Approval Pathway for Biosimilar and Interchangeable Biological Products; Public Hearing; Request for Comments, 61497-61501 [2010-24853]
Download as PDF
61497
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
TABLE 1—TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN1—Continued
No. of
Respondents
FDA Center
Annual Frequency
per Response
Total Annual
Responses
Hours per
Response
Total Hours
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (Three different product categories)
386
47
11,609
2
23,218
1
337
0.5
169
27,401
50,942
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2010–N–0477]
Approval Pathway for Biosimilar and
Interchangeable Biological Products;
Public Hearing; Request for Comments
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notice of public hearing; request
for comments.
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing a
2-day public hearing to obtain input on
specific issues and challenges
associated with the implementation of
the Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act). The
BPCI Act establishes an abbreviated
approval pathway for biological
products that are demonstrated to be
‘‘highly similar’’ (biosimilar) to, or
‘‘interchangeable’’ with, an FDAlicensed biological product. The
purpose of this public hearing is to
create a forum for interested
stakeholders to provide input regarding
the agency’s implementation of the
statute. FDA will take the information it
obtains from the public hearing into
account in its implementation of the
BPCI Act.
DATES: The public hearing will be held
November 2 and 3, 2010, from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. Individuals who wish to
present at the public hearing must
register on or before October 11, 2010.
Section III of this document provides
attendance and registration information.
Electronic or written comments will be
accepted after the public hearing until
December 31, 2010.
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
The public hearing will be
held at FDA’s White Oak Campus,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building
31, Rm. 1503, Silver Spring, MD 20993.
Submit electronic comments to
https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food
and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Identify comments with the
corresponding docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this
document.
Transcripts of the public hearing will
be available for review at the Division
of Dockets Management and on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov
approximately 30 days after the public
hearing (see Section VI of this
document).
A live webcast of this public hearing
will be viewable at the following Web
addresses on the days of the public
hearing: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/
NewsEvents/ucm221688.htm. A video
record of the public hearing will be
available at the same Web addresses for
1 year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandra J. Benton, Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6340,
Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301–796–
1042, FAX: 301–847–3529, E-mail:
biosimilarspublicmtg@fda.hhs.gov.
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2010–25009 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
1,158
15,653
Dated: September 30, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
AGENCY:
1.5
337
1 There
772
247
Total
2
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On March 23, 2010, President Obama
signed into law the Patient Protection
and Affordable Care Act (Affordable
Care Act) (Pub. L. 111–148). The
Affordable Care Act contains a subtitle
called the Biologics Price Competition
and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act)
that amends the Public Health Service
Act (PHS Act) and other statutes to
create an abbreviated approval pathway
for biological products shown to be
biosimilar to, or interchangeable with,
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
an FDA-licensed reference biological
product (see sections 7001 through 7003
of the BPCI Act).
The objectives of the BPCI Act are
conceptually similar to those of the
Drug Price Competition and Patent
Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L.
98–417) (commonly referred to as the
‘‘Hatch-Waxman Act’’), which
established abbreviated pathways for
the approval of drug products under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act). The BPCI Act aligns with
FDA’s longstanding policy of permitting
appropriate reliance on what is already
known about a drug, thereby saving
time and resources and avoiding
unnecessary duplication of human or
animal testing. The implementation of
an abbreviated approval pathway for
biological products can present
challenges given the scientific and
technical complexities that may be
associated with the larger and often
more complex structure of biological
products, as well as the processes by
which such products are manufactured.
Most biological products are produced
in a living system such as a
microorganism, or plant or animal cells,
whereas small molecule drugs are
typically manufactured through
chemical synthesis.
Section 351(k) of the PHS Act (42
U.S.C. 262(k)), added by the BPCI Act,
describes the general requirements for
an application for a proposed biosimilar
biological product and an application or
a supplement for a proposed
interchangeable biological product.
A biological product may be
demonstrated to be ‘‘biosimilar’’ to a
biological reference product based upon
data derived from analytical studies,
animal studies, and a clinical study or
studies if the product is shown to be
highly similar to the reference product,
notwithstanding minor differences in
clinically inactive components, and if
there are no clinically meaningful
differences between the biological
product and the reference product in
terms of safety, purity and potency.
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
61498
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
To meet the higher standard of
‘‘interchangeability,’’ a product must
demonstrate that it can be expected to
produce the same clinical result as the
reference product in any given patient
and, if the biological product is
administered more than once to an
individual, the risk in terms of safety or
diminished efficacy of alternating or
switching between the use of the
biological product and the reference
product is not greater than the risk of
using the reference product without
such alternation or switch.
Interchangeable products may be
substituted for the reference product by
a pharmacist without the intervention of
the prescribing health care provider.
The BPCI Act also includes, among
other provisions: A 12-year period of
marketing exclusivity from the date of
first licensure of the reference product,
during which approval of a 351(k)
application referencing that product
cannot be made effective; an exclusivity
period for the first biological product
submitted in a 351(k) application that
has been determined to be
interchangeable with the reference
product for any condition of use, during
which a second or subsequent biological
product may not be determined
interchangeable to that reference
product; and a transition provision for
protein products that have been or will
be approved under section 505 of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355) prior to March
23, 2020.
The BPCI Act also requires that FDA
develop recommendations to present to
Congress with respect to a user fee
program for biosimilar and
interchangeable biological products.
Such recommendations must address
the goals for the process of reviewing
351(k) applications, and plans for
meeting those goals, for fiscal years (FY)
2013 to 2017. In developing such
recommendations, FDA is required to
consult with the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions of the
Senate; the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of
Representatives; scientific and academic
experts; healthcare professionals;
representatives of patient and consumer
advocacy groups; and regulated
industry.
