An ICSR is a
description of the adverse drug
experience that includes the basic
elements, or facts, of each reportable
event for an individual patient or
subject. Under the current regulations,
persons who submit safety reports on
paper must use the approved reporting
form for ICSRs—either the FDA Form
3500A or an equivalent form as
discussed below. Although current
regulations do not use the term ICSR,
the term is used in FDA and ICH
guidances to refer to the adverse drug
experience information supplied on the
FDA Form 3500A or other approved
forms, including those currently
submitted in electronic format.7
Accordingly, we will refer throughout
this document to the description of each
adverse drug experience related to an
individual patient or subject using
human drug or biological products as an
ICSR. As discussed in section III.E of
this document, consistent with the
proposed change to a mandatory
electronic format for safety reports, we
propose to delete most references to the
paper forms (e.g., FDA Form 3500A)
from FDA postmarketing safety
reporting regulations and to add: (1) A
definition of ICSR for drugs and
biologics and (2) a statement of the
information required to be reported in
an ICSR.
a. 15-day Alert reports. FDA
regulations require manufacturers,
packers, distributors, and applicants to
submit an ICSR on FDA Form 3500A, or
its equivalent, for each postmarketing
adverse drug experience that is both
serious and unexpected to the agency
within 15 calendar days of initial
receipt of information about the adverse
drug experience (15-day ‘‘Alert
reports’’). An unexpected adverse drug
experience is any adverse drug
experience that is not listed in the
current labeling for the product
(§§ 310.305(b), 314.80(a), and 600.80(a)).
hospital discharge summaries and autopsy reports/
death certificates.
7 Health Level Seven (HL7), a technical-standards
group accredited by the American National
Standards Institute (ANSI), also uses the term ICSR
to describe adverse event information supplied for
FDA regulated products.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
Followup reports are required to be
submitted within 15 calendar days of
receipt of new information or as
requested by FDA, and are also
submitted on an FDA Form 3500A or on
an equivalent form. In addition to the
ICSR, 15-day Alert reports frequently
include related documents, such as
medical records, hospital discharge
summaries, or other documentation
related to the event (ICSR attachments).
To avoid duplication of reports,
nonapplicant manufacturers, packers,
and distributors of drug and biological
products having an approved
application may, under §§ 314.80 and
600.80, submit all reports of serious
adverse drug experiences to the
applicant within 5 calendar days of
receipt of the report instead of to FDA.
Similarly, packers and distributors of
prescription drug products marketed
without an approved application may
meet their postmarketing 15-day safety
reporting obligations under § 310.305 by
submitting all reports of serious adverse
drug experiences to the manufacturer
within 5 calendar days of the receipt of
the information instead of to FDA.
Applicants/manufacturers receiving
such data must then, in turn, submit a
15-day Alert report to FDA.
b. Periodic reports. In addition to 15day Alert reports, applicants are also
required to submit postmarketing
periodic safety reports to FDA. For each
approved application, applicants are
required under §§ 314.80 and 600.80 to
submit a periodic report quarterly or
annually, depending on how long the
drug or biological product has been
approved. Upon written notice, the
agency can require that an applicant
submit these reports to FDA at different
times than those stated. These reports
contain the following information: (1) A
narrative summary and analysis of the
information in the report, (2) an analysis
of all of the 15-day Alert reports
submitted during the reporting interval,
(3) an ICSR (and ICSR attachments, if
applicable) for each adverse drug
experience not previously reported (i.e.,
reports of all serious, expected (labeled)
and nonserious events)8, and (4) a
history of actions taken since the last
periodic report because of the reports of
adverse drug experiences. The
descriptive information portions of a
postmarketing periodic safety report
8 In some cases, applicants may request a waiver
for submission of an ICSR for nonserious, expected
adverse drug experiences. See section XI.A of FDA’s
draft guidance for industry on ‘‘Postmarketing
Safety Reporting for Human Drug and Biological
Products Including Vaccines’’ available on the
Internet at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Guidance
ComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
default.htm under ‘‘Procedural.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(report summary, analysis of 15-day
Alert reports, and history of actions) are
submitted to the agency in a narrative
format accompanied by the ICSRs and
any ICSR attachments for all serious,
expected and nonserious adverse drug
experiences that occurred during the
reporting period. Manufacturers of
drugs marketed without an approved
application (e.g., NDA, ANDA) are not
required to submit postmarketing
periodic safety reports to FDA.
c. Distribution reports. In addition to
periodic reports, under § 600.81,
applicants with approved BLAs are also
required to submit distribution reports
to the agency every 6 months or at other
intervals that the agency may specify
with written notice. These reports
contain information about the quantity
of biological product distributed under
the BLA, including the quantity
distributed to distributors.
d. Nonprescription human drug
products marketed without an approved
application. Public Law 109–462,
enacted on December 22, 2006,
amended the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the act) to create a new
section 760 (21 U.S.C. 379aa), entitled
‘‘Serious Adverse Event Reporting for
Nonprescription Drugs.’’ Section 760 of
the act requires manufacturers, packers,
or distributors whose name appears on
the label of nonprescription human drug
products marketed without an approved
application to report serious adverse
events associated with their products.
Effective December 22, 2007, section
760 of the act requires these reports to
be submitted to FDA within 15 business
days. As required by section 2(e)(3) of
Public Law 109–462, FDA issued a draft
guidance for industry entitled
‘‘Postmarketing Adverse Event
Reporting for Nonprescription Human
Drug Products Marketed without an
Approved Application’’ (72 FR 58316,
October 15, 2007). The draft guidance
describes the minimum data elements
and the relevant policies and
procedures for making these reports
under section 760 of the act. It provides,
among other things, that the reports be
submitted on paper on FDA Form
3500A or in the electronic format
described in the guidance.
This proposed rule does not contain
language that would require that safety
reports under section 760 of the act for
nonprescription human drug products
marketed without an approved
application be submitted to FDA in
electronic format. However, we are
soliciting public comment on whether
the final rule should require the use of
electronic format for these reports. We
expect that any electronic format
requirements for these section 760
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
reports would be quite similar to the
requirements for other categories of drug
products addressed by this rule. Any
decision whether to include section 760
reports will be informed by the public
comments submitted in response to this
proposal and the agency’s experience
since submission of serious adverse
event reports for nonprescription
human drug products marketed without
an approved application became
mandatory in December 2007.
Finally, note that nonprescription
drugs that are marketed under approved
applications (NDAs or ANDAs) are not
covered under section 760 of the act.
Such products are subject to reporting
under current §§ 314.80 and 314.81.
Reports submitted to FDA under those
sections would be subject to the
mandatory electronic format
requirements proposed in this rule as
described elsewhere in this document.
ICSRs in the electronic report include
the same information as the paper FDA
Form 3500A or CIOMS I form.
Accordingly, under current
regulations, an ICSR submission can
take the form of a paper FDA Form
3500A, a paper CIOMS I form, or
comparable information submitted in
electronic format. (See section II.D.1 of
this document). Each of these is a
different method of transmitting to FDA
the same basic elements of the ICSR,
whether on paper or in electronic
format. As described in section II.D.1.a
of this document, ICSR attachments and
the descriptive information portions of
periodic safety reports may also be
submitted electronically.
b. Vaccine products. Adverse
experience reporting for vaccine
products may be submitted to the
Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting
System (VAERS). VAERS is a
computerized information database
designed to support the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention’s
(CDC’s) and FDA’s postmarketing
surveillance program for vaccine
products. Postmarketing ICSRs for
vaccines can be submitted on a VAERS
paper form11 or reported on-line using
the VAERS secure web-based system12.
Each of these is a different method of
transmitting to CDC/FDA the same basic
elements of the ICSR. Currently, VAERS
does not have the capability to receive
electronic ICSRs submitted through the
FDA’s electronic submissions gateway.
However, developments are underway
to implement this submission
capability.
2. Current Format for the Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports
a. Drug and biological products. FDA
currently accepts all postmarketing
ICSRs in either a paper format or an
electronic format. Sections 310.305(d),
314.80(f), and 600.80(f) authorize use of
a paper FDA Form 3500A for reporting
of single cases of adverse drug
experiences for human drug and
biological products. The regulations also
permit use of the form introduced by the
World Health Organization’s (WHO’s)
Council for International Organizations
of Medical Sciences (CIOMS) Working
Group I for reporting single cases of
foreign adverse drug experiences that
are serious and unexpected (CIOMS I
form).
Section 11.2(b)(2) currently provides
that regulatory submissions may be
voluntarily provided to the agency in
electronic form9 if the submissions are
identified by FDA in its electronic
submissions public docket as
submissions the agency will accept in
electronic form.10 Postmarketing safety
reports for drug and nonvaccine
biological products have been identified
in the docket as submissions the agency
can accept in electronic format. See
Memorandums 23 and 28 in FDA’s
electronic submissions public docket. If
the reporter elects to file the safety
report in electronic format rather than
on paper, current §§ 310.305(d),
314.80(f), and 600.80(f) require that the
B. Previously Proposed Revisions to the
Postmarketing Safety Reporting
Requirements
In the Federal Register of March 14,
2003 (68 FR 12406), FDA published a
proposed rule to amend its safety
reporting requirements for human drug
and biological products (Safety
Reporting Proposed Rule). The agency
proposed new definitions and reporting
formats and standards for pre- and
postmarketing safety reporting as
recommended by ICH (see section II.C.3
of this document) and by CIOMS. Some
of the proposed amendments were
based on the recommendations of ICH,
while others were proposed by the
agency on its own initiative. With
regard to coding of postmarketing ICSRs
9 The content of labeling for NDAs, certain BLAs,
ANDAs, annual reports, and supplements is
currently the only regulatory submission required
to be submitted to the agency electronically (68 FR
69009, December 11, 2003).
10 Docket No. FDA–1992–S–0039 (formerly
Docket No. 1992S–0251) can be accessed on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
11 The VAERS form can be accessed on the
Internet at https://secure.vaers.org/vaersdata
entryintro.htm. FDA has verified the Web site
addresses throughout this document, but FDA is not
responsible for any subsequent changes to the Web
sites after this document publishes in the Federal
Register.)
12 Report on-line at https://secure.vaers.org.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42187
to standardize safety reports for
comparison and analysis, the agency
proposed use of the Medical Dictionary
for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA)
terminology developed by ICH13. The
agency also proposed to require the
submission of new types of
postmarketing safety reports to FDA.
FDA is currently considering the
comments that it has received on the
Safety Reporting Proposed Rule. Any
new postmarketing safety reports that
are required by a safety reporting final
rule would be required to be submitted
electronically in accordance with this
rulemaking, if adopted as final.
C. Rationale for Requiring Electronic
Submission of Postmarketing Safety
Report
As explained more below, the agency
proposes to require that all
postmarketing safety reports for human
drugs and biological products be
submitted in electronic format. By
requiring submission of these reports in
electronic format, FDA would expedite
access to safety information and
facilitate international harmonization
and exchange of this information. This,
in turn, would lead to more efficient
reviews of safety data and enhance our
ability to rapidly disseminate safety
information to health care providers,
consumers, applicants, sponsors, and
other regulatory authorities in support
of FDA’s public health mission. In
addition, the agency would recognize a
significant cost savings by converting
the safety reporting system from a paper
submission process to an all electronic
system that would increase the accuracy
of information and reduce the need for
manual data entry.
1. Expedited Identification of Emerging
Safety Problems
Establishment and maintenance of
efficient risk management programs
(where appropriate) is an agency
priority (see FDA’s January 2007
response to the Institute of Medicine
(IOM) report on drug safety entitled
‘‘The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting
and Protecting the Health of the Public,’’
13 MedDRA is a medically validated medical
terminology created by ICH as a cooperative effort
between the pharmaceutical industry and regulators
from the United States, Europe, and Japan for
sharing regulatory information for human medical
products and activities (see www.ich.org/cache/
compo/276-254-1.html). MedDRA establishes a
terminology database for use in the regulatory
process for medical products and has become the
accepted standard for regulatory activities involving
adverse drug experiences. Use of MedDRA would
serve the public health by facilitating the collection,
presentation, and analysis of adverse drug
experience information from medical products
during clinical and scientific reviews and
marketing.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42188
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
FDA’s March 2005 guidance for
industry entitled ‘‘Development and Use
of Risk Minimization Action Plans,’’
and FDA’s 2007 Strategic Action
Plan).14 The changes proposed in this
rule, if adopted, would improve the
agency’s management of risks from
human drug and biological products by
expediting the postmarketing
identification and communication of
emerging safety information for these
products.
Requiring that postmarketing ICSRs
be submitted in electronic format would
result in reducing the time required for
FDA to enter information from a paper
safety report into a database for
evaluation and analysis. Currently,
approximately 60 percent of all ICSRs
(i.e., 15-day Alert reports and ICSRs
associated with periodic reports15) are
submitted to FDA on paper for input
into the AERS database (approximately
30,000/month). With regard to 15-day
Alert reports, approximately one-third
are submitted on paper (approximately
8,000/month) to FDA. Fifteen-day Alert
reports that are submitted on paper
generally reach FDA’s data entry
contractor within the required 15 days
following the adverse drug experience,
but then the ICSRs must be manually
entered into the AERS database. These
ICSRs are entered into the FDA AERS
database on a priority basis because they
may indicate a new, previously
unidentified risk. The time required for
data entry, validation, and quality
control processes, however, adds an
additional 2 weeks before the ICSRs are
actually available for assessment by
FDA’s safety evaluators. With regard to
periodic ICSRs, approximately 80
percent are submitted on paper
(approximately 22,000/month).16
Periodic ICSRs, which are submitted on
paper, may not be available for review
by safety evaluators for up to 2 months
after submission to the agency because
of their volume and because ICSRs in
14 These resources are available on the Internet at
(IOM response) https://www.fda.gov/downloads/
drugs/drugsafety/postmarketingdrugsafety
informationforpatientsandproviders/
UCM171627.pdf, (strategic plan) https://
www.fda.gov/ope/stratplan07/stratplan07.htm, and
(guidance) https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Guidance
ComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
default.htmunder ‘‘Clinical/Medical.’’
15 See section II.A.1.b of this preamble for a
description of periodic ICSRs.
16 Postmarketing periodic reports are required to
be submitted to the FDA for each approved NDA,
ANDA, and BLA and are due quarterly for the first
3 years after U.S. approval of the application and
annually thereafter. An ICSR in a periodic safety
report includes the same elements in the same
format as an ICSR in a 15-day Alert report, but
describes an adverse drug experience that is not
both serious and unexpected (i.e., all nonserious
adverse drug experiences or serious, expected
adverse drug experiences).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
15-day Alert reports must take first
priority.
In contrast, the ICSRs in both 15-day
Alert and periodic reports submitted in
electronic format are processed and
available for safety evaluator review
much more quickly because there is no
need for data entry and the associated
quality control and validation processes
are faster. Instead of 2 months for
periodic ICSRs or 2 weeks for 15-day
Alert ICSRs that are submitted in a
paper format, ICSRs submitted in
electronic format are, generally,
available to reviewers within 2 days of
their receipt by FDA. The requirement
for electronic safety reports is expected
to result in faster processing and this
will permit FDA to more quickly
identify emerging safety issues and
rapidly disseminate significant safety
information to the medical community
and the public with corresponding
benefits to the public health.
2. Improved Speed and Efficiency of
Industry and Agency Operations
The proposed electronic formatting
requirements for postmarketing safety
reports would enhance operations for
both industry and FDA. Electronic
reporting can benefit industry by
eliminating the costs associated with
collating, copying, storing, retrieving,
and mailing paper copies. In addition,
FDA would benefit from the elimination
of data entry processes and significant
reduction in physical storage
requirements. When data are provided
only on paper, the information must be
converted manually into an electronic
form to review and analyze. This
process is time consuming, costly, and
creates an opportunity for data entry
error to occur.
FDA expects to provide two options
for submitting electronically formatted
ICSRs. Reporters would be able to
submit ICSRs by using either an ICHcompatible electronic transmission
system, or a Web-based form similar to
those used for commercial transactions,
such as retail purchases, on the Internet.
(These options, as well as those for
submission of ICSR attachments in
electronic form, are discussed in more
detail in section II.D.1 of this
document.) For companies that submit
large numbers of ICSRs, use of the ICHcompatible system for electronic
transmission would be cost effective
because the information from the ICSRs
will be transmitted directly from the
company’s database to FDA without
needing additional administrative
support for manual entry of the
information. For companies that submit
a small number of ICSRs, use of the
Web-based form may be more cost
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
effective than using the ICH-compatible
system.
FDA has worked with industry on
electronic submission of postmarketing
ICSRs since 1998. In 2001, FDA
announced through public docket
number 92S–0251 that the agency
would accept voluntary electronic
submissions of ICSRs for 15-day Alert
and periodic safety reports in lieu of a
paper submission (see section II.A.2 of
this document). Currently, over 40
pharmaceutical companies are
voluntarily using electronic format to
submit to FDA ICSRs for both 15-day
Alert and periodic reports for human
drug and biologics, with more than
500,000 ICSRs submitted to date. This
experience has shown that electronic
data submissions to the AERS database
reduce the cost of data entry and
facilitate the review process. It currently
costs FDA approximately $35 to process
a report submitted on paper. In
comparison, a report submitted in an
electronic format costs approximately
$12 to process.
3. International Harmonization of Safety
Reporting
In developing this proposal, FDA
considered the international standards
developed by ICH for the submission of
safety information. The other ICH
regions (the European Union (EU) and
Japan) are also implementing the
standards recommended by ICH for the
electronic submission of safety reports.
The procedures for the electronic
submission of postmarketing safety
reports in this proposed rule would,
therefore, reduce costs to industry
associated with maintaining multiple
electronic systems designed to meet the
needs of different regulatory authorities.