The BPCI Act also establishes
procedures for identifying and resolving
patent disputes involving applications
submitted under section 351(k) of the
PHS Act; these procedures do not
involve FDA and are not within the
scope of this public hearing.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
II. Purpose and Scope of the Public
Hearing
The purpose of this part 15 hearing is
to receive information and comments
from a broad group of stakeholders,
such as healthcare professionals,
healthcare institutions, manufacturers of
biomedical products, interested
industry and professional associations,
patients and patient associations, third
party payers, current and prospective
biological license application (BLA) and
new drug application (NDA) holders,
and the public, regarding
implementation of the BPCI Act.
To prepare to begin negotiations with
regulated industry regarding a user fee
program, FDA must identify which
companies and trade associations would
be affected by a user fee program for
biosimilar and interchangeable
biological products (i.e., a company
likely to submit an application for
approval of a biosimilar or
interchangeable biological product).
The purpose of this public hearing is
to create a forum for interested
stakeholders to provide input regarding
the agency’s implementation of the
statute concerning the following issues,
among others: Scientific and technical
factors related to a determination of
biosimilarity or interchangeability; the
type of information that may be used to
support a determination of biosimilarity
or interchangeability; development of a
framework for optimal
pharmacovigilance for biosimilar and
interchangeable biological products;
scope of the revised definition of a
‘‘biological product’’; priorities for
guidance development; scientific and
technical factors related to reference
product exclusivity; scientific and
technical factors that may inform the
agency’s interpretation of ‘‘product
class’’ as it relates to available regulatory
pathways for certain protein products
during the 10-year transition period
following enactment of the BPCI Act;
and the establishment of a user fee
program for biosimilar and
interchangeable biological products.
FDA is particularly interested in
obtaining information and public
comment on the following issues,
although any comments on any issues
related to biosimilar or interchangeable
biological products are welcome.
A. Biosimilarity
Section 351(k) of the PHS Act as set
forth in the BPCI Act requires, among
other things, that an application for a
proposed biosimilar product include
information demonstrating that the
proposed product is biosimilar to a
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
reference product based upon data
derived from:
• Analytical studies that demonstrate
that the biological product is highly
similar to the reference product
notwithstanding minor differences in
clinically inactive components;
• Animal studies (including the
assessment of toxicity); and
• A clinical study or studies
(including the assessment of
immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics
or pharmacodynamics) that are
sufficient to demonstrate safety, purity,
and potency in one or more appropriate
conditions of use for which the
reference product is licensed.
The BPCI Act provides that FDA may
determine, at its discretion, that an
element described previously is
unnecessary in a 351(k) application.
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. What scientific and technical
factors should the agency consider in
determining whether the biological
product is highly similar to the
reference product notwithstanding
minor differences in clinically inactive
components?
2. What scientific and technical
factors should the agency consider in
determining the appropriate analytical,
animal, and clinical study or studies to
assess the nature and impact of actual
or potential structural differences
between the proposed biosimilar
product and the reference product?
3. What range of structural differences
between a proposed biosimilar product
and the reference product is consistent
with the standard ‘‘highly similar’’ and
may be acceptable in a 351(k)
application if the applicant can
demonstrate the absence of any
clinically meaningful differences
between the proposed biosimilar
product and the reference product?
4. Under what circumstances should
the agency consider finding that animal
studies or a clinical study or studies are
‘‘unnecessary’’ for submission of a 351(k)
application?
B. Interchangeability
Section 351(k)(4) of the PHS Act
requires that an application for a
proposed interchangeable product
contain information sufficient to
demonstrate:
• The biological product is biosimilar
to the reference product; and
• The biological product can be
expected to produce the same clinical
result as the reference product in any
given patient; and
• For a biological product that is
administered more than once to an
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
individual, the risk in terms of safety or
diminished efficacy of alternating or
switching between use of the biological
product and the reference product is not
greater than the risk of using the
reference product without such
alternation or switch.
FDA seeks input on the following
issues related to interchangeability:
1. What factors should the agency
consider in determining whether a
proposed interchangeable biological
product can be ‘‘expected to produce the
same clinical result as the reference
product in any given patient?’’
2. What factors should the agency
consider in evaluating the potential risk
related to alternating or switching
between use of the proposed
interchangeable biological product and
the reference product or among
interchangeable biological products?
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
C. Patient Safety and
Pharmacovigilance
The agency considers the safety of
patients who are taking any medical
products to be of paramount
importance. To that end and to protect
each individual patient, the agency is
developing a framework for optimal
pharmacovigilance for biosimilar and
interchangeable products that is
informed by our current experience and
industry best practices. In the interest of
patient safety and for the purpose of
pharmacovigilance, the agency must be
able to distinguish between a reference
product, a related biological product
that has not been demonstrated to be
biosimilar, a biosimilar product, and an
interchangeable product.
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. What factors unique to proposed
biosimilar or interchangeable biological
products and their use should the
agency consider in developing its
pharmacovigilance program for such
products?
2. What approaches can be
undertaken by the agency, industry, or
health care community to ensure
appropriate pharmacovigilance for
biosimilar and interchangeable
products?
3. If each product were given a unique
nonproprietary name, should a
distinguishing prefix or suffix be added
to the nonproprietary name for a related
biological product that has not been
demonstrated to be biosimilar, a
biosimilar product, or an
interchangeable product to facilitate
pharmacovigilance? What factors should
be considered to reduce any negative
impact on the healthcare delivery
system related to unique nonproprietary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
names for highly similar biological
products?
4. What safeguards should the agency
consider to assist the healthcare
community when prescribing,
administering, and dispensing
biological products to prevent unsafe
substitution of biological products?
5. What are some mechanisms that
FDA may consider to communicate
findings that a particular product is or
is not biosimilar to or interchangeable
with a given reference product?