The proposed electronic safety reporting
regulations would also encourage better
communication between FDA and the
industry, as well as with other
regulators, nationally and abroad, while
reducing the costs associated with
reporting. Moreover, the industry would
be able to rely on one form of electronic
reporting, which would reduce the
administrative costs of compliance.
a. Status of electronic submissions in
the EU. The European Commission
drafted guidance on adverse event
reporting, including Volume 9 of ‘‘The
Rules Governing Medicinal Products in
the European Union’’ (the EU rules),
which contains a specific emphasis on
pharmacovigilance. The EU rules
require the electronic submission of
adverse event reports (effective
November 2005) and incorporate
international guidelines reached within
the framework of the ICH. The EU rules
specify that the electronic transmission
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
and management of safety reports will
be carried out according to the
guidelines and specifications contained
in ICH guidance on safety reporting and
electronic standards.
b. Status of electronic submissions in
Japan. On October 27, 2003, the
Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour,
and Welfare mandated that ICH
guidance E2BM17 compliant ICSRs be
submitted in electronic format either by
the Internet or by physical media.
c. Global impact of a standard
electronic submission. FDA collaborates
with many international regulatory
counterparts on drug safety issues.
Frequently, FDA sends to and receives
from other regulators paper copies of
ICSRs for further clinical analysis of
specific drug safety issues. FDA
envisions that regulatory partners
participating in ICH, and other
regulators that choose to implement the
same standards, will be able to
electronically exchange specific ICSRs
in real time as safety issues emerge. As
a result, regulatory partners would be
assured that they are making regulatory
decisions based on a full complement of
available information.
D. Electronic Format Submission
Initiatives
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Electronic Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports
a. Voluntary electronic submissions.
In the Federal Register of March 20,
1997 (62 FR 13430), FDA published a
regulation on electronic records and
electronic signatures (21 CFR part 11).
In August 2003, FDA issued guidance
for industry entitled ‘‘Part 11, Electronic
Records; Electronic Signatures—Scope
and Application,’’ describing the
agency’s thinking regarding part 11. Part
11 generally provides that in instances
where records are submitted to the
agency, such records may be submitted
in electronic format instead of paper
format, provided that FDA has
identified the submission in FDA’s
electronic submissions public docket as
the type of submission that FDA can
accept in electronic format.
17 ICH first issued guidance on ‘‘E2B Data
Elements for Transmission of Individual Case
Safety Reports’’ in July 1997 (ICH E2B). ICH E2B
was revised in 2000 to include adjustments based
on successful pilot projects conducted in the three
ICH regions (ICH E2BM). ICH is currently revising
its E2B guidance again to provide additional
information and clarification and has released ICH
E2B(R) in draft. The term ‘‘ICH E2B guidance’’ used
in this document includes all ICH guidance on the
E2B topic of data elements for the transmission of
ICSRs. The guidances are available on the Internet
at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Guidance
ComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
default.htm under the ICH—Efficacy category or
https://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm under the
ICH guidance documents category.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
Postmarketing safety reports have been
identified in FDA’s electronic
submissions public docket as
submissions that FDA may accept in
electronic format18.
Presently, FDA allows applicants,
manufacturers, packers, and distributors
to submit postmarketing safety reports
(both 15-day Alert and periodic reports)
in electronic format by sending the
reports to FDA either: (1) Through
FDA’s Electronic Submission Gateway
(ESG) or (2) on physical media, e.g., CDROM, digital tape, or floppy disk (sent
by mail).19 These electronic
submissions may include ICSRs, any
ICSR attachments, and descriptive
information. The data elements and
electronic transport formats that FDA
can accept for electronic ICSRs are
described in technical specifications
referenced in FDA guidance
documents.20 Currently, FDA can accept
attachments to ICSRs and the
descriptive information of periodic
reports in an electronic form as portable
document format (PDF) files, which may
be sent through the FDA’s ESG or
mailed to FDA on physical media.21 To
send these reports by FDA’s ESG, a
manufacturer/applicant must initially
contact FDA’s AERS electronic
submission coordinator22 to establish an
ESG connection with FDA’s network.
b. ICH standards. FDA codes and
analyzes electronic submissions of
safety information received via the ESG
or on physical media based on ICH
standards.23 ICH has developed
international standards for the
electronic submission of safety
information that include: (1)
18 Docket No. FDA–1992–S–0039 (formerly
Docket No. 1992S–0251) can be accessed on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
19 FDA expects that, in the future, all electronic
submissions to the agency will be sent through the
ESG and that use of physical media for such
submissions will, eventually, be phased-out.
20 FDA is currently accepting electronic
submissions using either the ICH E2B or ICH E2BM
data elements; ICH E2B and ICH E2BM are available
on the Internet at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/
GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/
Guidances/default.htm under the ICH—Efficacy
category or https://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm
under the ICH guidance documents category.
21 See footnote number 19 in this document.
22 FDA’s AERS electronic submission coordinator
may be contacted at aersesub@fda.hhs.gov.
23 See www.ich.org/cache/compo/276-254-1.html.
24 ICH M2 provides electronic standards for the
transfer of regulatory information (ESTRI). The M2
ESTRI recommendations facilitate international
electronic communication in the three ICH regions.
The ICH M2 working group developed a
specification for the implementation of E2B data
elements that allows for the transmission of all
types of ICSRs, regardless of source and destination.
ICH M2 recommendations are revised periodically
to reflect the evolving nature of the technology.
More information on M2 ESTRI is available on the
Internet at https://estri.ich.org.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42189
Standardized common data elements for
transmission of ICSRs (ICH E2B
guidance), and (2) electronic standard
transmission procedures (ICH M224 ).
ICH E2B guidance provides
standardized common data elements for
the transmission of ICSRs by identifying
and defining the data elements for the
transmission of all types of ICSRs,
regardless of source and destination.
The ICH format for ICSRs includes
provisions for transmitting all the
relevant data elements useful to assess
an individual adverse drug reaction or
adverse event report. The common data
elements are sufficiently comprehensive
to cover complex reports from most
sources, different data sets, and different
transmission requirements.
c. FDA Web-based submission portal.
In addition to submission of ICSRs
through the ESG, FDA is developing a
Web-based electronic submission portal
to collect and process safety information
for all FDA-regulated products that will
be consistent with ICH standards and
may be used as another method for
reporting adverse drug experiences to
the agency.25 FDA’s Web-based portal
will allow for the secure electronic
submission of postmarketing ICSRs
directly into FDA’s AERS database once
information is typed into a Web-based
electronic form. Users will receive
electronic confirmation that their
submissions have been received by
FDA. Any person who is subject to
FDA’s postmarketing safety reporting
requirements and has Internet access
will be able to use the Web-based form
to submit ICSRs to the agency. The Webbased submission function will assist
entities that submit a small number of
safety reports by creating a simpler and
more efficient mechanism for reporting
that does not require them to have an
internal database that is compatible
with the ICH-based system. However,
because some administrative support
would be needed to manually enter the
information for the ICSRs onto a form
on the Web, this Web-based electronic
reporting format will be less cost
effective than direct submission through
the ESG (or submitting the information
on physical media) for companies with
large numbers of safety reports. As soon
as FDA can accept submissions using
this Web-based form, information in
docket 92S–0251, and the guidance
documents described in this section will
be updated to reflect this option.
25 The Web-based reporting portal is based on the
HL7 Individual Case Safety Report standard
accredited by ANSI. This standard is for the
exchange of adverse event information between
computer systems.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42190
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Comments on the Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) for
Mandatory Electronic Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports to FDA
In the Federal Register of November
5, 1998 (63 FR 59746), FDA issued an
ANPRM describing the agency’s plans to
require electronic submission of all
postmarketing expedited and periodic
ICSRs. In the ANPRM, the agency
indicated that it would propose that
international standards be used for
electronic safety reporting (i.e.,
precoding of ICSRs using the ICH M1
international medical terminology, ICH
E2B format, and ICH M2 transmission
specifications).26 FDA also indicated
that it was considering requiring that
the textual (descriptive) information
contained in a postmarketing periodic
safety report be submitted to the agency
in an electronic format. FDA received
comments on the ANPRM from 11
representatives of pharmaceutical
companies and associations and one
individual. The agency considered these
comments in developing this proposed
rule on electronic submission of
postmarketing safety reports.
a. General. In general, the comments
supported FDA’s plans to require
electronic submission of postmarketing
safety reports, while a few comments
said that electronic submissions to the
agency should remain voluntary. One
comment said that FDA’s goal of having
all safety reports submitted in an
electronic format would be realized
without being mandated as electronic
record collection, retrieval, and
reporting becomes the generallyrecognized norm throughout the
pharmaceutical and biologics industry.
FDA believes that the electronic
submission of postmarketing safety
reports should be required and not
voluntary because, although we have
accepted the voluntary submission of
postmarketing safety reports in
electronic format since 2001, we are
only receiving approximately 40 percent
of ICSRs in electronic format. To
expedite the identification of emerging
safety problems and to realize cost
savings for industry and the agency, we
will need to receive close to 100 percent
of ICSRs in electronic format.
b. Waivers. Several comments
provided suggestions for waivers
(exemptions) from the requirement to
submit postmarketing safety reports
electronically to FDA. The comments
described two types of waivers: (1)
26 The proposal to require coding of ICSRs using
MedDRA (ICH M1) is included in a separate
rulemaking, the Safety Reporting Proposed Rule,
described in section II.B of this document.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
Temporary hardship waivers and (2)
indefinite waivers.
Two comments requested that FDA
grant a temporary hardship waiver for
companies that experience
unanticipated technical difficulties after
implementation of the regulation. In this
case, the company would be permitted
to submit safety reports in a paper
format. One comment said that such
temporary waivers must be automatic so
that regulatory requirements for timely
reporting are fulfilled. The comments
said that temporary waivers should be
evaluated on an individual basis, taking
into account factors such as company
size, volume of reports, potential issues
with international affiliates, and scope
of required technical activities. One
comment requested that the waiver be
renewable for a 6-month period as long
as the company can demonstrate
progress towards the ability to submit
reports electronically.
With regard to indefinite waivers, four
comments said that small businesses
should be exempt from the requirement
to submit postmarketing safety reports
in electronic format. The comments said
that a waiver should be based on the
number of safety reports that a company
submits to FDA. They noted that the
number of safety reports can vary
significantly among manufacturers
based on such attributes as company
size and product line. One comment
said that generic, or other, drug
companies that receive few adverse
event reports (e.g., 0–5 adverse drug
reactions (ADRs) per week) should be
exempt from the requirement. The
comment stated that compliance with
the requirement would place an undue
burden on these drug companies
because of the associated costs for
human resources, equipment, software
requirements, and other costs. The
comment further stated that if the
agency does not create a waiver for drug
companies that have few ADRs per
week (e.g., less than 5), then a longer
transition period should be permitted,
during which the agency would accept
either paper or electronic ADRs. The
transition period would allow sufficient
time for drug companies that currently
do not have the appropriate resources to
establish electronic safety reporting
systems. Another comment said that the
criterion for an automatic waiver could
be limited to NDAs for products with
orphan-designated indications, because
of the small number of ADRs submitted
for these products. The comment also
suggested that drug product sponsors
who make less than a particular
monetary amount for drug product sales
per year (e.g., $100 million) should be
exempt from the rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Since these comments on the ANPRM
were submitted in 1998, Internet access
has become commonplace, reducing or
eliminating implementation concerns
for smaller firms or firms with very few
reports. These firms will be able to use
the Web-based form. Accordingly, we
are not proposing indefinite waivers
from implementation of electronic
format submission of safety reports.
With regard to temporary waivers, we
believe they should only be necessary in
rare cases. Larger companies using the
ESG could use submission on physical
media (i.e., CD-ROM) or the Web-based
system as a back-up if they experience
temporary technological problems with
their ESG submission system. Similarly,
smaller firms regularly reporting on the
Web-based system could easily find
alternative Internet access in the event
of a temporary Internet outage at the
firm. Given that it is not possible to
anticipate all the various situations that
might require a waiver, we are
proposing in this rule to provide for a
temporary waiver of the electronic
format submission requirement for good
cause shown (see section III.C of this
document). As discussed more below,
we are specifically requesting comments
in this rule on what would constitute
‘‘good cause’’ for a temporary waiver of
the electronic format submission
requirements.
c. Textual materials. ICSRs are often
accompanied by textual materials (ISCR
attachments), such as hospital discharge
summaries or other medical records,
published studies, or autopsy reports.
Two comments supported the
possibility of submitting textual
materials electronically in addition to
ICSRs. One of the comments
recommended that the electronic
transmission of textual materials be
accepted using ICH standards so that
consistency could be enhanced
worldwide.
As recommended in the technical
specifications referenced in guidances
on submitting postmarketing safety
reports in electronic format, textual
materials can currently be submitted in
a paper format or in an electronic format
as a PDF file consistent with ICH
guidelines.27 When finalized, this rule
would require submission of these
textual materials in an electronic format
we can process, review, and archive.
Future changes to technical
specifications for such submissions,
such as transmission standards and file
formats, would be announced in the
technical specifications referenced in
FDA guidance documents.
27 See
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
footnote number 3 of this document.
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
d. Security issues. Several comments
discussed security issues related to the
confidentiality of data when safety
reports are submitted electronically.
Some comments stated that industry
and the agency must be prepared to
respond promptly to changing
technology to ensure secure
transmission of data. Another comment
requested that the tools used for this
purpose be commercially available at a
reasonable cost.
The agency requires the secure
transmission of all electronic
submissions. We currently have
certificate authority with standard
encryption and will continue to use this
security method in the agency’s ESG for
the electronic submission of
postmarketing safety reports. The ESG
meets National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST)–80028 series
security certification standards.
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
As noted previously, the changes
proposed in this rule would, largely,
affect the form in which postmarketing
safety reports must be submitted to FDA
(i.e., in electronic format instead of a
paper format) and, in addition, make
minor conforming changes to the
regulations.
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Electronic Submission of
Postmarketing Safety Reports
The proposal would revise
§§ 310.305, 314.80, 314.98, and 600.80
to require that manufacturers, packers,
and distributors, and applicants with
approved NDAs, ANDAs, and BLAs and
those that market prescription drugs for
human use without an approved
application submit postmarketing safety
reports to the agency in an electronic
format that FDA can process, review,
and archive. We are proposing to delete
the specific references to paper
reporting forms in §§ 310.305, 314.80,
and 600.80. We also propose to add
language to these sections which states
that FDA will periodically issue
guidance on how to provide the
electronic submissions (e.g., method of
transmission, media, file formats,
preparation and organization of files).
Postmarketing 15-day Alert and
periodic reports, including the ICSRs,
any ICSR attachments and the
descriptive information portion of
postmarketing periodic safety reports,
28 NIST,
a nonregulatory Federal agency in the
U.S. Commerce Department’s Technology
Administration, promotes U.S. innovation and
industrial competitiveness by advancing
measurement science, standards, and technology,
including researching and developing test methods
and standards for emerging and rapidly changing
information technologies.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
would be submitted to FDA in an
electronic format. Information on the
agency’s ability to process, review, and
archive these reports is described in the
technical specifications referenced in
FDA guidance documents (see section I
of this document). The reports would be
submitted to FDA in an electronic
format only; paper copies would not be
accepted unless the agency granted a
temporary waiver (see section III.C of
this document).
Under the proposed rule, for marketed
products with an approved application,
manufacturers, packers, or distributors
that do not hold the application would
continue to have the option of
submitting 15-day Alert reports directly
to FDA or to the application holder
under §§ 314.80(c)(1)(iii) and
600.80(c)(1)(iii). If they opt to submit
directly to FDA, they would be required
to do so in electronic format. If they
choose to report to the applicant, they
could submit the report in any
acceptable format. The applicant,
however, would be required to use
electronic reporting when it
subsequently reports the information to
FDA. Similarly, for marketed drug
products without an approved
application, initial safety reports made
to the manufacturer by packers and
distributors under current
§ 310.305(c)(3) could be made in any
form agreeable to the reporter and the
manufacturer, but this proposal would
require all safety reports made to FDA
to be made in electronic format.
This proposal applies to all
postmarketing safety reports currently
required to be submitted to FDA under
§§ 310.305, 314.80, 314.98, and 600.80
(including vaccines) and would apply to
any new postmarketing safety reports
for drug or biological products that are
implemented in the future (e.g., new
postmarketing safety reports proposed
in the Safety Reporting Proposed Rule
described in section II.B of this
document). The proposal would also
revise § 600.81 by requiring the
electronic submission of biological lot
distribution reports. As previously
described for postmarketing safety
reports, FDA will also periodically issue
guidance on how to provide the
electronic submissions for these reports
(e.g., method of transmission, media,
file formats, preparation and
organization of files).
B. Safety Reports Not Covered by the
Proposed Rule
Postmarketing safety reports for drugs,
including vaccines, constitute the
largest volume of paper safety reports
received by the agency and,
consequently, require the most
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42191
resources to input electronically. This
proposed rule would permit more
efficient management of these
postmarketing safety reports by FDA.
This proposed rule would not apply to
submission of the following safety
reports:
• Investigational new drug
application (IND) safety reports
(§ 312.32);
• Safety update reports for drugs
(§ 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b));
• Approved NDA and BLA annual
reports (§§ 314.81(b)(2) and 601.28 (21
CFR 601.28));
• Biological product deviation reports
(BPDRs) (§§ 600.14 and 606.171 (21 CFR
606.171));
• Reports of complications of blood
transfusion and collection confirmed to
be fatal (21 CFR 606.170(b) and 640.73);
• Adverse reaction reports for human
cells, tissues and cellular and tissuebased products (HCT/Ps) regulated
solely under section 361 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264) (21
CFR 1271.350(a)); and
• NDA-field alert reports
(§ 314.81(b)(1)).