D. The Use of Supportive Data and
Information
The BPCI Act provides that an
application for the licensure of a
biosimilar or interchangeable product:
Shall include publicly available
information regarding the Secretary’s
(Department of Health and Human
Services) previous determination that
the reference product is safe, pure, and
potent; and may include any additional
information in support of the
application, including publicly
available information with respect to the
reference product or another biological
product (section 351(k)(2)(A)(iii) of the
PHS Act).
The BPCI Act defines the term
‘‘reference product’’ to mean ‘‘the single
biological product licensed under
[section 351(a)] against which a
biological product is evaluated in an
application submitted under [section
351(k)].’’ Accordingly, section 351(k)
requires that an applicant demonstrate
biosimilarity to and or
interchangeability with a reference
product licensed by FDA (as
distinguished from a biological product
licensed by a foreign regulatory
authority).
The agency is aware that some
prospective biosimilar sponsors have
conducted animal and/or clinical
studies to support regulatory approval
in another jurisdiction using a non-U.S.licensed biological product as a
comparator. To avoid duplicative
animal and human testing, sponsors
may wish, to the extent permissible, to
rely on these studies to support a 351(k)
application.
FDA seeks comments on the following
issue: From a scientific perspective, to
what extent, if any, should animal or
clinical data comparing a proposed
biosimilar product with a non-U.S.licensed comparator product be used to
support a demonstration of biosimilarity
to a U.S.-licensed reference product?
What type of bridging data or
information would be needed to
scientifically justify the relevance of the
comparative data?
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61499
E. Definition of a Biological Product
The BPCI Act changes the statutory
authority under which certain protein
products will be regulated by amending
the definition of ‘‘biological product’’ in
section 351(i) of the PHS Act to include
a protein (except any chemically
synthesized polypeptide) before the
phrase ‘‘or analogous product.’’ In light
of the absence of scientific consensus on
the distinction between the categories of
‘‘protein’’ and ‘‘polypeptide’’ or
‘‘peptide,’’ FDA may establish a
regulatory definition of ‘‘protein’’ and
‘‘any chemically synthesized
polypeptide’’ to clarify the authority
under which such products will be
licensed and regulated and, to the extent
possible, avoid the conflicting
regulation of certain products (i.e., those
that are manufactured through either
synthetic and recombinant technology)
under different authorities.
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. What scientific and technical
factors should FDA consider if it
develops a regulatory definition for the
category of ‘‘protein’’ (as distinguished
from peptide or polypeptide)?
2. What scientific and technical
factors should FDA consider if it
develops a regulatory definition for the
category of ‘‘any chemically synthesized
polypeptide’’?
F. Guidances
Although the issuance or nonissuance
of guidance does not preclude
submission or agency review of, or
action on, a 351(k) application, we are
interested in obtaining public input
regarding priorities for issuing guidance
documents for industry (see section
351(k)(8) of the PHS Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. What types of guidance documents
for industry should be a priority for the
agency during the early period of
implementation?
2. Section 351(k)(8)(E) of the PHS Act
permits the agency to indicate in a
guidance document that the science and
experience, as of the date of the
guidance document, with respect to a
product or product class (not including
any recombinant protein) does not allow
approval of a 351(k) application for such
a product or product class. What
scientific and technical factors should
the agency consider in determining if
the existing science and experience are
sufficient to allow approval for a
product or product class under section
351(k) of the PHS Act?
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
61500
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
G. Exclusivity
The BPCI Act provides for a 12-year
period of marketing exclusivity from the
date of first licensure of the reference
biological product, during which
approval of a 351(k) application cannot
be made effective (see section 351(k)(7)
of the PHS Act). The date of first
licensure does not apply to a license for
or approval of:
• A supplement for the biological
product that is the reference product; or
• A subsequent application filed by
the same sponsor or manufacturer of the
biological product that is the reference
product (or a related entity) for a change
(not including a modification to the
structure of the biological product) that
results in a new indication, route of
administration, dosing schedule, dosage
form, delivery system, delivery device,
or strength; or
• A subsequent application filed by
the same sponsor or manufacturer of the
biological product that is the reference
product (or a related entity) for a
modification to the structure of the
biological product that does not result
in a change in safety, purity, or potency
(see section 351(k)(7)(C) of the PHS
Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. In light of the potential transfer of
BLAs from one corporate entity to
another and the complexities of
corporate and business relationships,
what factors should the agency consider
in determining the types of related
entities that may be ineligible for a
period of 12-year exclusivity for a
subsequent BLA?
2. What factors should the agency
consider in determining whether a
modification to the structure of the
licensed reference biological product
results in a change in safety, purity, or
potency, such that a subsequent BLA
may be eligible for a second 12-year
period of marketing exclusivity?
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
H. Transition Provisions
The BPCI Act requires that an
application for a biological product,
which now includes the category of
‘‘protein (except any chemically
synthesized polypeptide),’’ must be
submitted under section 351 of the PHS
Act, rather than under section 505 of the
FD&C Act. However, the BPCI Act
provides an exception for certain
biological products that are in a
‘‘product class’’ for which an application
has been approved under section 505 of
the FD&C Act prior to March 23, 2010.
An application for a biological product
in these product classes may be
submitted under section 505 of the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
FD&C Act until March 23, 2020, unless
there is another biological product
licensed under section 351(a) of the PHS
Act that could serve as the reference
product for the application, if the
application were submitted under
section 351(k) of the PHS Act (see
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. What scientific factors should FDA
consider in defining and applying
‘‘product class’’ for purposes of
determining which applications for
biological products may be submitted
under the FD&C Act during the 10-year
transition period?