We have not proposed to require that
premarketing safety reports be
submitted electronically because IND
safety reports are submitted directly to
the review division with responsibility
for the IND, and are not uploaded into
the AERS database. Blood transfusion
and collection fatality reports are
submitted to the agency in lower
numbers than the postmarketing safety
reports addressed in this rule; therefore,
we have not proposed that these reports
be subject to the mandatory electronic
format requirements proposed in this
rule. The agency has not yet received
blood transfusion and collection fatality
reports as electronic submissions, but
does receive BPDRs through a voluntary
electronic submission process. We are
considering a mandatory electronic
submission requirement for BPDRs, and
blood transfusion and collection fatality
reports in the near future and would
like to receive industry comment on this
possibility.
C. Waivers
Although this proposed rule would
require that all postmarketing safety
reports be submitted to FDA in
electronic format, we are proposing in
§§ 310.305(e)(2), 314.80(g)(2), and
600.80(g)(2) to grant a temporary waiver
from the electronic format requirement
for ‘‘good cause’’ shown. Procedural
details for submitting waiver requests,
such as where to send the request and
any supporting documentation, would
be announced in guidance. When a
temporary waiver has been granted, a
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42192
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
paper copy of the safety reports would
be required to be submitted in a form
that FDA can process, review, and
archive.29 FDA anticipates that
temporary waivers of the requirement to
submit postmarketing safety reports to
the agency in electronic format will only
be needed in rare circumstances.
Companies experiencing technical
difficulties with their ESG interface
could, as a backup, submit reports on
physical media or using the Web-based
form during short-term, temporary
outage. Moreover, for companies that
rely on the Web-based form,
submissions could be made from any
computer with an Internet connection,
providing ample alternatives should the
company experience a longer term
interruption of Internet service at its
offices. Accordingly, we seek comments
on what circumstances would constitute
‘‘good cause’’ for granting waivers.
D. Individual Case Safety Report
(ICSR)—Definition and Required
Information
The term ICSR is used to describe the
information contained on either an
initial or followup report of an
individual adverse drug experience,
currently reported on an FDA Form
3500A, CIOMS I form, VAERS form,
or in electronic format. Given that this
proposed rule would require that all
safety reports be submitted in electronic
format, we believe describing the safety
reporting vehicle generically, rather
than by reference to the associated
paper form, is appropriate. Accordingly,
we are proposing in §§ 310.305(b),
314.80(a), and 600.80(a) (with minor
modifications) to define an ICSR as a
description of an adverse drug
experience related to an individual
patient or subject. Because the items of
information which should be reported
in an ICSR are currently specified on the
paper reporting forms that will no
longer be used, we are also proposing to
add a list of the reportable elements in
the regulations. Accordingly, proposed
§§ 310.305(d), 314.80(f), and 600.80(f)
would provide a detailed list of specific
types of information in five broad
categories that are to be reported on the
ICSR. The proposed categories, and
examples of some of the types of
information in each category, are as
follows:
29 FDA’s ability to process, review, and archive
postmarketing safety reports submitted to the
agency in a paper format is described in FDA’s draft
guidance for industry on ‘‘Postmarketing Safety
Reporting for Human Drug and Biological Products
Including Vaccines’’ available on the Internet at
https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Guidance
ComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
default.htm under ‘‘Procedural’’ or at https://
www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
• Patient information (e.g., patient
identification code, age, gender);
• Information about the adverse drug
experience (e.g., date and description of
the adverse drug experience);
• Information about the drug (e.g.,
drug name, dose, indication, National
Drug Code (NDC) number);
• Information identifying the initial
reporter (e.g., name and contact
information); and
• Information about the drug’s
applicant or manufacturer (e.g., name
and contact information).
Other than minor wording
differences, this proposed list of
information to be reported is the same
as that currently reflected on the FDA
Form 3500A for postmarketing reporting
for drugs and biological products.
Codification of the ICSR reporting
requirements is not intended to change
the existing obligation of manufacturers,
packers, or distributors to exercise due
diligence for purposes of completing all
of the applicable elements of an ICSR.
The obligation to provide all applicable
information described in proposed
§§ 310.305(d), 314.80(f), or 600.80(f)
would be the same as the current
obligation to complete the FDA Form
3500A.30
E. Removal of Paper Format Provisions
FDA believes that it is no longer
necessary to describe procedures for
paper format submissions in its
regulations because the agency
anticipates that a paper format will be
used on a very limited basis, if at all.
Accordingly, FDA is proposing to
remove from its regulations provisions
describing the details for submission of
safety reports in paper format, such as
the number of required paper copies or
specific markings or notations required
on the paper forms. We are proposing to
delete in §§ 310.305(d), 314.80(f) and
600.80(f) the provisions specifically
describing paper submissions and
replace them with a new paragraph
(proposed §§ 310.305(e)(1), 314.80(g)(1)
and 600.80(g)(1)), which states that
ICSRs and any attachments must be
submitted to FDA in an electronic
format that we can process, review, and
archive. In addition, we are proposing to
revise current regulations to remove or
modify the following references or
provisions that are specific to paper
formats:
• References to the number of paper
copies required for safety report
submissions (§§ 310.305(c) , 314.80(c),
and 600.80(c));
30 For FDA’s current thinking on ‘‘due diligence,’’
see the guidance described in footnote 29 of this
document.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• The requirement to mark paper
reports to identify their contents as ‘‘15day Alert report’’ or ‘‘15-day Alert
report-followup,’’ (§§ 310.305(c)(4),
314.80(c)(1)(iv), 600.80(c)(1)(iv));
• The requirement to use FDA Form
3500A, CIOMS I form, or VAERS form
or to determine an appropriate
alternative format for voluntary
submission in electronic format
(§§ 310.305(d)(1) and (3); 314.80(f)(1)
and (3), and 600.80(f)(1) and (3));
• The reference to FDA Form 3500A
or other paper forms designated for
adverse drug experience reporting by
FDA for ICSRs that are submitted as part
of periodic reporting requirements
(§§ 314.80(c)(2)(ii)(b) and
600.80(c)(2)(ii)(B)); and
• The requirement for identifying
reports of adverse drug experiences that
occur in postmarketing studies by
separating and marking them
(§§ 314.80(e)(2), and 600.80(e)(2)).
As discussed previously in this
document, in the future, procedural and
formatting details, if applicable to
electronic submissions, will be included
in guidance, rather than in regulations.
F. Miscellaneous Changes
The proposal would amend
§§ 310.305, 314.80, 314.98, and 600.80
by replacing the word ‘‘shall’’ with the
word ‘‘must’’ except in the first sentence
of §§ 314.80(c)(1)(iii) and
600.80(c)(1)(iii), from which the word
‘‘shall’’ would be removed for editorial
reasons. FDA is also proposing to revise
in § 314.80(c)(2) the paragraph
designations that are currently not in
correct format. FDA anticipates that
these minor changes will clarify the
regulations and make them easier to
read. FDA is also proposing to change
the term ‘‘licensed manufacturer’’ to
‘‘applicant’’ in §§ 600.80, 600.81 and
600.90.
Current §§ 310.305(c), 314.80(c),
314.98(b), and 600.80(c) provide mailing
addresses for the submission of
postmarketing safety reports. FDA is
proposing to remove these mailing
addresses from its regulations because
this information is provided in guidance
and it is easier to update guidances
when an address changes.
Under current § 310.305(c)(1)(i), each
report must be accompanied by a copy
of the labeling. We are proposing to
revise this section to require the
submission of the current content of
labeling in electronic format unless it is
already on file with FDA.
Currently, ICSRs for all adverse drug
experiences other than those reported as
15-day Alert or followup reports (i.e.,
reports of serious, expected or
nonserious adverse drug experiences)
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
are submitted as a batch as part of the
postmarketing periodic safety report for
the period during which the events
occurred. Although the ICSRs may be
generated at any time during the
reporting period, they are retained by
the applicant during the reporting
period and submitted to FDA all at
once, along with the other (descriptive)
portions of the periodic report. FDA is
including language in proposed
§§ 314.80(c)(2)(B) and 600.80(c)(2)(B) to
give applicants the option of submitting
these ICSRs at any time during the
reporting period, rather than waiting to
submit them in a single batch with the
descriptive information. As with current
submission procedures, all ICSRs of
serious, expected or nonserious adverse
drug experiences occurring during the
reporting period would still be due to
the agency by the time the descriptive
information is submitted for that period,
but the proposed change would permit
them to be filed anytime during the
reporting period, rather than all at once
with the narrative portion of the
periodic report. We understand that
many applicants would prefer this
added flexibility of submitting the
ICSRs on an ongoing basis.
Current postmarketing safety
reporting regulations at §§ 310.305(e),
314.80(h), and 600.80(h) state that
persons subject to these requirements
should not include the names and
addresses of individual patients in
reports and, instead, should assign a
unique code number to each report,
preferably not more than eight
characters in length. Proposed
§§ 310.305(f), 314.80(i), and 600.80(i)
would remove the eight character limit
from the provision and add that the
preferred methodology for determining
the identification code would be set
forth in technical specifications
referenced in FDA guidance documents.
Specific details of this type are most
appropriate in the technical
specifications referenced in FDA
guidance documents, which can be
more easily revised as technological
requirements change. In addition, these
provisions require that the entity
submitting the report to FDA include in
the ICSR the name of the reporter from
whom the information was received. We
are proposing to add an exception so
that the name of the reporter need not
be disclosed in situations where the
reporter is also the patient.
Current §§ 310.305(c)(1),
314.80(c)(1)(i), and 600.80(c)(1)(i)
require that 15-day Alert reports be
submitted ‘‘as soon as possible but in no
case later than 15 calendar days of
initial receipt of the information’’ by the
person. We propose to revise this
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
language to state ‘‘as soon as possible,
but no later than 15 calendar days from
initial receipt of the information.’’ FDA
does not intend this proposed change to
have any substantive effect. It is being
made solely to simplify the regulatory
language and improve its readability.
G. Proposed Implementation Timeframe
FDA proposes that any final rule that
may issue based on the proposal become
effective 1 year after its date of
publication in the Federal Register.
FDA believes that 1 year is sufficient
because many companies are currently
submitting their postmarketing safety
reports electronically to the agency
using ICH standards and more than 1
year is not needed for companies that
would choose to set up this system for
their submissions. For companies that
choose to use the Web-based system, the
transition from paper submissions to
electronic submissions will be as simple
as filling out forms on the Internet and
would, therefore, not necessitate more
than 1 year to implement. (See section
II.D.1.c of this document for discussion.)
IV. Legal Authority
FDA’s legal authority to amend its
regulations governing the submission of
postmarketing safety reports for human
drugs and biological products derives
from sections 201, 301, 501, 502, 503,
505, 505A, 506, 506A, 506B, 506C, 510,
701, 704, 705, 760, and 801 of the act
(21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355,
355a, 356, 356a, 356b, 356c, 360, 371,
374, 375, 379aa, and 381); and the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
241, 262, and 264).
V. Environmental Impact
The agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.30(h) 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.
VI. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the
proposed rule under Executive Order
12866 and 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
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42193
believes that this proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
by the 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 average small
entity submits very few safety reports
and the agency’s proposed Web-based
method to submit reports electronically
would require little additional cost per
report, the agency does not believe that
this proposed rule would have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
FDA requests comment on this issue.
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 $133
million, using the most current (2008)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this proposed rule to result in any 1year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
The major benefit of this proposed
rule would be to public health and the
agency in the form of quicker access to
postmarketing safety information and an
annual savings of about $2.4 million,
including a savings in the cost of paper.
Total one-time costs to industry would
be between $4.5 million to $5.6 million;
most of these costs would be for
changing standard operating procedures
(SOPs), setting up systems for
submissions, and acquiring an
electronic certificate. Industry would
also incur annual costs of between
$133,320 to $139,380 for Internet
upgrades and to maintain electronic
certificates.
The proposed rule would require the
submission of all postmarketing safety
reports, including periodic reports, to
FDA in an electronic format. It would
affect all persons required to submit
postmarketing safety reports under
§§ 310.305, 314.80, 314.98, 600.80, and
600.81. As currently proposed, this rule
would not change the content of the
postmarketing safety reports or the
frequency of the reporting requirements.
The proposal is part of the agency’s
initiative to adopt electronic
technologies to improve the quality of
our operations and increase our
efficiency.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42194
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
A regulation is necessary because the
majority of the benefits from increased
effectiveness of FDA use of adverse drug
experience reports will accrue to the
agency and to public health, while the
costs are borne by industry. Many of the
firms lack the private incentive to divert
resources to develop electronic
submission capabilities on their own. In
other words, for many firms the present
value of the cost savings from
eliminating paper reports is less than
the cost of switching to electronic
reports. Without this regulation, the
agency would need to maintain
adequate resources to convert paper
reports to electronic records until all
companies adopt the electronic
submission format, possibly years in the
future. Although some part of this
proposed rule would merely shift costs
of adopting the electronic format from
FDA to industry, the additional social
benefit arises from the increased speed
and effectiveness of FDA analyses and
action based on adverse drug experience
reports. The need for the regulation
stems from the benefits to the public
health from more rapid identification
and action on unanticipated adverse
drug experiences.
FDA currently accepts postmarketing
safety reports submitted electronically
using ICH standards (i.e., ICH M2
transmission standards and ICH E2BM
data elements) (see section II.D.1.b of
this document). Both the EU and Japan
have mandated electronic submissions
for postmarketing safety reports using
these standards. The proposed rule
would make the FDA’s system
compatible with the systems used in
Japan and the EU. The proposed rule
may also increase the use of
international data and international
comparisons, which could contribute to
more rapid identification and action on
serious and unexpected adverse drug
experiences.
A. Benefits
The proposal would reduce FDA’s
current costs associated with processing
postmarketing safety reports that are
received via paper format. By receiving
these reports electronically, FDA would
be able to access the safety information
more quickly and also reduce data entry
errors that could occur during entry of
the information from the paper reports
into our electronic system. The major
benefits of this proposed rule would be
to the agency and public health in terms
of quicker access to postmarketing
safety information, which in turn would
lead to faster identification of safety
problems. The proposed rule would also
reduce the agency’s costs for converting
paper records in a variety of formats
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
into electronic form. Resources that are
now used to manually enter the reports
into FDA’s electronic database could be
redirected to monitoring drug safety or
other agency initiatives.
Currently, the agency receives more
than 445,000 postmarketing ICSRs per
year. In fiscal year 2006, approximately
60 percent of ICSRs (15-day Alert and
periodic) were submitted in paper form.
At this time, it takes from 3 to 14 days
before a submitted paper record of a 15day Alert report is available for analysis
in the AERS database. Periodic ICSRs
submitted on paper may not be entered
into AERS for up to 60 days. With a
standardized electronic format, records
would become available for analysis in
AERS as soon as they were processed by
FDA (within 2 days of receipt by the
agency).
The agency currently spends about
$5.4 million annually on conversion of
paper ICSRs to an electronic format,
which includes data entry and quality
control.31 The proposal would result in
reduced costs associated with
controlling and ensuring the quality of
the data. Assuming that the number of
reports remains fairly constant over
time, we estimate that we would save
about $2.4 million annually in
contracting costs by not having to
convert paper copies to an electronic
format.
The larger public health benefits—
more timely identification of drug safety
problems with the potential to reduce
subsequent adverse drug experiences—
cannot be realized fully until a
comprehensive surveillance system and
international harmonization of reporting
requirements are in place (e.g.,
implementation of the ICH standards
discussed in the Safety Reporting
Proposed Rule). Obtaining
postmarketing safety reports in an
electronic format is an important and
necessary step toward attaining the
larger public health benefits.
B. Costs
FDA estimates that there are
approximately 2,020 firms affected by
this rule. Table 1 lists the number of
firms affected by type of product
marketed. To comply with the proposed
rule, firms would incur both one-time
and annually recurring costs. One-time
costs include modifying SOPs,
developing electronic submission
capabilities, and training employees on
the new procedures. Annually recurring
costs would include the cost to maintain
an electronic certificate and high-speed
Internet access. There would be no
31 Cost to convert paper reports to electronic
format from FDA AERS data entry contract.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
change in the actual time required to
research and prepare the report, nor
would there be any additional reporting
requirements as a result of this proposed
rule.
As discussed earlier in this preamble,
firms marketing nonprescription drug
products without an approved
application are now subject to safety
reporting requirements as a result of
Public Law 109–462 (see section II.A.1.d
of this document). Although this rule
does not propose to require use of an
electronic format for submission of
these reports, because we are
considering such a requirement for the
final rule, this analysis includes an
estimate of the incremental cost for
firms to comply with the submission of
these safety reports in an electronic
format. While the mandatory reporting
requirements are new, analyzing
product complaints, including reports of
drug induced adverse drug experiences,
is a requirement of the Current Good
Manufacturing Practice regulations (21
CFR 211.198).
1. One-time costs
a. Rewriting standard operating
procedures and training personnel.
Almost all companies would have to
make some changes to their SOPs to
reflect the requirements for electronic
submission versus mailing the reports to
the agency. Most companies that submit
postmarketing safety reports to FDA are
small and submit few safety reports to
the agency; we estimate that it would
require about 10 hours to change their
SOPs and to train the appropriate
employees. Companies with proprietary
computer systems used to generate and
store safety reports would require
considerably more time to modify their
SOPs and train the appropriate
personnel. We estimate that these firms
would require about 50 hours for this
task.
We estimate that about 1,520 firms
would require 10 hours and about 100
firms would require 50 hours to modify
SOPs and train the appropriate
personnel. (The firms primarily
marketing nonprescription drug
products without an approved
application are not included in this
estimate.) Assuming an average wage
rate including benefits of $68 per hour,
the total one-time incremental cost for
this proposed requirement would be
about $1.4 million [(1,520 x 10 hours x
$68) + (100 x 50 hours x $68)] (see table
1 of this document).32
32 Wage derived from 2007 Bureau of Labor
Statistics Occupation Employment Statistics
Survey, standard occupation code 11–3042, training
manager for pharmaceutical medicine and
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Firms producing primarily
nonprescription drug products without
an approved application will have to
establish SOPs for submitting ICSRs. We
estimate that it takes between 24 and 40
hours to write a new SOP and another
5 to 10 hours to train the appropriate
personnel, depending on the size of the
firm.33 Assuming an average wage cost
of $68 per hour, and the mid-point of
the range of hours the cost would be
about $1.1 million (40 hours x $68 x 400
firms).
b. Setting up system for submission.
ICSRs would be submitted through
FDA’s electronic submission gateway
(ESG) using one of two methods: One at
a time using a Web-based form or by
direct transmission through an ICH
compatible system. Attachments to the
ICSRs, the descriptive information
portion of periodic reports and
distribution reports would be submitted
as PDF files through the ESG. We
assumed that because most firms are
small and submit few ICSRs, they would
use the Web-based form. To comply
using this submission method, firms
would need high speed Internet
connections and would have to
download and install up to two free
software programs, validate the
installation, and train the appropriate
personnel on the new procedures. Firms
that have dedicated IT staff would be
able to install and validate the
installation themselves. Smaller firms
would probably choose to hire an
outside contractor for the installation
and validation. We do not have data on
the amount of time required to install
and validate the installation of the
software or the percentage of firms that
might need to contract out the
installation. For this analysis, we
assumed it would take 8 to 16 hours to
install and validate the installation of
the Java Runtime Edition software and
the Java security policy files for the
company’s Internet browser.34 This
estimate also includes the time required
to notify FDA and run a test submission
through the FDA ESG and to train the
appropriate staff. Based on these
assumptions and using the $68 per hour
wage the cost for this requirement
would range from $1.0 million to $2.1
million (8 hours x $68 wage x 1,920
manufacturing—mean wage rate $48.73 + 40
percent for nonwage benefits and rounded to $68,
at www.bls.gov.
33 Eastern Research Group, ‘‘Economic Threshold
and Regulatory Flexibility Assessment of Proposed
Changes to the Current Good Manufacturing
Practice Regulations for Manufacturing, Processing,
Packing, or Holding Drugs,’’ submitted to the Office
of Planning and Evaluation, March 1995.
34 See https://www.fda.gov/esg/
default.htm#tutorials and https://www.fda.gov/esg/
account.htm.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
firms and 16 hours x $68 wage x 1,920
firms).
Firms that submit a large number of
reports each year may chose to use the
ICH compatible method. This method
allows for the submission of multiple
reports at faster transmission rates. We
do not know at what threshold of
reporting it becomes cost effective for a
firm to submit reports using this
method. Currently just over 40 firms
voluntarily submit ICSRs using this
method and they account for about onehalf of all 15-day Alert reports
submitted each year. We assume that
only firms that have existing
infrastructure to support the ICH
method of transmission would choose
this method to submit reports. At the
time of a final rule we estimate that
about 50 firms would be voluntarily
using this method of submission and
about 100 additional firms would
comply with the rule by adopting this
method of reporting for an estimated
cost of $0.3 million (50 hours x $68 x
150 firms).
c. Electronic certificate. All firms
would need an electronic certificate to
submit any document to the FDA ESG.
The electronic certificate identifies the
sender and serves as an electronic
signature. Firms that have not submitted
any electronic documents to the agency
would incur a one-time cost to acquire
the certificate and recurring costs to
keep the certificate active as a result of
this proposed rule. The certificates cost
about $20 and are good for 1 year. We
assume that the search and transactions
costs involved in the initial acquisition
of the certificate double the cost of the
certificate to $40 for the first year, half
of which would be set-up costs. We also
believe that should this rule become
final many firms will already have
electronic certificates because they are
required for electronic submission of
other regulatory documents, such as
product applications and supplements.
If 60 to 70 percent of the firms needed
to acquire an electronic certificate to
comply with the proposed requirement,
the cost would be between $48,480 and
$56,560 ($40 x 1,212 firms and $40 x
1,414 firms, respectively).
In addition to the costs we have
estimated, some firms affected by this
proposed rule may have to hire outside
expertise to install and validate the
software installation to comply with the
proposed requirements.
d. Creation of PDF files. Some
companies still maintain safety
information as paper records.
Companies that store their submissions
in paper format rather than
electronically may also incur costs to
acquire the ability to convert ICSR
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42195
attachments, the descriptive information
portion of periodic reports, and
distribution reports to an electronic
format that the agency can process,
review, and archive. Currently, this is
the PDF format. We assume all firms
would have the software and training
necessary to convert existing electronic
files to a PDF format.
We lack sufficient data to estimate
with any certainty the costs to convert
paper documents to electronic files that
can be transmitted through our ESG. We
do not know how many companies
maintain paper versus electronic
records. We also do not know how
many have optical scanning capabilities
that would allow them to convert the
paper records to electronic PDF files.
Because optical scanners are
relatively inexpensive and easy to use,
they are commonplace in businesses
today. We believe that all of the large
firms in the industry currently have
such equipment and would incur little
or no additional incremental costs for
this capability. Most large firms
currently store much of their
information electronically now, and
they should require no more than 30
minutes to convert ICSR attachments to
PDF files and proof them, which would
be offset by the time they currently use
for photocopying, collating, and mailing
files. For documents the applicant has
in paper format, the time required to
scan a document would also be offset by
no longer having to photocopy, collate,
and mail the submission to us.
Companies that maintain their records
in a paper format may have to purchase
an optical scanner and the appropriate
optical character recognition (OCR)
software to comply with this
requirement, or they could pay a service
provider, such as a copy center, to
transform the documents into an
electronic PDF file. A suitable scanner
with OCR software should not cost more
than $400. FDA assumes that initial
setup and training to use the equipment
should require no more than 4 hours. At
the wage plus benefits rate of $68 per
hour, the one-time cost for setup and
training would be about $272 (4 hours
x $68). If one-half of the companies
affected needed to purchase a scanner
and train employees to use it, the total
one-time costs would be $0.7 million
(($400 + $272) x 1,010) (see table 1 of
this document).
To have a service provider convert a
black and white paper document to a
PDF file would cost about $10 per page
for the first page and about $2 per page
thereafter. If an applicant wanted the
documents saved to a disk, it would cost
an additional $20 per transaction.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42196
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Safety report submissions differ
greatly in the number of attachments
and number of pages submitted
depending on the nature of the adverse
drug experience and the drug involved.
We do not have an estimate of the
number of pages of attachments in an
average report. However, if an applicant
used a service provider to convert 20
pages of material and had it saved to a
disk, it would cost about $70 ($10 first
page + ($2 x 19 pages) + $20 to save to
disk).
The total one-time incremental costs
of this proposed rule would be between
$4.5 million and $5.6 million. About
$1.4 million to $1.7 million of this total
would be incurred by the firms that
primarily market nonprescription drug
products without an approved
application. (table 1 of this document).
2. Annual costs
The annual costs of this proposed rule
would include the costs of maintaining
electronic certificates and the increased
cost for some firms to obtain high-speed
Internet access.
a. Maintaining the electronic
certificate. Firms would have an annual
cost to renew the electronic certificate
that identifies the sender. In addition to
having to renew the certificate on a
regular basis, firms that seldom submit
reports would also have to ensure they
are capable of transmitting data to the
agency. To add these additional costs to
the cost of the certificate itself, we
assume that firms incur an additional
annually recurring cost equal to one-half
the price of the certificate ($10), for a
total annually recurring cost of $30.
Assuming that 60 to 70 percent of the
firms would not voluntarily submit any
required documents electronically
without a regulation, the annual cost to
maintain certificates would range from
$36,360 and $42,420 ($30 x 1,212 firms
or $30 x 1,414 firms).
b. High-Speed Internet access. Firms
will need high-speed Internet access to
use either of the submission methods. A
2004 study of small businesses
sponsored by the Small Business
Administration found that essentially
all small firms in the United States had
Internet access and about 50 percent
had high-speed Internet access.35 The
average cost of high-speed access was
about $40 per month more than dial-up
access. Because of the nature of the drug
industry and because the average cost of
Internet access has been going down
over time, we estimate that by the time
this proposed rule would be made final,
35 Pociask, Steve, ‘‘A Survey of Small Businesses’
Telecommunications Use and Spending,’’ Small
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
about 90 percent of firms would have
high speed access. The average annual
recurring increase in cost for high speed
Internet access for the remaining 10
percent of firms would be $96,960 ($40
x 12 months x 202 firms).
Table 2 shows the annual costs of the
proposed rule. As with the one-time
costs, only firms not already making
electronic submission of any kind to the
agency when this proposed rule
becomes final would incur these costs.
C. Summary of Benefits and Costs
The principal benefit of this proposed
rule would be the public health benefits
associated with more rapid processing
and analysis of the almost 300,000
ICSRs currently submitted on paper. In
addition, requiring electronic
submission would reduce FDA annual
operating costs by $2.4 million.
The total one-time cost for modifying
SOPs and establishing electronic
submission capabilities is estimated to
range from $4.5 million to $5.6 million.
Annually recurring costs totaled
$133,320 to $139,380 and included
maintenance of electronic submission
capabilities, including renewing the
electronic certificate, and for some firms
the incremental cost to maintain highspeed Internet access. The total
annualized cost of the proposed rule,
assuming a 7-percent discount rate over
10 years, would be from $0.8 million to
$0.9 million ($0.7 million to $0.8
million at a 3-percent discount rate). We
request comment on the accuracy and
completeness of the assumptions used
to estimate the costs of this proposed
rule, including our choice of a 10 year
time horizon.
D. Alternatives Considered
During the development of this
proposed rule, we considered a number
of alternative approaches. The first was
to allow persons to voluntarily submit
reports electronically. This option is
currently available and our experience
has shown that a number of companies
would resist changing their procedures
for a long time. As a result, we would
not attain the benefits of standardized
formats and quicker access to adverse
drug experience data with voluntary
electronic submissions.
Another alternative was to allow
small entities a longer period of time to
comply with the electronic submission
requirements. This alternative would
have allowed small entities to delay the
expense of compliance. This alternative
would delay our receiving the full
Business Administration Office of Advocacy
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
benefits of quicker access to these
reports. Compliance costs for small
entities are estimated to be low, less
than $2,260 in one-time costs (sum of
cost for equipment, training, and
changing SOPs), which should not
impose an economic hardship on the
small entities.
We also considered requiring
electronic submissions but not
specifying a format. This alternative
would reduce the costs to firms
associated with paper. Because
receiving reports in many different
formats would continue to require the
agency to convert the reports into a
standard format for analysis, this
alternative would delay the full public
health benefits of quicker FDA access to
these reports.
E. Small Business Impact
The Small Business Administration
defines an entity in the pharmaceutical
industry as small if it has fewer than
750 employees and a biologic entity as
small if it has fewer than 500
employees. Based on this definition
about 90 percent of the drug and
biologic entities are small. The impact
on each entity will vary depending on
their electronic submission capabilities
when the rule is made final. Much of
the incremental cost and all of the
recurring costs of this proposed rule are
for acquiring and maintaining electronic
submission capability ($1,236 to $1,780
in one-time costs and up to $510 in
annually recurring costs per small
entity). Only firms that have not made
any electronic submissions to the
agency when this rule becomes final
would incur those costs. The writing of
SOPs and employee training are the
only costs that are specific to this rule
(a one-time cost of about $680 per small
entity).
Because the estimated incremental
costs per entity are low, between $1,916
and $2,460 in one-time incremental
costs and up to $510 in annually
recurring costs, and the majority of
those costs would be incurred for any
electronic submission across the agency,
this proposed rule would probably not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
However, because we lack data to fully
characterize the small entities and the
average submittal, we do not certify that
there will be no significant impact at
this time. We request comment on the
tentative conclusion of no significant
impact.
contract number SBA–HQ–02–M–0493, March
2004.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42197
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1.—ONE-TIME COSTS BY FIRM TYPE1
Type of Firm
Establishing
e-submission capability
Total
number of
firms
Acquiring
e-certificate1
Total
PDF files
Modifying
SOPs
Low
ICH
Method
Low
$340,000
High
low
$7,200
$8,400
$201,600
$1,500,800
$1,774,000
High
high
Drug and biologic products subject to parts
310, 314, and 600
600
$680,000
$272,000
$544,000
Nonprescription drug
products marketed
without an approved
application
400
1,088,000
217,000
435,200
4,800
5,600
134,400
1,444,800
1,663,200
Medical Gas
1,020
693,300
554,880
1,109,760
12,240
14,280
342,720
1,603,440
2,160,360
Total
2,020
$2,461,600
$1,044,480
$2,088,960
$24,240
$28,280
$678,720
$4,549,040
$5,597,560
Annualized at 3% over 10
years
$553,286
$656,205
Annualized at 7% over 10
years
$647681
$796,967
1This
$340,000
refers to the $20 one-time cost involved in acquiring the certificate, the actual cost of the certificate is captured in the annual recurring costs (table 2 of this document).
TABLE 2.—ANNUAL RECURRING COSTS
Electronic Certificate
Total
Type of Firm
Internet access
Low
Drug and biologic products subject to
parts 310, 314, and 600
High
This proposed rule contains
collections of information that are
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 3520). ‘‘Collection of
information’’ includes any request or
requirement that persons obtain,
maintain, retain, or report information
to the agency, or disclose information to
a third party or to the public (44 U.S.C.
3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c)). The title,
description, and respondent description
of the information collection are shown
under this section with an estimate of
the annual reporting burden. Included
in the estimate is the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
We invite comments on these topics:
(1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for proper
performance of FDA’s functions,
including whether the information will
have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of
FDA’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
$39,600
$41,400
8,400
19,200
26,400
27,600
21,420
48,960
67,320
70,380
$36,360
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
$28,800
18,360
Total
$12,600
7,200
Medical Gas
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Low
$10,800
Nonprescription drug products marketed
without an approved application
VerDate Nov<24>2008
High
$42,420
$96,960
$133,320
$139,380
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including through the
use of automated collection techniques,
when appropriate, and other forms of
information technology.
Title: Postmarketing Safety Reports for
Human Drug and Biological Products:
Electronic Submission Requirements.
Description: The proposed rule would
amend FDA’s postmarketing safety
reporting regulations for human drug
and biological products, under parts
310, 314 and 600, to require that
persons subject to mandatory reporting
requirements submit safety reports in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review, and archive. Under §§ 310.305,
314.80, 314.98 and 600.80,
manufacturers, packers, and
distributors, and applicants with
approved NDAs, ANDAs and BLAs and
those that market prescription drugs for
human use without an approved
application must currently submit
postmarketing safety reports to the
agency. Under § 600.81, applicants with
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
approved BLAs must currently submit
biological lot distribution reports to the
agency. In this rule, FDA is proposing
to require that these postmarketing
reports be submitted to the agency in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review and archive. We also propose to
add language to these sections which
states that FDA will periodically issue
guidance on how to provide the
electronic submissions (e.g., method of
transmission, media, file formats,
preparation and organization of files).
This rule does not change the content of
these postmarketing reports. It only
proposes to require that they be
submitted in an electronic form. Under
§§ 310.305(e)(2), 314.80(g)(2),
600.80(g)(2), and 600.81(b)(2), we are
also proposing to permit manufacturers,
packers, and distributors, and
applicants with approved NDAs,
ANDAs and BLAs and those that market
prescription drugs for human use
without an approved application to
request a waiver from the electronic
format requirement.
We currently have OMB approval for
submission of postmarketing safety
reports to FDA under parts 310, 314,
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42198
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
and 600. The information collection for
part 310 and part 314 is approved under
OMB Control Numbers 0910–0291
(Form 3500A) and 0910–0230. The
information collection for part 600 is
approved under OMB Control Numbers
0910–0291 (Form 3500A) and 0910–
0308. We do not expect that the burdens
currently estimated, under parts 310,
314 and 600, for submission of
postmarketing safety reports to FDA for
human drugs and biological products
would change as a result of this
proposed rule. This is because: (1)
Current burden estimates associated
with these regulatory requirements have
taken into account voluntary
submission of these reports in an
electronic format and those applicants,
manufacturers, packers, and distributors
that already submit these reports in an
electronic format would have no new
reporting burdens, and (2) new burdens
for establishing the means for
submitting postmarketing safety reports
in electronic form to comply with this
proposed rule, including obtaining an
electronic certificate, revising SOPs, and
familiarity with the system, would be
negated by the savings in burden from
not having to print out the report and
mail it to FDA. These assumptions also
apply to applicants submitting
biological lot distribution reports under
proposed § 600.81. We invite comment
on the number of respondents not
currently submitting safety reports in
electronic format who would need to
convert from paper submission. We also
invite comment on the reduction in
burden associated with not printing out
reports and mailing them to FDA and
whether this burden reduction is offset
by the cost associated with obtaining an
electronic certificate, revising SOPs, and
familiarizing firms with the system.
Manufacturers, packers, or
distributors whose name appears on the
label of nonprescription human drug
products marketed without an approved
application are now required to submit
reports of serious adverse events to FDA
(see section II.A.1.d of this document).