2. What scientific factors should FDA
consider in determining whether
another biological product approved
under section 351(a) of the PHS Act
could serve as the reference product for
an application submitted under section
351(k) of the PHS Act?
I. User Fees
The BPCI Act amends section 735 of
the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379g) to
include 351(k) applications in the
definition of a ‘‘human drug
application’’ for the purposes of the
prescription drug user fee provisions
(see section 7002(f)(3) of the BPCI Act).
The BPCI Act requires FDA to develop
recommendations to present to Congress
by January 15, 2012, for goals for the
process of reviewing 351(k)
applications, and plans for meeting
those goals, for the first five fiscal years
after FY 2012 (see section 7002(f)(3) of
the BPCI Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following
issues:
1. If the existing fee structure under
the Prescription Drug User Fee Act
(PDUFA) were to be considered as a
model in establishing a user fee
structure for applications and
supplements for proposed biosimilar
and interchangeable biological products,
what factors and changes should FDA
take into consideration, and why?
2. What factors should FDA take into
account when considering whether to
recommend that user fees for biosimilar
and interchangeable biological products
should also be used to monitor safety
after approval?
In addition, FDA seeks to identify
potential participants in any
negotiations of user fee programs for
biosimilar and interchangeable
biological products, specifically
companies that would be affected by
such a user fee program and industry
associations representing such
companies. FDA requests that
commenters identify these potential
participants by sending to Biosimilars
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
UserFeeProgram@fda.hhs.gov the
following information regarding any
company that may be subject to a user
fee program for biosimilar and
interchangeable biological products, or
any industry association representing
such companies: The name of the entity;
contact person; e-mail address; and a
phone number.
III. Attendance and Registration
The FDA Conference Center at the
White Oak location is a Federal facility
with security procedures and limited
seating. Attendance is free and will be
on a first-come, first-served basis.
Individuals who wish to present at the
public hearing must register by sending
an e-mail to biosimilarspublicmtg@fda.
hhs.gov on or before October 11, 2010,
and provide complete contact
information, including name, title,
affiliation, address, e-mail, and phone
number. Those without e-mail access
may register by contacting Sandra
Benton (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT). FDA has included questions
for comment in section II of this
document. You should identify the
section and the number of each question
you wish to address in your
presentation, so that FDA can consider
that in organizing the presentations.
Individuals and organizations with
common interests should consolidate or
coordinate their presentations and
request time for a joint presentation.
FDA will do its best to accommodate
requests to speak and will determine the
amount of time allotted for each oral
presentation, and the approximate time
that each oral presentation is scheduled
to begin. FDA will notify registered
presenters of their scheduled times, and
make available an agenda at https://
www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/
ucm221688.htm approximately 2 weeks
prior to the public hearing. Once FDA
notifies registered presenters of their
scheduled times, presenters should
submit to FDA an electronic copy of
their presentation to biosimilarspublic
mtg@fda.hhs.gov on or before October
27, 2010.
If you need special accommodations
because of disability, please contact
Sandra Benton, (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7 days
before the meeting.
A live Webcast of this public hearing
will be viewable at the following Web
addresses on the days of the public
hearing: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/
NewsEvents/ucm221688.htm. A video
record of the public hearing will be
available at the same Web addresses for
one year.
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 5, 2010 / Notices
IV. Notice of Hearing Under 21 CFR
Part 15
The Commissioner of Food and Drugs
is announcing that the public hearing
will be held in accordance with part 15
(21 CFR part 15). The hearing will be
conducted by a presiding officer, who
will be accompanied by FDA senior
management from the Office of the
Commissioner and the Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research.
Under § 15.30(f), the hearing is
informal and the rules of evidence do
not apply. No participant may interrupt
the presentation of another participant.
Only the presiding officer and panel
members may question any person
during or at the conclusion of each
presentation. Public hearings under part
15 are subject to FDA’s policy and
procedures for electronic media
coverage of FDA’s public administrative
proceedings (part 10, subpart C (21 CFR
part 10, subpart C)). Under § 10.205,
representatives of the electronic media
may be permitted, subject to certain
limitations, to videotape, film, or
otherwise record FDA’s public
administrative proceedings, including
presentations by participants. The
hearing will be transcribed as stipulated
in § 15.30(b) (see section VI of this
document). To the extent that the
conditions for the hearing, as described
in this notice, conflict with any
provisions set out in part 15, this notice
acts as a waiver of those provisions as
specified in § 15.30(h).
V. Request for Comments
Regardless of attendance at the public
hearing, interested persons may submit
either electronic or written comments to
the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of
mailed comments. Identify comments
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.
Programs, Food and Drug
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Room 6–30, Rockville, MD 20857.
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010–24853 Filed 10–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2010–N–0496]
Cooperative Agreement To Support
Capacity Building Activities Through
the World Health Organization Global
Foodborne Infections Network
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is announcing its
intention to accept and consider a single
source application to award a
cooperative agreement to the World
Health Organization (WHO) Advisory
Group on Integrated Surveillance of
Antimicrobial Resistance (AGISAR) and
in support of the WHO Global
Foodborne Infections Network (GFN)
and to provide guidance to the WHO on
a framework for the development of an
international network to promote and
enhance collaboration on harmonization
and data sharing among countries with
Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
surveillance programs.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION AND
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS CONTACT:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Transcripts of the public hearing will
be available for review at the Division
of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES)
and on the Internet at https://www.
regulations.gov approximately 30 days
after the public hearing. A transcript
will also be made available in either
hard copy or on CD–ROM, upon
submission of a Freedom of Information
request. Written requests are to be sent
to Division of Freedom of Information
(HFI–35), Office of Management
18:36 Oct 04, 2010
Jkt 223001
Notice.