Even though we are not proposing to
require that these reports be submitted
to FDA in an electronic form at this
time, we are considering including such
a requirement in the final rule. OMB has
recently approved the burden associated
with these submissions under OMB
Control Number 0910–0636.
In table 3 of this document, we have
estimated the burdens associated with
submission of waivers, under proposed
§§ 310.305(e)(2), 314.80(g)(2),
600.80(g)(2), 600.81(b)(2) and 21 U.S.C.
379aa((b) and (c)). We expect very few
waiver requests (see section III.C of this
document). We estimate that
approximately one manufacturer would
request a waiver annually under
§§ 310.305(e)(2), 600.81(b)(2), and 21
U.S.C. 379aa((b) and (c)), and five
manufacturers would request a waiver
annually under §§ 314.80(g)(2) and
600.80(g)(2). We estimate that each
waiver request would take
approximately 1 hour to prepare and
submit to us.
Description of Respondents:
Manufacturers, packers, and
distributors, and applicants with
approved NDAs, ANDAs and BLAs and
those that market prescription drugs for
human use without an approved
application.
Burden Estimate: Table 3 of this
document provides an estimate of the
annual reporting burden for submitting
requests under the proposed waiver
requirement in this rule.
A. Reporting Cost
TABLE 3.—TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL BURDEN FOR THIS PROPOSED RULE
Number of
Responses Per
Respondent
Number of
Respondents
21 CFR Sections
Total Annual
Responses
Hours per
Response
Total Hours
Waivers
310.305(e)(2)
1
1
1
1
1
314.80(g)(2)
5
1
5
1
5
600.80(g)(2)
5
1
5
1
5
600.81(b)(2)
1
1
1
1
1
21 U.S.C. 379aa((b) and (c))
1
1
1
1
1
Total Reporting Burden
13
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Based on the average hourly wage as
calculated in section VI (Analysis of
Impacts) of the proposed rule ($68), the
cost to respondents would be $884 (13
X $68).
Tables 4 through 7 of this document
provide an estimate of the annual
reporting burden currently covered
under existing OMB Control Numbers
0910–0291, 0910–0230, 0910–0308, and
0910–0636. As explained previously, we
believe that any burden increases
associated with electronic reporting are
offset by burden decreases associated
with not printing out reports and
mailing them to FDA. Therefore, we
believe that the burden estimates for
these information collections will not
change.
TABLE 4.—OMB CONTROL NUMBER 0910–0291
Number of
Respondents
21 CFR Sections
Form 3500A (§§ 310.305, 314.80,
314.98, & 600.80)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
Number of
Responses Per
Respondent
600
PO 00000
Frm 00015
765
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Total Annual
Responses
Hours per
Response
459,102
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
Total Hours
1.1
21AUP1
505, 012
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
Based on the average hourly wage as
calculated in section VI (Analysis of
Impacts) of the proposed rule ($68), the
42199
cost to respondents would be
$34,340,816 (505,012 x $68).
TABLE 5.—OMB CONTROL NUMBER 0910–0230
Number of
Responses Per
Respondent
Number of
Respondents
21 CFR Sections
310.305(c)(5)
Total Annual
Responses
Hours per
Response
Total Hours
1
1
1
1
642
314.80(c)(2)
1
17.88
11,478
60
688,680
Total
688,681
Based on the average hourly wage as
calculated in section VI (Analysis of
Impacts) of the proposed rule ($68), the
cost to respondents would be
$46,830,308 (688,681 x $68).
TABLE 6.—OMB CONTROL NUMBER 0910–0308
Number of
Responses Per
Respondent
Number of
Respondents
21 CFR Sections
Total Annual
Responses
Hours per
Response
Total Hours
600.80(c)(1) & 600.80(e)
88
270.85
23,835
1
23,835
600.80(c)(2)
88
248.55
21,872
28
612,416
600.81
88
2.03
179
1
179
Total
636,430
Based on the average hourly wage as
calculated in section VI (Analysis of
Impacts) of the proposed rule ($68), the
cost to respondents would be
$43,277,240 (636,430 x $68).
TABLE 7.—OMB CONTROL NUMBER 0910–0636
Number of
Responses Per
Respondent
Number of
Respondents
21 CFR Sections
Reports of serious adverse drug events
(21 U.S.C. 379aa((b) and (c))
50
Total Annual
Responses
250
Hours per
Response
12.500
2
Total
B. Capital Costs
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
25,000
25,000
Based on the average hourly wage as
calculated in section VI (Analysis of
Impacts) of the proposed rule ($68), the
cost to respondents would be
$1,700,000 (25,000 x $68).
As explained in section VI (Analysis
of Impacts) of this document, total onetime costs to industry under this rule
would be between $4.5 million to $5.6
million; most of these costs would be for
changing SOPs, setting up systems for
submissions, and acquiring an
electronic certificate. Industry would
also incur annual costs of between
$133,320 to $139,380 for Internet
upgrades and to maintain electronic
certificates.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Total Hours
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
The information collection provisions
of this proposed rule have been
submitted to OMB for review. Interested
persons are requested to fax comments
regarding information collection by (see
DATES section of this document), to the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, OMB. To ensure that comments
on the information collection are
received, OMB recommends that written
comments be faxed to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX:
202–395–7285, or e-mailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. All
comments should reference the title of
this rule and include the FDA docket
number found in brackets in the
heading of this document.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
VIII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA
has determined that the rule does not
contain policies that have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Accordingly, the
agency has concluded that the rule does
not contain policies that have
federalism implications as defined in
the Executive order and, consequently,
a federalism summary impact statement
is not required.
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42200
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
IX. Request for Comments
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) written or electronic
comments regarding this document.
Submit a single copy of electronic
comments or two paper copies of any
mailed comments, except that
individuals may submit one paper copy.
Comments are to be identified with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 310
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drugs, Labeling, Medical
devices, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
21 CFR Part 314
Administrative practice and
procedure, Confidential business
information, Drugs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 600
Biologics, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public
Health Service Act, and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, it is proposed that 21 CFR
parts 310, 314, and 600 be amended as
follows:
PART 310—NEW DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 310 continues to read as follows:
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360b–360f, 360j, 361(a), 371, 374,
375, 379e; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 242(a), 262,
263b–263n.
2. Section 310.305 is amended by:
a. Removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each
time it appears and by adding in its
place the word ‘‘must’’;
b. Adding alphabetically in paragraph
(b) the definition of ‘‘Individual case
safety report (ICSR)’’;
c. Revising paragraph (c) introductory
text, paragraph (c)(1)(i), and the second
sentence of paragraph (c)(3)
introductory text; removing the last
sentence in paragraph (c)(2), and
removing and reserving paragraph (c)(4);
d. Revising paragraph (d); and
e. Redesignating paragraphs (e)
through (g) as paragraphs (f) through (h),
adding a new paragraph (e), revising
newly redesignated paragraph (f), and in
newly redesignated paragraph (g)(1)
remove ‘‘(c)(4)’’ and add in its place
‘‘(c)(3)’’ to read as follows:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
§ 310.305 Records and reports concerning
adverse drug experiences on marketed
prescription drugs for human use without
approved new drug applications.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
Individual case safety report (ICSR). A
description of an adverse drug
experience related to an individual
patient or subject.
(c) Reporting requirements. Each
person identified in paragraph (c)(1)(i)
of this section must submit to FDA
adverse drug experience information as
described in this section. Except as
provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section, 15-day ‘‘Alert reports’’ and
followup reports, including ICSRs and
any attachments, must be submitted to
the agency in electronic format as
described in paragraph (e)(1) of this
section.
(1) Postmarketing 15-day ‘‘Alert
reports’’. (i) Any person whose name
appears on the label of a marketed
prescription drug product as its
manufacturer, packer, or distributor
must report to FDA each adverse drug
experience received or otherwise
obtained that is both serious and
unexpected as soon as possible, but no
later than 15 calendar days from initial
receipt of the information by the person
whose name appears on the label. Each
report must be accompanied by the
current content of labeling in electronic
format unless it is already on file at
FDA.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * * If a packer or distributor
elects to submit these adverse drug
experience reports to the manufacturer
rather than to FDA, it must submit, by
any appropriate means, each report to
the manufacturer within 5 calendar days
of its receipt by the packer or
distributor, and the manufacturer must
then comply with the requirements of
this section even if its name does not
appear on the label of the drug product.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(4) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Information reported on ICSRs.
ICSRs include the following
information:
(1) Patient information.
(i) Patient identification code;
(ii) Patient age at the time of adverse
drug experience, or date of birth;
(iii) Patient gender; and
(iv) Patient weight.
(2) Adverse drug experience.
(i) Outcome attributed to adverse drug
experience;
(ii) Date of adverse drug experience;
(iii) Date of report;
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(iv) Description of adverse drug
experience;
(v) Description of relevant tests,
including dates and laboratory data; and
(vi) Other relevant patient history,
including preexisting medical
conditions.
(3) Suspect medication(s).
(i) Name;
(ii) Dose, frequency, and route used;
(iii) Therapy dates;
(iv) Diagnosis for use (indication);
(v) State whether adverse drug
experience abated after drug use
stopped or dose reduced;
(vi) Lot number;
(vii) Expiration date;
(viii) State whether adverse drug
experience reappeared after
reintroduction of drug;
(ix) NDC number; and
(x) Concomitant medical products and
therapy dates.
(4) Initial reporter information.
(i) Name, address, and phone number;
(ii) Whether the initial reporter is a
health professional;
(iii) Occupation; and
(iv) Whether the initial reporter also
sent a copy of the report to FDA.
(5) Manufacturer, packer, or
distributor information.
(i) Manufacturer, packer, or
distributor name and contact office
address;
(ii) Telephone number;
(iii) Report source(s) (e.g., literature,
study);
(iv) Date received by manufacturer,
packer, or distributor;
(v) Basis for marketing if
nonapplication product;
(vi) Type of report being submitted
(e.g., 15-day, periodic, followup);
(vii) Adverse drug experience term(s);
and
(viii) Manufacturer report number.
(e) Electronic format for submissions.
(1) Each report required to be submitted
to FDA under this section, including the
ICSR and any attached documentation,
must be submitted in an electronic
format that FDA can process, review,
and archive. FDA will periodically issue
guidance on how to provide the
electronic submission (e.g., method of
transmission, media, file formats,
preparation and organization of files).
(2) Waivers. Each person identified in
paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section may
request, in writing, a temporary waiver
of the requirements in paragraph (e)(1)
of this section. These waivers will be
granted on a limited basis for good
cause shown. If the agency grants the
waiver, the person must submit the
reports required under paragraph (c) of
this section on paper within the
required time periods in a form that
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
FDA can process, review, and archive.
FDA will issue guidance on how to
provide the paper submission.
Procedures for how to request waivers
of this requirement will be set forth in
guidance.
(f) Patient privacy. Manufacturers,
packers, and distributors should not
include in reports under this section the
names and addresses of individual
patients; instead, the manufacturer,
packer, and distributor should assign a
unique code to each report. The
preferred methodology for determining
the identification code will be set forth
in guidance. The manufacturer, packer,
and distributor should include the name
of the reporter from whom the
information was received, unless the
reporter is the patient. The names of
patients, individual reporters, health
care professionals, hospitals, and
geographical identifiers in adverse drug
experience reports are not releasable to
the public under FDA’s public
information regulations in part 20 of
this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 314—APPLICATIONS FOR FDA
APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 314 continues to read as follows:
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 356, 356a, 356b, 356c, 371, 374,
379e.
4. Section 314.80 is amended:
a. By removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each
time it appears and by adding in its
place the word ‘‘must’’;
b. In paragraph (a) by alphabetically
adding the definition for ‘‘Individual
case safety report (ICSR)’’;
c. In paragraph (c)(1)(i) by removing
the phrase ‘‘in no case later than 15
calendar days of’’ and by adding in its
place the phrase ‘‘no later than 15
calendar days from’’;
d. By removing the last sentence of
paragraph (c)(1)(ii);
e. By removing paragraph (c)(1)(iv);
f. By revising paragraph (c)
introductory text, the first and third
sentences of paragraph (c)(1)(iii)
introductory text, and paragraph
(c)(2)(ii);
g. By removing paragraph (d)(2) and
by redesignating paragraph (d)(1) as
paragraph (d) and revising the first
sentence of paragraph (d);
h. By removing paragraph (e)(2) and
by redesignating paragraph (e)(1) as
paragraph (e);
i. By revising paragraph (f);
j. By redesignating paragraph (g)
through paragraph (k) as paragraph (h)
through paragraph (l); and revising
newly redesignated (i);
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
k. By adding new paragraph (g) to
read as follows:
§ 314.80 Postmarketing reporting of
adverse drug experiences.
(a) * * *
Individual case safety report (ICSR). A
description of an adverse drug
experience related to an individual
patient or subject.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Reporting requirements. The
applicant must submit to FDA adverse
drug experience information as
described in this section. Except as
provided in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section, these reports must be submitted
to the agency in electronic format as
described in paragraph (g)(1) of this
section.
(1) * * *
(iii) Submission of reports. The
requirements of paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and
(c)(1)(ii) of this section, concerning the
submission of postmarketing 15-day
Alert reports, also apply to any person
other than the applicant whose name
appears on the label of an approved
drug product as a manufacturer, packer,
or distributor (nonapplicant). * * * If a
nonapplicant elects to submit adverse
drug experience reports to the applicant
rather than to FDA, the nonapplicant
must submit, by any appropriate means,
each report to the applicant within 5
calendar days of initial receipt of the
information by the nonapplicant, and
the applicant must then comply with
the requirements of this section. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(ii) Each periodic report is required to
contain:
(A) Descriptive information. (1) A
narrative summary and analysis of the
information in the report;
(2) An analysis of the 15-day Alert
reports submitted during the reporting
interval (all 15-day Alert reports being
appropriately referenced by the
applicant’s patient identification code,
adverse reaction term(s), and date of
submission to FDA);
(3) A history of actions taken since the
last report because of adverse drug
experiences (for example, labeling
changes or studies initiated); and
(4) An index consisting of a line
listing of the applicant’s patient
identification code, and adverse
reaction term(s) for all ICSRs submitted
under paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B) of this
section.
(B) ICSRs for serious, expected and
nonserious adverse drug experiences.
An ICSR for each adverse drug
experience not reported under
paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section (all
serious, expected and nonserious
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42201
adverse drug experiences). All such
ICSRs must be submitted to FDA (either
individually or in one or more batches)
within the timeframe specified in
paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. ICSRs
must only be submitted to FDA once.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Scientific literature. A 15-day
Alert report based on information in the
scientific literature must be
accompanied by a copy of the published
article. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Information reported on ICSRs.
ICSRs include the following
information:
(1) Patient information.
(i) Patient identification code;
(ii) Patient age at the time of adverse
drug experience, or date of birth;
(iii) Patient gender; and
(iv) Patient weight.
(2) Adverse drug experience.
(i) Outcome attributed to adverse drug
experience;
(ii) Date of adverse drug experience;
(iii) Date of report;
(iv) Description of adverse drug
experience;
(v) Description of relevant tests,
including dates and laboratory data; and
(vi) Other relevant patient history,
including preexisting medical
conditions.
(3) Suspect medication(s).
(i) Name;
(ii) Dose, frequency, and route used;
(iii) Therapy dates;
(iv) Diagnosis for use (indication);
(v) State whether adverse drug
experience abated after drug use
stopped or dose reduced;
(vi) Lot number;
(vii) Expiration date;
(viii) State whether adverse drug
experience reappeared after
reintroduction of drug;
(ix) NDC number; and
(x) Concomitant medical products and
therapy dates.
(4) Initial reporter information.
(i) Name, address, and phone number;
(ii) Whether the initial reporter is a
health professional;
(iii) Occupation; and
(iv) Whether the initial reporter also
sent a copy of the report to FDA.
(5) Applicant information.
(i) Applicant name and contact office
address;
(ii) Telephone number;
(iii) Report source(s) (e.g., literature,
study);
(iv) Date received by applicant;
(v) Application number and type;
(vi) Type of report being submitted
(e.g., 15-day, periodic, followup);
(vii) Adverse drug experience term(s);
and
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
42202
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(viii) Manufacturer report number.
(g) Electronic format for submissions.
(1) Safety report submissions, including
ICSRs. Any attached documentation,
and the descriptive information in
periodic reports, must be in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review, and archive. FDA will
periodically issue guidance on how to
provide the electronic submission (e.g.,
method of transmission, media, file
formats, preparation and organization of
files).
(2) Waivers. An applicant or
nonapplicant may request, in writing, a
temporary waiver of the requirements in
paragraph (g)(1) of this section. These
waivers will be granted on a limited
basis for good cause shown. If the
agency grants the waiver, the applicant
or nonapplicant must submit reports
required under this section on paper
within the required time periods in a
form that FDA can process, review, and
archive. FDA will issue guidance on
how to provide the paper submission.
Procedures for how to request waivers
of this requirement will be set forth in
guidance.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Patient privacy. An applicant
should not include in reports under this
section the names and addresses of
individual patients; instead, the
applicant should assign a unique code
to each report. The preferred
methodology for determining the
identification code will be set forth in
guidance. The applicant should include
the name of the reporter from whom the
information was received, unless the
reporter is the patient. The names of
patients, health care professionals,
hospitals, and geographical identifiers
in adverse drug experience reports are
not releasable to the public under FDA’s
public information regulations in part
20 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
5. Section 314.98 is revised to read as
follows:
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
§ 314.98
Postmarketing reports.
(a) Each applicant having an approved
abbreviated new drug application under
§ 314.94 that is effective must comply
with the requirements of § 314.80
regarding the reporting and
recordkeeping of adverse drug
experiences.
(b) Each applicant must make the
reports required under § 314.81 and
section 505(k) of the act for each of its
approved abbreviated applications.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
PART 600—BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS:
GENERAL
6. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 600 continues in part to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 360, 360i, 371, 374; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262,
263, 263a, 264, 300aa–25.
*
*
*
*
*
7. Section 600.80 is amended:
a. By removing the word ‘‘shall’’ each
time it appears and by adding in its
place the word ‘‘must’’;
b. By removing the phrase ‘‘licensed
manufacturer’’ each time it appears and
by adding in its place the word
‘‘applicant’’;
c. In paragraph (a) by alphabetically
adding the definition for ‘‘Individual
case safety report (ICSR)’’;
d. In paragraph (c)(1)(i) by removing
the phrase ‘‘in no case later than 15
calendar days of’’ and by adding in its
place the phrase ‘‘no later than 15
calendar days from’’;
e. In paragraph (c)(1)(ii) by removing
the last sentence;
f. By removing paragraph (c)(1)(iv);
g. By revising paragraph (c)
introductory text, the first and third
sentences of paragraph (c)(1)(iii)
introductory text, and paragraph
(c)(2)(ii);
h. By removing paragraph (d)(2) and
by redesignating paragraph (d)(1) as
paragraph (d) and revising the first
sentence of paragraph (d);
i. By removing paragraph (e)(2) and by
redesignating paragraph (e)(1) as
paragraph (e);
j. By revising paragraph (f);
k. By redesignating paragraph (g)
through paragraph (l) as paragraph (h)
through paragraph (m) and by revising
newly redesignated paragraph (i); and
l. By adding new paragraph (g) to read
as follows:
§ 600.80 Postmarketing reporting of
adverse experiences.
(a) * * *
Individual case safety report (ICSR). A
description of an adverse experience
related to an individual patient or
subject.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Reporting requirements. The
applicant must submit to FDA
postmarketing 15-day Alert reports and
periodic safety reports pertaining to its
biological product as described in this
section. These reports must be
submitted to the agency in electronic
format as described in paragraph (g)(1)
of this section, except as provided in
paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
(1) * * *
(iii) Submission of reports. The
requirements of paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(c)(1)(ii) of this section, concerning the
submission of postmarketing 15-day
Alert reports, also apply to any person
whose name appears on the label of a
licensed biological product as a
manufacturer, packer, distributor,
shared manufacturer, joint
manufacturer, or any other participant
involved in divided manufacturing.
* * * If a person elects to submit
adverse experience reports to the
applicant rather than to FDA, the person
must submit, by any appropriate means,
each report to the applicant within 5
calendar days of initial receipt of the
information by the person, and the
applicant must then comply with the
requirements of this section. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(2) * * *
(ii) Each periodic report is required to
contain:
(A) Descriptive information. (1) A
narrative summary and analysis of the
information in the report;
(2) An analysis of the 15-day Alert
reports submitted during the reporting
interval (all 15-day Alert reports being
appropriately referenced by the
applicant’s patient identification code,
adverse reaction term(s), and date of
submission to FDA);
(3) A history of actions taken since the
last report because of adverse
experiences (for example, labeling
changes or studies initiated);
(4) An index consisting of a line
listing of the applicant’s patient
identification code, and adverse
reaction term(s) for all ICSRs submitted
under paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(B) of this
section; and
(B) ICSRs for serious, expected and
nonserious adverse experiences. An
ICSR for each adverse experience not
reported under paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this
section (all serious, expected and
nonserious adverse experiences). All
such ICSRs must be submitted to FDA
(either individually or in one or more
batches) within the timeframe specified
in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section.
ICSRs must only be submitted to FDA
once.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Scientific literature. A 15-day
Alert report based on information in the
scientific literature must be
accompanied by a copy of the published
article. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(f) Information to be reported on
ICSRs. ICSRs include the following
information:
(1) Patient information.
(i) Patient identification code;
(ii) Patient age at the time of adverse
experience, or date of birth;
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
CPrice-Sewell on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(iii) Patient gender; and
(iv) Patient weight.
(2) Adverse experience.
(i) Outcome attributed to adverse
experience;
(ii) Date of adverse experience;
(iii) Date of report;
(iv) Description of adverse experience;
(v) Description of relevant tests,
including dates and laboratory data; and
(vi) Other relevant patient history,
including preexisting medical
conditions.
(3) Suspect medical product(s).
(i) Name;
(ii) Dose, frequency, and route used;
(iii) Therapy dates;
(iv) Diagnosis for use (indication);
(v) State whether adverse experience
abated after product use stopped or dose
reduced;
(vi) Lot number;
(vii) Expiration date;
(viii) State whether adverse
experience reappeared after
reintroduction of the product;
(ix) NDC number, or other unique
identifier; and
(x) Concomitant medical products and
therapy dates.
(4) Initial reporter information.
(i) Name, address, and phone number;
(ii) Whether the initial reporter is a
health professional;
(iii) Occupation; and
(iv) Whether the initial reporter also
sent a copy of the report to FDA.
(5) Applicant information.
(i) Applicant name and contact office
address;
(ii) Telephone number;
(iii) Report source(s) (e.g., literature,
study);
(iv) Date received by applicant;
(v) Application number and type;
(vi) Type of report being submitted
(e.g., 15-day, periodic, followup);
(vii) Adverse experience term(s); and
(viii) Manufacturer report number.
(g) Electronic format for submissions.
(1) Safety report submissions, including
ICSRs and any attached documentation
and the descriptive information in
periodic reports, must be in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review, and archive. FDA will
periodically issue guidance on how to
provide the electronic submission (e.g.,
method of transmission, media, file
formats, preparation and organization of
files).
(2) Waivers. Persons subject to the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this
section may request, in writing, a
temporary waiver of the requirements in
paragraph (g)(1) of this section. These
waivers will be granted on a limited
basis for good cause shown. If the
agency grants the waiver, the person
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:17 Aug 20, 2009
Jkt 217001
must submit reports required under this
section on paper within the required
time periods in a form that FDA can
process, review, and archive. FDA will
issue guidance on how to provide the
paper submission. Requests for waivers
must be submitted in accordance with
§ 600.90.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Patient privacy. For nonvaccine
biological products, an applicant should
not include in reports under this section
the names and addresses of individual
patients; instead, the applicant should
assign a unique code to each report. The
preferred methodology for determining
the identification code will be set forth
in guidance. The applicant should
include the name of the reporter from
whom the information was received,
unless the reporter is the patient. The
names of patients, health care
professionals, hospitals, and
geographical identifiers in adverse
experience reports are not releasable to
the public under FDA’s public
information regulations in part 20 of
this chapter. For vaccine adverse
experience reports, these data will
become part of the CDC Privacy Act
System 09–20–0136, ‘‘Epidemiologic
Studies and Surveillance of Disease
Problems.’’ Information identifying the
person who received the vaccine or that
person’s legal representative will not be
made available to the public, but may be
available to the vaccinee or legal
representative.
*
*
*
*
*
8. Section § 600.81 is amended:
a. By removing the phrase ‘‘licensed
manufacturer’’ each time it appears and
by adding in its place the word
‘‘applicant’’;
b. By designating the existing text as
paragraph (a) and by adding a new
heading for paragraph (a); and
c. By adding new paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
§ 600.81
Distribution reports.
(a) Reporting requirements. * * *
(b)(1) Electronic format. Except as
provided for in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section, the distribution reports required
under paragraph (a) of this section must
be submitted to the agency in electronic
format in a form that FDA can process,
review, and archive. FDA will
periodically issue guidance on how to
provide the electronic submission (e.g.,
method of transmission, media, file
formats, preparation and organization of
files).
(2) Waivers. An applicant may
request, in writing, a temporary waiver
of the requirements in paragraph (b)(1)
of this section. These waivers will be
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42203
granted on a limited basis for good
cause shown. If the agency grants the
waiver, the applicant must submit
reports required under this section on
paper within the required time period in
a form that FDA can process, review,
and archive. FDA will issue guidance on
how to provide the paper submission.
Requests for waivers must be submitted
in accordance with § 600.90.
§ 600.90
[Amended]
9. Section 600.90 is amended by
removing the phrase ‘‘licensed
manufacturer’’ each time it appears and
by adding in its place the word
‘‘applicant’’.
Dated: August 5, 2009.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. E9–19682 Filed 8–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 803
[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0393]
RIN 0910–AF86
Medical Device Reporting: Electronic
Submission Requirements
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is proposing to
amend its postmarket medical device
reporting regulation to require that
manufacturers, importers, and user
facilities submit mandatory reports of
individual medical device adverse
events, also known as medical device
reports (MDRs) to the agency in an
electronic format that FDA can process,
review, and archive. Mandatory
electronic reporting would improve the
agency’s process for collecting and
analyzing postmarket medical device
adverse event information. The
proposed regulatory changes would
provide the agency with a more efficient
data entry process that would allow for
timely access to medical device adverse
event information and identification of
emerging public health issues.
Elsewhere in this issue of the Federal
Register, FDA is also announcing a draft
guidance document that provides
recommendations on how to prepare
and submit electronic MDRs to FDA in
a manner that satisfies the requirements
E:\FR\FM\21AUP1.SGM
21AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 161 (Friday, August 21, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42184-42203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-19682]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 161 / Friday, August 21, 2009 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 42184]]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 310, 314, and 600
[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0334]
RIN 0910-AF96
Postmarketing Safety Reports for Human Drug and Biological
Products; Electronic Submission Requirements
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to amend
its postmarketing safety reporting regulations for human drug and
biological products to require that persons subject to mandatory
reporting requirements submit safety reports in an electronic format
that FDA can process, review, and archive. FDA is taking this action to
improve the agency's systems for collecting and analyzing postmarketing
safety reports. The proposed change would help the agency to more
rapidly review postmarketing safety reports, identify emerging safety
problems, and disseminate safety information in support of FDA's public
health mission. In addition, the proposed amendments would be a key
element in harmonizing FDA's postmarketing safety reporting regulations
with international standards for the electronic submission of safety
information.
DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the proposed rule by
November 19, 2009. Submit comments on information collection issues
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 by September 21, 2009, (see
section ``VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' of this document). See
section III.G of this document for the proposed effective date of a
final rule based on this proposed rule.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2008-
N-0334 and/or RIN number 0910-AF96, by any of the following methods,
except that comments on information collection issues under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 must be submitted to the Office of
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (see the
``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' section of this document).
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the following ways:
FAX: 301-827-6870.
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
To ensure more timely processing of comments, FDA is no longer
accepting comments submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages
you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, as described previously, in the ADDRESSES portion
of this document under Electronic Submissions.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and Docket No. and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. All comments received may be posted without change to
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the
``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov 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, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
The information collection provisions of this proposed rule have
been submitted to OMB for review. Interested persons are requested to
fax comments regarding information collection by September 21, 2009, to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB. To ensure that
comments on information collection are received, OMB recommends that
written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or e-mailed to
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For information concerning human drug products: Roger Goetsch,
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Silver Spring, MD, 20993-0002, 301-
770-9299, or
For information concerning human biological products: Stephen
Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and
Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, suite 200N, Rockville, MD,
20852-1448, 301-827-6210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Background
A. Current Postmarketing Safety Reporting Requirements
1. Description and Timing of Safety Reports
2. Current Format for the Submission of Postmarketing Safety
Reports
B. Previously Proposed Revisions to the Postmarketing Safety
Reporting Requirements
C. Rationale for Requiring Electronic Submission of Postmarketing
Safety Reports
1. Expedited Identification of Emerging Safety Problems
2. Improved Speed and Efficiency of Industry and Agency Operations
3. International Harmonization of Safety Reporting
D. Electronic Format Submission Initiatives
1. Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports
2. Comments on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)
for Mandatory Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports to
FDA
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
A. Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports
[[Page 42185]]
B. Safety Reports Not Covered by the Proposed Rule
C. Waivers
D. Individual Case Safety Report (ICSR)--Definition and Required
Information
E. Removal of Paper Format Provisions
F. Miscellaneous Changes
G. Proposed Implementation Timeframe
IV. Legal Authority
V. Environmental Impact
VI. Analysis of Impacts
A. Benefits
B. Costs
C. Summary of Benefits and Costs
D. Alternatives Considered
E. Small Business Impact
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
A. Reporting Cost
B. Capital Costs
VIII. Federalism
IX. Request for Comments
I. Introduction
When a drug or biological product is approved and enters the
market, the product is introduced to a larger patient population in
settings different from clinical trials. New information generated
during the postmarketing period offers further insight into the
benefits and risks of the product, and evaluation of this information
is important to ensure the safe use of these products.
FDA receives information regarding postmarketing adverse drug
experiences\1\ from safety reports submitted to the agency. For nearly
35 years, FDA has received these postmarketing safety reports on paper.
In recent years, many companies have voluntarily submitted these
reports to the agency in electronic format.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For purposes of this preamble, the term adverse drug
experience includes an adverse experience associated with use of a
biological product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data from both electronic and paper reports are entered into FDA's
Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) database. AERS is a computerized
information database designed to support FDA's postmarketing safety
surveillance program for drug and biological products. The AERS
database is used to store and analyze data received in postmarketing
safety reports. Safety reporting data submitted on paper must first be
converted into an electronic format before being entered into AERS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Additional information regarding the AERS database may be
found at: https://www.fda.gov/cder/aers/default.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA is proposing to require use of an electronic format for the
submission of postmarketing safety reports (see section II of this
document), which would be an important step toward improving the
agency's systems for collecting and analyzing these reports. The
proposal would:
Eliminate the time and costs associated with submitting
paper reports (for industry) and converting data from paper reports
into electronic format for review and analysis (for the agency),
Expedite the agency's access to safety information and
provide data to the agency in a format that would support more
efficient and comprehensive reviews, and
Enhance our ability to rapidly communicate information
about suspected problems to health care providers, consumers,
applicants, and sponsors within the United States and internationally
in support of FDA's public health mission.
The proposed rule would require that postmarketing safety reports
be submitted to us in an electronic format that we can process, review,
and archive. Consistent with FDA's current practice for firms that
already submit these reports in electronic format voluntarily,
technical specifications referenced in FDA guidance documents will
describe how to submit such reports to the agency.\3\ As necessary, the
agency will revise the technical specifications referenced in FDA
guidance documents to address changing technical specifications or any
additional specifications that may be needed for mandatory electronic
safety reporting. Using guidance documents to communicate these
technical specifications will permit FDA to be more responsive to
rapidly occurring changes in the technological environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The most current information on submitting postmarketing
safety reports in electronic format can be found in the draft
guidance on ``Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic
Format--Postmarketing Individual Case Safety Reports'' (73 FR 33436,
June 12, 2008) and the ``Periodic safety update reports'' section of
the guidance on ``Providing Regulatory Submissions in Electronic
Format--Human Pharmaceutical Product Applications and Related
Submissions Using the eCTD Specifications'' (Revision 2, June 2008).
We intend to finalize the draft guidance document in the near
future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Currently, the technical specifications referenced in guidance
documents rely upon and adopt certain safety reporting and transmission
standards recommended by the International Conference on Harmonisation
of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human
Use (ICH). ICH was formed to facilitate the harmonization of technical
requirements for the registration of pharmaceutical products among the
three ICH regions: The European Union, Japan, and the United States. In
this proposed rule, we reaffirm our intention to continue to rely on
these ICH-recommended standards, in addition to providing other options
(see section II.D.1 of this document). We believe the continued use of
ICH standards will promote harmonization of safety reporting among
regulatory agencies and facilitate the international exchange of
postmarketing safety information. Accordingly, this proposed rule is
consistent with ongoing agency initiatives to encourage the widest
possible use of electronic technology and to promote international
harmonization of safety reporting for human drug and biological
products through reliance on ICH standards. (See section II.C.3 of this
document for additional discussion of ICH.).
In this document, we provide background information on the current
status of FDA's postmarketing safety reporting requirements (current
regulations and previously proposed revisions) (sections II.A and II.B
of this document). We also discuss the rationale for proposing this
rule (section II.C of this document). Additionally, we describe
electronic postmarketing safety reporting initiatives (section II.D of
this document), including an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) that we issued in 1998. Finally, we describe the proposed rule
(section III of this document).
II. Background
A. Current Postmarketing Safety Reporting Requirements
The current postmarketing safety reporting requirements for drug
and biological products are summarized below. The proposed electronic
reporting amendments would leave the substantive aspects of these
requirements largely unchanged.
1. Description and Timing of Safety Reports
Under existing regulations in part 310, 314, and 600 (21 CFR part
310, 314, and 600), specifically Sec. Sec. 310.305, 314.80, 314.98,
and 600.80, manufacturers, packers, distributors,\4\
[[Page 42186]]
and applicants\5\ with approved new drug applications (NDAs),
abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs), and biological license
applications (BLAs) and those that market prescription drugs for human
use without an approved application are required to submit
postmarketing safety reports of adverse drug experiences to FDA. These
safety reports include individual case safety reports (ICSRs), and
other related documents (ICSR attachments\6\) for each adverse drug
experience. An ICSR is a description of the adverse drug experience
that includes the basic elements, or facts, of each reportable event
for an individual patient or subject. Under the current regulations,
persons who submit safety reports on paper must use the approved
reporting form for ICSRs--either the FDA Form 3500A or an equivalent
form as discussed below. Although current regulations do not use the
term ICSR, the term is used in FDA and ICH guidances to refer to the
adverse drug experience information supplied on the FDA Form 3500A or
other approved forms, including those currently submitted in electronic
format.\7\ Accordingly, we will refer throughout this document to the
description of each adverse drug experience related to an individual
patient or subject using human drug or biological products as an ICSR.