SUMMARY:
VI. Transcripts
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
PO 00000
Program Contact: Patrick McDermott,
Division of Animal and Food
Microbiology, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, 7519 Standish Pl.,
Mod II, rm. 1505, Rockville, MD
20855, 301–210–4213, FAX: 301–
210–4685, email:
Patrick.McDermott@fda.hhs.gov.
Management Contact: Katherine C.
Bond, Office of International
Programs, Office of the
Commissioner, FDA, White Oak
Bldg. 32, rm. 3300, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Silver Spring, MD
20993, 301–796–8318, FAX: 301–
595–5058, email:
Katherine.Bond@fda.hhs.gov.
Grants Contact: Kimberly Pendleton,
Division of Acquisition and Grants,
FDA, 5630 Fishers Lane (HFA–500),
rm. 2104, Rockville, MD 20857,
301–827–9363, FAX: 301–827–
7101, email:
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61501
kimberly.pendleton@fda.hhs.gov.
For more information on this funding
opportunity announcement (FOA) and
to obtain detailed requirements, please
contact Kimberly Pendleton.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Funding Opportunity Description
[RFA–FD–10–006]
[Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Number(s): 93.103 https://
www.cfda.gov]
A. Background
The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) is announcing its intention to
accept and consider a single source
application for a cooperative agreement
to the WHO GFN. This project
represents a collaborative agreement
between the WHO and FDA aimed at
capacity building in laboratory based
surveillance of foodborne pathogens and
disease in developing regions to support
AGISAR and GFN to enable FDA to
realize its goal of developing an
international database for human and
animal isolates of foodborne pathogens
and their susceptibility profiles.
B. Research Objectives
• Support WHO capacity building
activities with member countries for
AMR monitoring (development of AMR
training modules for GFN training
courses, and hosting of visiting scientist
from developing countries).
• Develop harmonized schemes for
monitoring antimicrobial resistance in
zoonotic and enteric bacteria to include
appropriate sampling.
• Promote information sharing on
AMR (development of a global AMR
databank).
• Provide expert advice to WHO, and
promote WHO and FDA collaborative
work to advise WHO Member States on
containment of AMR with a particular
focus to Human Critically Important
Antimicrobials. AGISAR should be the
core advisory group to review criteria
for ranking human and animal
antimicrobials to be reviewed by WHO;
and FDA’s resources could be used in
support of AGISAR’s participation.
• Support and advise WHO on
selection of sentinel sites to be
strategically identified around the globe
and designing pilot projects to conduct
integrated surveillance of antimicrobial
resistance.
• Promote development of
standardized methods for monitoring
antimicrobial use and work with
member states for the implementation of
these methods at the country-level.
• Promote the development of
published articles on the emergence of
AMR threats and challenges, and the
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
05OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61497-61501]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24853]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0477]
Approval Pathway for Biosimilar and Interchangeable Biological
Products; Public Hearing; Request for Comments
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of public hearing; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a 2-day
public hearing to obtain input on specific issues and challenges
associated with the implementation of the Biologics Price Competition
and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act). The BPCI Act establishes an
abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are
demonstrated to be ``highly similar'' (biosimilar) to, or
``interchangeable'' with, an FDA-licensed biological product. The
purpose of this public hearing is to create a forum for interested
stakeholders to provide input regarding the agency's implementation of
the statute. FDA will take the information it obtains from the public
hearing into account in its implementation of the BPCI Act.
DATES: The public hearing will be held November 2 and 3, 2010, from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Individuals who wish to present at the public
hearing must register on or before October 11, 2010. Section III of
this document provides attendance and registration information.
Electronic or written comments will be accepted after the public
hearing until December 31, 2010.
ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be held at FDA's White Oak Campus,
10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 31, Rm. 1503, Silver Spring, MD
20993.
Submit electronic comments to https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food
and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Room 1061, Rockville, MD
20852. Identify comments with the corresponding docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document.
Transcripts of the public hearing will be available for review at
the Division of Dockets Management and on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov approximately 30 days after the public hearing (see
Section VI of this document).
A live webcast of this public hearing will be viewable at the
following Web addresses on the days of the public hearing: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm221688.htm. A video record of the
public hearing will be available at the same Web addresses for 1 year.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra J. Benton, Food and Drug
Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 6340, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-
1042, FAX: 301-847-3529, E-mail: biosimilarspublicmtg@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On March 23, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act (Affordable Care Act) (Pub. L. 111-
148). The Affordable Care Act contains a subtitle called the Biologics
Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCI Act) that amends the
Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) and other statutes to create an
abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be
biosimilar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed reference
biological product (see sections 7001 through 7003 of the BPCI Act).
The objectives of the BPCI Act are conceptually similar to those of
the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984
(Pub. L. 98-417) (commonly referred to as the ``Hatch-Waxman Act''),
which established abbreviated pathways for the approval of drug
products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). The
BPCI Act aligns with FDA's longstanding policy of permitting
appropriate reliance on what is already known about a drug, thereby
saving time and resources and avoiding unnecessary duplication of human
or animal testing. The implementation of an abbreviated approval
pathway for biological products can present challenges given the
scientific and technical complexities that may be associated with the
larger and often more complex structure of biological products, as well
as the processes by which such products are manufactured. Most
biological products are produced in a living system such as a
microorganism, or plant or animal cells, whereas small molecule drugs
are typically manufactured through chemical synthesis.
Section 351(k) of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262(k)), added by the BPCI
Act, describes the general requirements for an application for a
proposed biosimilar biological product and an application or a
supplement for a proposed interchangeable biological product.
A biological product may be demonstrated to be ``biosimilar'' to a
biological reference product based upon data derived from analytical
studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies if the product
is shown to be highly similar to the reference product, notwithstanding
minor differences in clinically inactive components, and if there are
no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and
the reference product in terms of safety, purity and potency.