As discussed in section III.E of this document, consistent with the
proposed change to a mandatory electronic format for safety reports, we
propose to delete most references to the paper forms (e.g., FDA Form
3500A) from FDA postmarketing safety reporting regulations and to add:
(1) A definition of ICSR for drugs and biologics and (2) a statement of
the information required to be reported in an ICSR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ For Sec. 600.80, ``distributor'' also includes shared
manufacturers, joint manufacturers, or any other participant
involved in divided manufacturing.
\5\ In this document, the term ``applicant'' is used instead of
the term ``licensed manufacturer'' for persons with approved BLAs.
\6\ ICSR attachments include published articles that must
accompany ICSRs based on scientific literature (Sec. Sec. 314.80(d)
and 600.80(d)), as well as other supporting information such as
relevant hospital discharge summaries and autopsy reports/death
certificates.
\7\ Health Level Seven (HL7), a technical-standards group
accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), also
uses the term ICSR to describe adverse event information supplied
for FDA regulated products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. 15-day Alert reports. FDA regulations require manufacturers,
packers, distributors, and applicants to submit an ICSR on FDA Form
3500A, or its equivalent, for each postmarketing adverse drug
experience that is both serious and unexpected to the agency within 15
calendar days of initial receipt of information about the adverse drug
experience (15-day ``Alert reports''). An unexpected adverse drug
experience is any adverse drug experience that is not listed in the
current labeling for the product (Sec. Sec. 310.305(b), 314.80(a), and
600.80(a)). Followup reports are required to be submitted within 15
calendar days of receipt of new information or as requested by FDA, and
are also submitted on an FDA Form 3500A or on an equivalent form. In
addition to the ICSR, 15-day Alert reports frequently include related
documents, such as medical records, hospital discharge summaries, or
other documentation related to the event (ICSR attachments).
To avoid duplication of reports, nonapplicant manufacturers,
packers, and distributors of drug and biological products having an
approved application may, under Sec. Sec. 314.80 and 600.80, submit
all reports of serious adverse drug experiences to the applicant within
5 calendar days of receipt of the report instead of to FDA. Similarly,
packers and distributors of prescription drug products marketed without
an approved application may meet their postmarketing 15-day safety
reporting obligations under Sec. 310.305 by submitting all reports of
serious adverse drug experiences to the manufacturer within 5 calendar
days of the receipt of the information instead of to FDA. Applicants/
manufacturers receiving such data must then, in turn, submit a 15-day
Alert report to FDA.
b. Periodic reports. In addition to 15-day Alert reports,
applicants are also required to submit postmarketing periodic safety
reports to FDA. For each approved application, applicants are required
under Sec. Sec. 314.80 and 600.80 to submit a periodic report
quarterly or annually, depending on how long the drug or biological
product has been approved. Upon written notice, the agency can require
that an applicant submit these reports to FDA at different times than
those stated. These reports contain the following information: (1) A
narrative summary and analysis of the information in the report, (2) an
analysis of all of the 15-day Alert reports submitted during the
reporting interval, (3) an ICSR (and ICSR attachments, if applicable)
for each adverse drug experience not previously reported (i.e., reports
of all serious, expected (labeled) and nonserious events)\8\, and (4) a
history of actions taken since the last periodic report because of the
reports of adverse drug experiences. The descriptive information
portions of a postmarketing periodic safety report (report summary,
analysis of 15-day Alert reports, and history of actions) are submitted
to the agency in a narrative format accompanied by the ICSRs and any
ICSR attachments for all serious, expected and nonserious adverse drug
experiences that occurred during the reporting period. Manufacturers of
drugs marketed without an approved application (e.g., NDA, ANDA) are
not required to submit postmarketing periodic safety reports to FDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ In some cases, applicants may request a waiver for
submission of an ICSR for nonserious, expected adverse drug
experiences. See section XI.A of FDA's draft guidance for industry
on ``Postmarketing Safety Reporting for Human Drug and Biological
Products Including Vaccines'' available on the Internet at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm under ``Procedural.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Distribution reports. In addition to periodic reports, under
Sec. 600.81, applicants with approved BLAs are also required to submit
distribution reports to the agency every 6 months or at other intervals
that the agency may specify with written notice. These reports contain
information about the quantity of biological product distributed under
the BLA, including the quantity distributed to distributors.
d. Nonprescription human drug products marketed without an approved
application. Public Law 109-462, enacted on December 22, 2006, amended
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the act) to create a new
section 760 (21 U.S.C. 379aa), entitled ``Serious Adverse Event
Reporting for Nonprescription Drugs.'' Section 760 of the act requires
manufacturers, packers, or distributors whose name appears on the label
of nonprescription human drug products marketed without an approved
application to report serious adverse events associated with their
products. Effective December 22, 2007, section 760 of the act requires
these reports to be submitted to FDA within 15 business days. As
required by section 2(e)(3) of Public Law 109-462, FDA issued a draft
guidance for industry entitled ``Postmarketing Adverse Event Reporting
for Nonprescription Human Drug Products Marketed without an Approved
Application'' (72 FR 58316, October 15, 2007). The draft guidance
describes the minimum data elements and the relevant policies and
procedures for making these reports under section 760 of the act. It
provides, among other things, that the reports be submitted on paper on
FDA Form 3500A or in the electronic format described in the guidance.
This proposed rule does not contain language that would require
that safety reports under section 760 of the act for nonprescription
human drug products marketed without an approved application be
submitted to FDA in electronic format. However, we are soliciting
public comment on whether the final rule should require the use of
electronic format for these reports. We expect that any electronic
format requirements for these section 760
[[Page 42187]]
reports would be quite similar to the requirements for other categories
of drug products addressed by this rule. Any decision whether to
include section 760 reports will be informed by the public comments
submitted in response to this proposal and the agency's experience
since submission of serious adverse event reports for nonprescription
human drug products marketed without an approved application became
mandatory in December 2007.
Finally, note that nonprescription drugs that are marketed under
approved applications (NDAs or ANDAs) are not covered under section 760
of the act. Such products are subject to reporting under current
Sec. Sec. 314.80 and 314.81. Reports submitted to FDA under those
sections would be subject to the mandatory electronic format
requirements proposed in this rule as described elsewhere in this
document.
2. Current Format for the Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports
a. Drug and biological products. FDA currently accepts all
postmarketing ICSRs in either a paper format or an electronic format.
Sections 310.305(d), 314.80(f), and 600.80(f) authorize use of a paper
FDA Form 3500A for reporting of single cases of adverse drug
experiences for human drug and biological products. The regulations
also permit use of the form introduced by the World Health
Organization's (WHO's) Council for International Organizations of
Medical Sciences (CIOMS) Working Group I for reporting single cases of
foreign adverse drug experiences that are serious and unexpected (CIOMS
I form).
Section 11.2(b)(2) currently provides that regulatory submissions
may be voluntarily provided to the agency in electronic form\9\ if the
submissions are identified by FDA in its electronic submissions public
docket as submissions the agency will accept in electronic form.\10\
Postmarketing safety reports for drug and nonvaccine biological
products have been identified in the docket as submissions the agency
can accept in electronic format. See Memorandums 23 and 28 in FDA's
electronic submissions public docket. If the reporter elects to file
the safety report in electronic format rather than on paper, current
Sec. Sec. 310.305(d), 314.80(f), and 600.80(f) require that the ICSRs
in the electronic report include the same information as the paper FDA
Form 3500A or CIOMS I form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The content of labeling for NDAs, certain BLAs, ANDAs,
annual reports, and supplements is currently the only regulatory
submission required to be submitted to the agency electronically (68
FR 69009, December 11, 2003).
\10\ Docket No. FDA-1992-S-0039 (formerly Docket No. 1992S-0251)
can be accessed on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, under current regulations, an ICSR submission can take
the form of a paper FDA Form 3500A, a paper CIOMS I form, or comparable
information submitted in electronic format. (See section II.D.1 of this
document). Each of these is a different method of transmitting to FDA
the same basic elements of the ICSR, whether on paper or in electronic
format. As described in section II.D.1.a of this document, ICSR
attachments and the descriptive information portions of periodic safety
reports may also be submitted electronically.
b. Vaccine products. Adverse experience reporting for vaccine
products may be submitted to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS). VAERS is a computerized information database designed to
support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) and
FDA's postmarketing surveillance program for vaccine products.
Postmarketing ICSRs for vaccines can be submitted on a VAERS paper
form\11\ or reported on-line using the VAERS secure web-based
system\12\. Each of these is a different method of transmitting to CDC/
FDA the same basic elements of the ICSR. Currently, VAERS does not have
the capability to receive electronic ICSRs submitted through the FDA's
electronic submissions gateway. However, developments are underway to
implement this submission capability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The VAERS form can be accessed on the Internet at https://secure.vaers.org/vaersdataentryintro.htm. FDA has verified the Web
site addresses throughout this document, but FDA is not responsible
for any subsequent changes to the Web sites after this document
publishes in the Federal Register.)
\12\ Report on-line at https://secure.vaers.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Previously Proposed Revisions to the Postmarketing Safety Reporting
Requirements
In the Federal Register of March 14, 2003 (68 FR 12406), FDA
published a proposed rule to amend its safety reporting requirements
for human drug and biological products (Safety Reporting Proposed
Rule). The agency proposed new definitions and reporting formats and
standards for pre- and postmarketing safety reporting as recommended by
ICH (see section II.C.3 of this document) and by CIOMS. Some of the
proposed amendments were based on the recommendations of ICH, while
others were proposed by the agency on its own initiative. With regard
to coding of postmarketing ICSRs to standardize safety reports for
comparison and analysis, the agency proposed use of the Medical
Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terminology developed by
ICH\13\. The agency also proposed to require the submission of new
types of postmarketing safety reports to FDA. FDA is currently
considering the comments that it has received on the Safety Reporting
Proposed Rule. Any new postmarketing safety reports that are required
by a safety reporting final rule would be required to be submitted
electronically in accordance with this rulemaking, if adopted as final.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ MedDRA is a medically validated medical terminology created
by ICH as a cooperative effort between the pharmaceutical industry
and regulators from the United States, Europe, and Japan for sharing
regulatory information for human medical products and activities
(see www.ich.org/cache/compo/276-254-1.html). MedDRA establishes a
terminology database for use in the regulatory process for medical
products and has become the accepted standard for regulatory
activities involving adverse drug experiences. Use of MedDRA would
serve the public health by facilitating the collection,
presentation, and analysis of adverse drug experience information
from medical products during clinical and scientific reviews and
marketing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Rationale for Requiring Electronic Submission of Postmarketing
Safety Report
As explained more below, the agency proposes to require that all
postmarketing safety reports for human drugs and biological products be
submitted in electronic format. By requiring submission of these
reports in electronic format, FDA would expedite access to safety
information and facilitate international harmonization and exchange of
this information. This, in turn, would lead to more efficient reviews
of safety data and enhance our ability to rapidly disseminate safety
information to health care providers, consumers, applicants, sponsors,
and other regulatory authorities in support of FDA's public health
mission. In addition, the agency would recognize a significant cost
savings by converting the safety reporting system from a paper
submission process to an all electronic system that would increase the
accuracy of information and reduce the need for manual data entry.
1. Expedited Identification of Emerging Safety Problems
Establishment and maintenance of efficient risk management programs
(where appropriate) is an agency priority (see FDA's January 2007
response to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on drug safety
entitled ``The Future of Drug Safety: Promoting and Protecting the
Health of the Public,''
[[Page 42188]]
FDA's March 2005 guidance for industry entitled ``Development and Use
of Risk Minimization Action Plans,'' and FDA's 2007 Strategic Action
Plan).\14\ The changes proposed in this rule, if adopted, would improve
the agency's management of risks from human drug and biological
products by expediting the postmarketing identification and
communication of emerging safety information for these products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ These resources are available on the Internet at (IOM
response) https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/drugsafety/postmarketingdrugsafetyinformationforpatientsandproviders/UCM171627.pdf, (strategic plan) https://www.fda.gov/ope/stratplan07/stratplan07.htm, and (guidance) https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htmunder
``Clinical/Medical.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requiring that postmarketing ICSRs be submitted in electronic
format would result in reducing the time required for FDA to enter
information from a paper safety report into a database for evaluation
and analysis. Currently, approximately 60 percent of all ICSRs (i.e.,
15-day Alert reports and ICSRs associated with periodic reports\15\)
are submitted to FDA on paper for input into the AERS database
(approximately 30,000/month). With regard to 15-day Alert reports,
approximately one-third are submitted on paper (approximately 8,000/
month) to FDA. Fifteen-day Alert reports that are submitted on paper
generally reach FDA's data entry contractor within the required 15 days
following the adverse drug experience, but then the ICSRs must be
manually entered into the AERS database. These ICSRs are entered into
the FDA AERS database on a priority basis because they may indicate a
new, previously unidentified risk. The time required for data entry,
validation, and quality control processes, however, adds an additional
2 weeks before the ICSRs are actually available for assessment by FDA's
safety evaluators. With regard to periodic ICSRs, approximately 80
percent are submitted on paper (approximately 22,000/month).\16\
Periodic ICSRs, which are submitted on paper, may not be available for
review by safety evaluators for up to 2 months after submission to the
agency because of their volume and because ICSRs in 15-day Alert
reports must take first priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See section II.A.1.b of this preamble for a description of
periodic ICSRs.
\16\ Postmarketing periodic reports are required to be submitted
to the FDA for each approved NDA, ANDA, and BLA and are due
quarterly for the first 3 years after U.S. approval of the
application and annually thereafter. An ICSR in a periodic safety
report includes the same elements in the same format as an ICSR in a
15-day Alert report, but describes an adverse drug experience that
is not both serious and unexpected (i.e., all nonserious adverse
drug experiences or serious, expected adverse drug experiences).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In contrast, the ICSRs in both 15-day Alert and periodic reports
submitted in electronic format are processed and available for safety
evaluator review much more quickly because there is no need for data
entry and the associated quality control and validation processes are
faster. Instead of 2 months for periodic ICSRs or 2 weeks for 15-day
Alert ICSRs that are submitted in a paper format, ICSRs submitted in
electronic format are, generally, available to reviewers within 2 days
of their receipt by FDA. The requirement for electronic safety reports
is expected to result in faster processing and this will permit FDA to
more quickly identify emerging safety issues and rapidly disseminate
significant safety information to the medical community and the public
with corresponding benefits to the public health.
2. Improved Speed and Efficiency of Industry and Agency Operations
The proposed electronic formatting requirements for postmarketing
safety reports would enhance operations for both industry and FDA.
Electronic reporting can benefit industry by eliminating the costs
associated with collating, copying, storing, retrieving, and mailing
paper copies. In addition, FDA would benefit from the elimination of
data entry processes and significant reduction in physical storage
requirements. When data are provided only on paper, the information
must be converted manually into an electronic form to review and
analyze. This process is time consuming, costly, and creates an
opportunity for data entry error to occur.
FDA expects to provide two options for submitting electronically
formatted ICSRs. Reporters would be able to submit ICSRs by using
either an ICH-compatible electronic transmission system, or a Web-based
form similar to those used for commercial transactions, such as retail
purchases, on the Internet. (These options, as well as those for
submission of ICSR attachments in electronic form, are discussed in
more detail in section II.D.1 of this document.) For companies that
submit large numbers of ICSRs, use of the ICH-compatible system for
electronic transmission would be cost effective because the information
from the ICSRs will be transmitted directly from the company's database
to FDA without needing additional administrative support for manual
entry of the information. For companies that submit a small number of
ICSRs, use of the Web-based form may be more cost effective than using
the ICH-compatible system.
FDA has worked with industry on electronic submission of
postmarketing ICSRs since 1998. In 2001, FDA announced through public
docket number 92S-0251 that the agency would accept voluntary
electronic submissions of ICSRs for 15-day Alert and periodic safety
reports in lieu of a paper submission (see section II.A.2 of this
document). Currently, over 40 pharmaceutical companies are voluntarily
using electronic format to submit to FDA ICSRs for both 15-day Alert
and periodic reports for human drug and biologics, with more than
500,000 ICSRs submitted to date. This experience has shown that
electronic data submissions to the AERS database reduce the cost of
data entry and facilitate the review process. It currently costs FDA
approximately $35 to process a report submitted on paper. In
comparison, a report submitted in an electronic format costs
approximately $12 to process.
3. International Harmonization of Safety Reporting
In developing this proposal, FDA considered the international
standards developed by ICH for the submission of safety information.
The other ICH regions (the European Union (EU) and Japan) are also
implementing the standards recommended by ICH for the electronic
submission of safety reports. The procedures for the electronic
submission of postmarketing safety reports in this proposed rule would,
therefore, reduce costs to industry associated with maintaining
multiple electronic systems designed to meet the needs of different
regulatory authorities. The proposed electronic safety reporting
regulations would also encourage better communication between FDA and
the industry, as well as with other regulators, nationally and abroad,
while reducing the costs associated with reporting. Moreover, the
industry would be able to rely on one form of electronic reporting,
which would reduce the administrative costs of compliance.
a. Status of electronic submissions in the EU. The European
Commission drafted guidance on adverse event reporting, including
Volume 9 of ``The Rules Governing Medicinal Products in the European
Union'' (the EU rules), which contains a specific emphasis on
pharmacovigilance. The EU rules require the electronic submission of
adverse event reports (effective November 2005) and incorporate
international guidelines reached within the framework of the ICH. The
EU rules specify that the electronic transmission
[[Page 42189]]
and management of safety reports will be carried out according to the
guidelines and specifications contained in ICH guidance on safety
reporting and electronic standards.
b. Status of electronic submissions in Japan. On October 27, 2003,
the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare mandated that ICH
guidance E2BM\17\ compliant ICSRs be submitted in electronic format
either by the Internet or by physical media.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ ICH first issued guidance on ``E2B Data Elements for
Transmission of Individual Case Safety Reports'' in July 1997 (ICH
E2B). ICH E2B was revised in 2000 to include adjustments based on
successful pilot projects conducted in the three ICH regions (ICH
E2BM). ICH is currently revising its E2B guidance again to provide
additional information and clarification and has released ICH E2B(R)
in draft. The term ``ICH E2B guidance'' used in this document
includes all ICH guidance on the E2B topic of data elements for the
transmission of ICSRs. The guidances are available on the Internet
at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm under the ICH--Efficacy category or https://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm under the ICH guidance documents
category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Global impact of a standard electronic submission. FDA
collaborates with many international regulatory counterparts on drug
safety issues. Frequently, FDA sends to and receives from other
regulators paper copies of ICSRs for further clinical analysis of
specific drug safety issues. FDA envisions that regulatory partners
participating in ICH, and other regulators that choose to implement the
same standards, will be able to electronically exchange specific ICSRs
in real time as safety issues emerge. As a result, regulatory partners
would be assured that they are making regulatory decisions based on a
full complement of available information.
D. Electronic Format Submission Initiatives
1. Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports
a. Voluntary electronic submissions. In the Federal Register of
March 20, 1997 (62 FR 13430), FDA published a regulation on electronic
records and electronic signatures (21 CFR part 11). In August 2003, FDA
issued guidance for industry entitled ``Part 11, Electronic Records;
Electronic Signatures--Scope and Application,'' describing the agency's
thinking regarding part 11. Part 11 generally provides that in
instances where records are submitted to the agency, such records may
be submitted in electronic format instead of paper format, provided
that FDA has identified the submission in FDA's electronic submissions
public docket as the type of submission that FDA can accept in
electronic format. Postmarketing safety reports have been identified in
FDA's electronic submissions public docket as submissions that FDA may
accept in electronic format\18\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Docket No. FDA-1992-S-0039 (formerly Docket No. 1992S-0251)
can be accessed on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presently, FDA allows applicants, manufacturers, packers, and
distributors to submit postmarketing safety reports (both 15-day Alert
and periodic reports) in electronic format by sending the reports to
FDA either: (1) Through FDA's Electronic Submission Gateway (ESG) or
(2) on physical media, e.g., CD-ROM, digital tape, or floppy disk (sent
by mail).\19\ These electronic submissions may include ICSRs, any ICSR
attachments, and descriptive information. The data elements and
electronic transport formats that FDA can accept for electronic ICSRs
are described in technical specifications referenced in FDA guidance
documents.\20\ Currently, FDA can accept attachments to ICSRs and the
descriptive information of periodic reports in an electronic form as
portable document format (PDF) files, which may be sent through the
FDA's ESG or mailed to FDA on physical media.\21\ To send these reports
by FDA's ESG, a manufacturer/applicant must initially contact FDA's
AERS electronic submission coordinator\22\ to establish an ESG
connection with FDA's network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ FDA expects that, in the future, all electronic submissions
to the agency will be sent through the ESG and that use of physical
media for such submissions will, eventually, be phased-out.
\20\ FDA is currently accepting electronic submissions using
either the ICH E2B or ICH E2BM data elements; ICH E2B and ICH E2BM
are available on the Internet at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm under
the ICH--Efficacy category or https://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm
under the ICH guidance documents category.
\21\ See footnote number 19 in this document.
\22\ FDA's AERS electronic submission coordinator may be
contacted at aersesub@fda.hhs.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. ICH standards. FDA codes and analyzes electronic submissions of
safety information received via the ESG or on physical media based on
ICH standards.\23\ ICH has developed international standards for the
electronic submission of safety information that include: (1)
Standardized common data elements for transmission of ICSRs (ICH E2B
guidance), and (2) electronic standard transmission procedures (ICH
M2\24\ ). ICH E2B guidance provides standardized common data elements
for the transmission of ICSRs by identifying and defining the data
elements for the transmission of all types of ICSRs, regardless of
source and destination. The ICH format for ICSRs includes provisions
for transmitting all the relevant data elements useful to assess an
individual adverse drug reaction or adverse event report. The common
data elements are sufficiently comprehensive to cover complex reports
from most sources, different data sets, and different transmission
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See www.ich.org/cache/compo/276-254-1.html.
\24\ ICH M2 provides electronic standards for the transfer of
regulatory information (ESTRI). The M2 ESTRI recommendations
facilitate international electronic communication in the three ICH
regions. The ICH M2 working group developed a specification for the
implementation of E2B data elements that allows for the transmission
of all types of ICSRs, regardless of source and destination. ICH M2
recommendations are revised periodically to reflect the evolving
nature of the technology. More information on M2 ESTRI is available
on the Internet at https://estri.ich.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. FDA Web-based submission portal. In addition to submission of
ICSRs through the ESG, FDA is developing a Web-based electronic
submission portal to collect and process safety information for all
FDA-regulated products that will be consistent with ICH standards and
may be used as another method for reporting adverse drug experiences to
the agency.\25\ FDA's Web-based portal will allow for the secure
electronic submission of postmarketing ICSRs directly into FDA's AERS
database once information is typed into a Web-based electronic form.
Users will receive electronic confirmation that their submissions have
been received by FDA. Any person who is subject to FDA's postmarketing
safety reporting requirements and has Internet access will be able to
use the Web-based form to submit ICSRs to the agency. The Web-based
submission function will assist entities that submit a small number of
safety reports by creating a simpler and more efficient mechanism for
reporting that does not require them to have an internal database that
is compatible with the ICH-based system. However, because some
administrative support would be needed to manually enter the
information for the ICSRs onto a form on the Web, this Web-based
electronic reporting format will be less cost effective than direct
submission through the ESG (or submitting the information on physical
media) for companies with large numbers of safety reports. As soon as
FDA can accept submissions using this Web-based form, information in
docket 92S-0251, and the guidance documents described in this section
will be updated to reflect this option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ The Web-based reporting portal is based on the HL7
Individual Case Safety Report standard accredited by ANSI. This
standard is for the exchange of adverse event information between
computer systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42190]]
2. Comments on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) for
Mandatory Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports to FDA
In the Federal Register of November 5, 1998 (63 FR 59746), FDA
issued an ANPRM describing the agency's plans to require electronic
submission of all postmarketing expedited and periodic ICSRs. In the
ANPRM, the agency indicated that it would propose that international
standards be used for electronic safety reporting (i.e., precoding of
ICSRs using the ICH M1 international medical terminology, ICH E2B
format, and ICH M2 transmission specifications).\26\ FDA also indicated
that it was considering requiring that the textual (descriptive)
information contained in a postmarketing periodic safety report be
submitted to the agency in an electronic format. FDA received comments
on the ANPRM from 11 representatives of pharmaceutical companies and
associations and one individual. The agency considered these comments
in developing this proposed rule on electronic submission of
postmarketing safety reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The proposal to require coding of ICSRs using MedDRA (ICH
M1) is included in a separate rulemaking, the Safety Reporting
Proposed Rule, described in section II.B of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. General. In general, the comments supported FDA's plans to
require electronic submission of postmarketing safety reports, while a
few comments said that electronic submissions to the agency should
remain voluntary. One comment said that FDA's goal of having all safety
reports submitted in an electronic format would be realized without
being mandated as electronic record collection, retrieval, and
reporting becomes the generally-recognized norm throughout the
pharmaceutical and biologics industry.
FDA believes that the electronic submission of postmarketing safety
reports should be required and not voluntary because, although we have
accepted the voluntary submission of postmarketing safety reports in
electronic format since 2001, we are only receiving approximately 40
percent of ICSRs in electronic format. To expedite the identification
of emerging safety problems and to realize cost savings for industry
and the agency, we will need to receive close to 100 percent of ICSRs
in electronic format.
b. Waivers. Several comments provided suggestions for waivers
(exemptions) from the requirement to submit postmarketing safety
reports electronically to FDA. The comments described two types of
waivers: (1) Temporary hardship waivers and (2) indefinite waivers.
Two comments requested that FDA grant a temporary hardship waiver
for companies that experience unanticipated technical difficulties
after implementation of the regulation. In this case, the company would
be permitted to submit safety reports in a paper format. One comment
said that such temporary waivers must be automatic so that regulatory
requirements for timely reporting are fulfilled. The comments said that
temporary waivers should be evaluated on an individual basis, taking
into account factors such as company size, volume of reports, potential
issues with international affiliates, and scope of required technical
activities. One comment requested that the waiver be renewable for a 6-
month period as long as the company can demonstrate progress towards
the ability to submit reports electronically.
With regard to indefinite waivers, four comments said that small
businesses should be exempt from the requirement to submit
postmarketing safety reports in electronic format. The comments said
that a waiver should be based on the number of safety reports that a
company submits to FDA. They noted that the number of safety reports
can vary significantly among manufacturers based on such attributes as
company size and product line. One comment said that generic, or other,
drug companies that receive few adverse event reports (e.g., 0-5
adverse drug reactions (ADRs) per week) should be exempt from the
requirement. The comment stated that compliance with the requirement
would place an undue burden on these drug companies because of the
associated costs for human resources, equipment, software requirements,
and other costs. The comment further stated that if the agency does not
create a waiver for drug companies that have few ADRs per week (e.g.,
less than 5), then a longer transition period should be permitted,
during which the agency would accept either paper or electronic ADRs.
The transition period would allow sufficient time for drug companies
that currently do not have the appropriate resources to establish
electronic safety reporting systems. Another comment said that the
criterion for an automatic waiver could be limited to NDAs for products
with orphan-designated indications, because of the small number of ADRs
submitted for these products. The comment also suggested that drug
product sponsors who make less than a particular monetary amount for
drug product sales per year (e.g., $100 million) should be exempt from
the rule.
Since these comments on the ANPRM were submitted in 1998, Internet
access has become commonplace, reducing or eliminating implementation
concerns for smaller firms or firms with very few reports. These firms
will be able to use the Web-based form. Accordingly, we are not
proposing indefinite waivers from implementation of electronic format
submission of safety reports.
With regard to temporary waivers, we believe they should only be
necessary in rare cases. Larger companies using the ESG could use
submission on physical media (i.e., CD-ROM) or the Web-based system as
a back-up if they experience temporary technological problems with
their ESG submission system. Similarly, smaller firms regularly
reporting on the Web-based system could easily find alternative
Internet access in the event of a temporary Internet outage at the
firm. Given that it is not possible to anticipate all the various
situations that might require a waiver, we are proposing in this rule
to provide for a temporary waiver of the electronic format submission
requirement for good cause shown (see section III.C of this document).
As discussed more below, we are specifically requesting comments in
this rule on what would constitute ``good cause'' for a temporary
waiver of the electronic format submission requirements.
c. Textual materials. ICSRs are often accompanied by textual
materials (ISCR attachments), such as hospital discharge summaries or
other medical records, published studies, or autopsy reports. Two
comments supported the possibility of submitting textual materials
electronically in addition to ICSRs. One of the comments recommended
that the electronic transmission of textual materials be accepted using
ICH standards so that consistency could be enhanced worldwide.
As recommended in the technical specifications referenced in
guidances on submitting postmarketing safety reports in electronic
format, textual materials can currently be submitted in a paper format
or in an electronic format as a PDF file consistent with ICH
guidelines.\27\ When finalized, this rule would require submission of
these textual materials in an electronic format we can process, review,
and archive. Future changes to technical specifications for such
submissions, such as transmission standards and file formats, would be
announced in the technical specifications referenced in FDA guidance
documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See footnote number 3 of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 42191]]
d. Security issues. Several comments discussed security issues
related to the confidentiality of data when safety reports are
submitted electronically. Some comments stated that industry and the
agency must be prepared to respond promptly to changing technology to
ensure secure transmission of data. Another comment requested that the
tools used for this purpose be commercially available at a reasonable
cost.
The agency requires the secure transmission of all electronic
submissions. We currently have certificate authority with standard
encryption and will continue to use this security method in the
agency's ESG for the electronic submission of postmarketing safety
reports. The ESG meets National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST)-800\28\ series security certification standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ NIST, a nonregulatory Federal agency in the U.S. Commerce
Department's Technology Administration, promotes U.S. innovation and
industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science,
standards, and technology, including researching and developing test
methods and standards for emerging and rapidly changing information
technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
As noted previously, the changes proposed in this rule would,
largely, affect the form in which postmarketing safety reports must be
submitted to FDA (i.e., in electronic format instead of a paper format)
and, in addition, make minor conforming changes to the regulations.
A. Electronic Submission of Postmarketing Safety Reports
The proposal would revise Sec. Sec. 310.305, 314.80, 314.98, and
600.80 to require that manufacturers, packers, and distributors, and
applicants with approved NDAs, ANDAs, and BLAs and those that market
prescription drugs for human use without an approved application submit
postmarketing safety reports to the agency in an electronic format that
FDA can process, review, and archive. We are proposing to delete the
specific references to paper reporting forms in Sec. Sec. 310.305,
314.80, and 600.80. We also propose to add language to these sections
which states that FDA will periodically issue guidance on how to
provide the electronic submissions (e.g., method of transmission,
media, file formats, preparation and organization of files).
Postmarketing 15-day Alert and periodic reports, including the
ICSRs, any ICSR attachments and the descriptive information portion of
postmarketing periodic safety reports, would be submitted to FDA in an
electronic format. Information on the agency's ability to process,
review, and archive these reports is described in the technical
specifications referenced in FDA guidance documents (see section I of
this document). The reports would be submitted to FDA in an electronic
format only; paper copies would not be accepted unless the agency
granted a temporary waiver (see section III.C of this document).
Under the proposed rule, for marketed products with an approved
application, manufacturers, packers, or distributors that do not hold
the application would continue to have the option of submitting 15-day
Alert reports directly to FDA or to the application holder under
Sec. Sec. 314.80(c)(1)(iii) and 600.80(c)(1)(iii). If they opt to
submit directly to FDA, they would be required to do so in electronic
format. If they choose to report to the applicant, they could submit
the report in any acceptable format. The applicant, however, would be
required to use electronic reporting when it subsequently reports the
information to FDA. Similarly, for marketed drug products without an
approved application, initial safety reports made to the manufacturer
by packers and distributors under current Sec. 310.305(c)(3) could be
made in any form agreeable to the reporter and the manufacturer, but
this proposal would require all safety reports made to FDA to be made
in electronic format.
This proposal applies to all postmarketing safety reports currently
required to be submitted to FDA under Sec. Sec. 310.305, 314.80,
314.98, and 600.80 (including vaccines) and would apply to any new
postmarketing safety reports for drug or biological products that are
implemented in the future (e.g., new postmarketing safety reports
proposed in the Safety Reporting Proposed Rule described in section
II.B of this document). The proposal would also revise Sec. 600.81 by
requiring the electronic submission of biological lot distribution
reports. As previously described for postmarketing safety reports, FDA
will also periodically issue guidance on how to provide the electronic
submissions for these reports (e.g., method of transmission, media,
file formats, preparation and organization of files).
B. Safety Reports Not Covered by the Proposed Rule
Postmarketing safety reports for drugs, including vaccines,
constitute the largest volume of paper safety reports received by the
agency and, consequently, require the most resources to input
electronically. This proposed rule would permit more efficient
management of these postmarketing safety reports by FDA. This proposed
rule would not apply to submission of the following safety reports:
Investigational new drug application (IND) safety reports
(Sec. 312.32);
Safety update reports for drugs (Sec.
314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b));
Approved NDA and BLA annual reports (Sec. Sec.
314.81(b)(2) and 601.28 (21 CFR 601.28));
Biological product deviation reports (BPDRs) (Sec. Sec.
600.14 and 606.171 (21 CFR 606.171));
Reports of complications of blood transfusion and
collection confirmed to be fatal (21 CFR 606.170(b) and 640.73);
Adverse reaction reports for human cells, tissues and
cellular and tissue-based products (HCT/Ps) regulated solely under
section 361 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 264) (21 CFR
1271.350(a)); and
NDA-field alert reports (Sec. 314.81(b)(1)).
We have not proposed to require that premarketing safety reports be
submitted electronically because IND safety reports are submitted
directly to the review division with responsibility for the IND, and
are not uploaded into the AERS database. Blood transfusion and
collection fatality reports are submitted to the agency in lower
numbers than the postmarketing safety reports addressed in this rule;
therefore, we have not proposed that these reports be subject to the
mandatory electronic format requirements proposed in this rule. The
agency has not yet received blood transfusion and collection fatality
reports as electronic submissions, but does receive BPDRs through a
voluntary electronic submission process. We are considering a mandatory
electronic submission requirement for BPDRs, and blood transfusion and
collection fatality reports in the near future and would like to
receive industry comment on this possibility.
C. Waivers
Although this proposed rule would require that all postmarketing
safety reports be submitted to FDA in electronic format, we are
proposing in Sec. Sec. 310.305(e)(2), 314.80(g)(2), and 600.80(g)(2)
to grant a temporary waiver from the electronic format requirement for
``good cause'' shown. Procedural details for submitting waiver
requests, such as where to send the request and any supporting
documentation, would be announced in guidance. When a temporary waiver
has been granted, a
[[Page 42192]]
paper copy of the safety reports would be required to be submitted in a
form that FDA can process, review, and archive.\29\ FDA anticipates
that temporary waivers of the requirement to submit postmarketing
safety reports to the agency in electronic format will only be needed
in rare circumstances. Companies experiencing technical difficulties
with their ESG interface could, as a backup, submit reports on physical
media or using the Web-based form during short-term, temporary outage.
Moreover, for companies that rely on the Web-based form, submissions
cou