[[Page 61498]]
To meet the higher standard of ``interchangeability,'' a product
must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical
result as the reference product in any given patient and, if the
biological product is administered more than once to an individual, the
risk in terms of safety or diminished efficacy of alternating or
switching between the use of the biological product and the reference
product is not greater than the risk of using the reference product
without such alternation or switch. Interchangeable products may be
substituted for the reference product by a pharmacist without the
intervention of the prescribing health care provider.
The BPCI Act also includes, among other provisions: A 12-year
period of marketing exclusivity from the date of first licensure of the
reference product, during which approval of a 351(k) application
referencing that product cannot be made effective; an exclusivity
period for the first biological product submitted in a 351(k)
application that has been determined to be interchangeable with the
reference product for any condition of use, during which a second or
subsequent biological product may not be determined interchangeable to
that reference product; and a transition provision for protein products
that have been or will be approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act
(21 U.S.C. 355) prior to March 23, 2020.
The BPCI Act also requires that FDA develop recommendations to
present to Congress with respect to a user fee program for biosimilar
and interchangeable biological products. Such recommendations must
address the goals for the process of reviewing 351(k) applications, and
plans for meeting those goals, for fiscal years (FY) 2013 to 2017. In
developing such recommendations, FDA is required to consult with the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate; the
Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives;
scientific and academic experts; healthcare professionals;
representatives of patient and consumer advocacy groups; and regulated
industry.
The BPCI Act also establishes procedures for identifying and
resolving patent disputes involving applications submitted under
section 351(k) of the PHS Act; these procedures do not involve FDA and
are not within the scope of this public hearing.
II. Purpose and Scope of the Public Hearing
The purpose of this part 15 hearing is to receive information and
comments from a broad group of stakeholders, such as healthcare
professionals, healthcare institutions, manufacturers of biomedical
products, interested industry and professional associations, patients
and patient associations, third party payers, current and prospective
biological license application (BLA) and new drug application (NDA)
holders, and the public, regarding implementation of the BPCI Act.
To prepare to begin negotiations with regulated industry regarding
a user fee program, FDA must identify which companies and trade
associations would be affected by a user fee program for biosimilar and
interchangeable biological products (i.e., a company likely to submit
an application for approval of a biosimilar or interchangeable
biological product).
The purpose of this public hearing is to create a forum for
interested stakeholders to provide input regarding the agency's
implementation of the statute concerning the following issues, among
others: Scientific and technical factors related to a determination of
biosimilarity or interchangeability; the type of information that may
be used to support a determination of biosimilarity or
interchangeability; development of a framework for optimal
pharmacovigilance for biosimilar and interchangeable biological
products; scope of the revised definition of a ``biological product'';
priorities for guidance development; scientific and technical factors
related to reference product exclusivity; scientific and technical
factors that may inform the agency's interpretation of ``product
class'' as it relates to available regulatory pathways for certain
protein products during the 10-year transition period following
enactment of the BPCI Act; and the establishment of a user fee program
for biosimilar and interchangeable biological products.
FDA is particularly interested in obtaining information and public
comment on the following issues, although any comments on any issues
related to biosimilar or interchangeable biological products are
welcome.
A. Biosimilarity
Section 351(k) of the PHS Act as set forth in the BPCI Act
requires, among other things, that an application for a proposed
biosimilar product include information demonstrating that the proposed
product is biosimilar to a reference product based upon data derived
from:
Analytical studies that demonstrate that the biological
product is highly similar to the reference product notwithstanding
minor differences in clinically inactive components;
Animal studies (including the assessment of toxicity); and
A clinical study or studies (including the assessment of
immunogenicity and pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics) that are
sufficient to demonstrate safety, purity, and potency in one or more
appropriate conditions of use for which the reference product is
licensed.
The BPCI Act provides that FDA may determine, at its discretion, that
an element described previously is unnecessary in a 351(k) application.
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. What scientific and technical factors should the agency consider
in determining whether the biological product is highly similar to the
reference product notwithstanding minor differences in clinically
inactive components?
2. What scientific and technical factors should the agency consider
in determining the appropriate analytical, animal, and clinical study
or studies to assess the nature and impact of actual or potential
structural differences between the proposed biosimilar product and the
reference product?
3. What range of structural differences between a proposed
biosimilar product and the reference product is consistent with the
standard ``highly similar'' and may be acceptable in a 351(k)
application if the applicant can demonstrate the absence of any
clinically meaningful differences between the proposed biosimilar
product and the reference product?
4. Under what circumstances should the agency consider finding that
animal studies or a clinical study or studies are ``unnecessary'' for
submission of a 351(k) application?
B. Interchangeability
Section 351(k)(4) of the PHS Act requires that an application for a
proposed interchangeable product contain information sufficient to
demonstrate:
The biological product is biosimilar to the reference
product; and
The biological product can be expected to produce the same
clinical result as the reference product in any given patient; and
For a biological product that is administered more than
once to an
[[Page 61499]]
individual, the risk in terms of safety or diminished efficacy of
alternating or switching between use of the biological product and the
reference product is not greater than the risk of using the reference
product without such alternation or switch.
FDA seeks input on the following issues related to
interchangeability:
1. What factors should the agency consider in determining whether a
proposed interchangeable biological product can be ``expected to
produce the same clinical result as the reference product in any given
patient?''
2. What factors should the agency consider in evaluating the
potential risk related to alternating or switching between use of the
proposed interchangeable biological product and the reference product
or among interchangeable biological products?
C. Patient Safety and Pharmacovigilance
The agency considers the safety of patients who are taking any
medical products to be of paramount importance. To that end and to
protect each individual patient, the agency is developing a framework
for optimal pharmacovigilance for biosimilar and interchangeable
products that is informed by our current experience and industry best
practices. In the interest of patient safety and for the purpose of
pharmacovigilance, the agency must be able to distinguish between a
reference product, a related biological product that has not been
demonstrated to be biosimilar, a biosimilar product, and an
interchangeable product.
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. What factors unique to proposed biosimilar or interchangeable
biological products and their use should the agency consider in
developing its pharmacovigilance program for such products?
2. What approaches can be undertaken by the agency, industry, or
health care community to ensure appropriate pharmacovigilance for
biosimilar and interchangeable products?
3. If each product were given a unique nonproprietary name, should
a distinguishing prefix or suffix be added to the nonproprietary name
for a related biological product that has not been demonstrated to be
biosimilar, a biosimilar product, or an interchangeable product to
facilitate pharmacovigilance? What factors should be considered to
reduce any negative impact on the healthcare delivery system related to
unique nonproprietary names for highly similar biological products?
4. What safeguards should the agency consider to assist the
healthcare community when prescribing, administering, and dispensing
biological products to prevent unsafe substitution of biological
products?
5. What are some mechanisms that FDA may consider to communicate
findings that a particular product is or is not biosimilar to or
interchangeable with a given reference product?
D. The Use of Supportive Data and Information
The BPCI Act provides that an application for the licensure of a
biosimilar or interchangeable product: Shall include publicly available
information regarding the Secretary's (Department of Health and Human
Services) previous determination that the reference product is safe,
pure, and potent; and may include any additional information in support
of the application, including publicly available information with
respect to the reference product or another biological product (section
351(k)(2)(A)(iii) of the PHS Act).
The BPCI Act defines the term ``reference product'' to mean ``the
single biological product licensed under [section 351(a)] against which
a biological product is evaluated in an application submitted under
[section 351(k)].'' Accordingly, section 351(k) requires that an
applicant demonstrate biosimilarity to and or interchangeability with a
reference product licensed by FDA (as distinguished from a biological
product licensed by a foreign regulatory authority).
The agency is aware that some prospective biosimilar sponsors have
conducted animal and/or clinical studies to support regulatory approval
in another jurisdiction using a non-U.S.-licensed biological product as
a comparator. To avoid duplicative animal and human testing, sponsors
may wish, to the extent permissible, to rely on these studies to
support a 351(k) application.
FDA seeks comments on the following issue: From a scientific
perspective, to what extent, if any, should animal or clinical data
comparing a proposed biosimilar product with a non-U.S.-licensed
comparator product be used to support a demonstration of biosimilarity
to a U.S.-licensed reference product? What type of bridging data or
information would be needed to scientifically justify the relevance of
the comparative data?
E. Definition of a Biological Product
The BPCI Act changes the statutory authority under which certain
protein products will be regulated by amending the definition of
``biological product'' in section 351(i) of the PHS Act to include a
protein (except any chemically synthesized polypeptide) before the
phrase ``or analogous product.'' In light of the absence of scientific
consensus on the distinction between the categories of ``protein'' and
``polypeptide'' or ``peptide,'' FDA may establish a regulatory
definition of ``protein'' and ``any chemically synthesized
polypeptide'' to clarify the authority under which such products will
be licensed and regulated and, to the extent possible, avoid the
conflicting regulation of certain products (i.e., those that are
manufactured through either synthetic and recombinant technology) under
different authorities.
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. What scientific and technical factors should FDA consider if it
develops a regulatory definition for the category of ``protein'' (as
distinguished from peptide or polypeptide)?
2. What scientific and technical factors should FDA consider if it
develops a regulatory definition for the category of ``any chemically
synthesized polypeptide''?
F. Guidances
Although the issuance or nonissuance of guidance does not preclude
submission or agency review of, or action on, a 351(k) application, we
are interested in obtaining public input regarding priorities for
issuing guidance documents for industry (see section 351(k)(8) of the
PHS Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. What types of guidance documents for industry should be a
priority for the agency during the early period of implementation?
2. Section 351(k)(8)(E) of the PHS Act permits the agency to
indicate in a guidance document that the science and experience, as of
the date of the guidance document, with respect to a product or product
class (not including any recombinant protein) does not allow approval
of a 351(k) application for such a product or product class. What
scientific and technical factors should the agency consider in
determining if the existing science and experience are sufficient to
allow approval for a product or product class under section 351(k) of
the PHS Act?
[[Page 61500]]
G. Exclusivity
The BPCI Act provides for a 12-year period of marketing exclusivity
from the date of first licensure of the reference biological product,
during which approval of a 351(k) application cannot be made effective
(see section 351(k)(7) of the PHS Act). The date of first licensure
does not apply to a license for or approval of:
A supplement for the biological product that is the
reference product; or
A subsequent application filed by the same sponsor or
manufacturer of the biological product that is the reference product
(or a related entity) for a change (not including a modification to the
structure of the biological product) that results in a new indication,
route of administration, dosing schedule, dosage form, delivery system,
delivery device, or strength; or
A subsequent application filed by the same sponsor or
manufacturer of the biological product that is the reference product
(or a related entity) for a modification to the structure of the
biological product that does not result in a change in safety, purity,
or potency (see section 351(k)(7)(C) of the PHS Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. In light of the potential transfer of BLAs from one corporate
entity to another and the complexities of corporate and business
relationships, what factors should the agency consider in determining
the types of related entities that may be ineligible for a period of
12-year exclusivity for a subsequent BLA?
2. What factors should the agency consider in determining whether a
modification to the structure of the licensed reference biological
product results in a change in safety, purity, or potency, such that a
subsequent BLA may be eligible for a second 12-year period of marketing
exclusivity?
H. Transition Provisions
The BPCI Act requires that an application for a biological product,
which now includes the category of ``protein (except any chemically
synthesized polypeptide),'' must be submitted under section 351 of the
PHS Act, rather than under section 505 of the FD&C Act. However, the
BPCI Act provides an exception for certain biological products that are
in a ``product class'' for which an application has been approved under
section 505 of the FD&C Act prior to March 23, 2010. An application for
a biological product in these product classes may be submitted under
section 505 of the FD&C Act until March 23, 2020, unless there is
another biological product licensed under section 351(a) of the PHS Act
that could serve as the reference product for the application, if the
application were submitted under section 351(k) of the PHS Act (see
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. What scientific factors should FDA consider in defining and
applying ``product class'' for purposes of determining which
applications for biological products may be submitted under the FD&C
Act during the 10-year transition period?
2. What scientific factors should FDA consider in determining
whether another biological product approved under section 351(a) of the
PHS Act could serve as the reference product for an application
submitted under section 351(k) of the PHS Act?
I. User Fees
The BPCI Act amends section 735 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 379g) to
include 351(k) applications in the definition of a ``human drug
application'' for the purposes of the prescription drug user fee
provisions (see section 7002(f)(3) of the BPCI Act). The BPCI Act
requires FDA to develop recommendations to present to Congress by
January 15, 2012, for goals for the process of reviewing 351(k)
applications, and plans for meeting those goals, for the first five
fiscal years after FY 2012 (see section 7002(f)(3) of the BPCI Act).
FDA seeks comments on the following issues:
1. If the existing fee structure under the Prescription Drug User
Fee Act (PDUFA) were to be considered as a model in establishing a user
fee structure for applications and supplements for proposed biosimilar
and interchangeable biological products, what factors and changes
should FDA take into consideration, and why?
2. What factors should FDA take into account when considering
whether to recommend that user fees for biosimilar and interchangeable
biological products should also be used to monitor safety after
approval?
In addition, FDA seeks to identify potential participants in any
negotiations of user fee programs for biosimilar and interchangeable
biological products, specifically companies that would be affected by
such a user fee program and industry associations representing such
companies. FDA requests that commenters identify these potential
participants by sending to BiosimilarsUserFeeProgram@fda.hhs.gov the
following information regarding any company that may be subject to a
user fee program for biosimilar and interchangeable biological
products, or any industry association representing such companies: The
name of the entity; contact person; e-mail address; and a phone number.
III. Attendance and Registration
The FDA Conference Center at the White Oak location is a Federal
facility with security procedures and limited seating. Attendance is
free and will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Individuals who
wish to present at the public hearing must register by sending an e-
mail to biosimilarspublicmtg@fda.hhs.gov on or before October 11, 2010,
and provide complete contact information, including name, title,
affiliation, address, e-mail, and phone number. Those without e-mail
access may register by contacting Sandra Benton (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT). FDA has included questions for comment in section
II of this document. You should identify the section and the number of
each question you wish to address in your presentation, so that FDA can
consider that in organizing the presentations. Individuals and
organizations with common interests should consolidate or coordinate
their presentations and request time for a joint presentation. FDA will
do its best to accommodate requests to speak and will determine the
amount of time allotted for each oral presentation, and the approximate
time that each oral presentation is scheduled to begin. FDA will notify
registered presenters of their scheduled times, and make available an
agenda at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm221688.htm
approximately 2 weeks prior to the public hearing. Once FDA notifies
registered presenters of their scheduled times, presenters should
submit to FDA an electronic copy of their presentation to
biosimilarspublicmtg@fda.hhs.gov on or before October 27, 2010.
If you need special accommodations because of disability, please
contact Sandra Benton, (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) at least 7
days before the meeting.
A live Webcast of this public hearing will be viewable at the
following Web addresses on the days of the public hearing: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm221688.htm. A video record of the
public hearing will be available at the same Web addresses for one
year.
[[Page 61501]]
IV. Notice of Hearing Under 21 CFR Part 15
The Commissioner of Food and Drugs is announcing that the public
hearing will be held in accordance with part 15 (21 CFR part 15). The
hearing will be conducted by a presiding officer, who will be
accompanied by FDA senior management from the Office of the
Commissioner and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Under Sec. 15.30(f), the hearing is informal and the rules of
evidence do not apply. No participant may interrupt the presentation of
another participant. Only the presiding officer and panel members may
question any person during or at the conclusion of each presentation.
Public hearings under part 15 are subject to FDA's policy and
procedures for electronic media coverage of FDA's public administrative
proceedings (part 10, subpart C (21 CFR part 10, subpart C)). Under
Sec. 10.205, representatives of the electronic media may be permitted,
subject to certain limitations, to videotape, film, or otherwise record
FDA's public administrative proceedings, including presentations by
participants. The hearing will be transcribed as stipulated in Sec.
15.30(b) (see section VI of this document). To the extent that the
conditions for the hearing, as described in this notice, conflict with
any provisions set out in part 15, this notice acts as a waiver of
those provisions as specified in Sec. 15.30(h).
V. Request for Comments
Regardless of attendance at the public hearing, interested persons
may submit either electronic or written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to send one
set of comments. It is no longer necessary to send two copies of mailed
comments. Identify comments 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.
VI. Transcripts
Transcripts of the public hearing will be available for review at
the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and on the Internet
at https://www.regulations.gov approximately 30 days after the public
hearing. A transcript will also be made available in either hard copy
or on CD-ROM, upon submission of a Freedom of Information request.
Written requests are to be sent to Division of Freedom of Information
(HFI-35), Office of Management Programs, Food and Drug Administration,
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857.
Dated: September 29, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-24853 Filed 10-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P