Unapproved Animal Drugs, 79383-79385 [2010-31889]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2010–N–0528]
Unapproved Animal Drugs
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice; request for comments.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA, the Agency) is
soliciting comments from stakeholders
on strategies to address the prevalence
of animal drug products marketed in the
United States without approval or other
legal marketing status. FDA is
concerned that the safety and
effectiveness of these actively-marketed
products has not been demonstrated.
Therefore, the Agency is requesting
comments on approaches for increasing
the number of legally-marketed animal
drug products, as well as on the use of
enforcement discretion for some
unapproved animal drug products in
certain limited circumstances.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments by February 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: 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, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tracey H. Forfa, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV–1), Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240–276–9000.
e-mail: tracey.forfa@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
I. Purpose
FDA is soliciting comments from all
stakeholders, including the regulated
industry, veterinary professionals, and
the public on strategies to address the
prevalence of animal drug products
marketed in the United States without
approval or other legal marketing status.
The Agency is concerned that the safety
and effectiveness of these marketed
products has not been demonstrated.
FDA recognizes that the continued
availability of a number of these
products is important to meet the health
needs of animals. FDA is requesting
comments on approaches for increasing
the number of currently marketed
animal drug products that have legal
marketing status. Our focus at this time
is not on revising the current new
animal drug approval process. Instead,
we wish to explore additional
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:18 Dec 17, 2010
Jkt 223001
mechanisms that utilize FDA’s existing
regulatory framework as well as novel
strategies not currently employed by the
agency to increase the number of
approved or otherwise legally marketed
animal drugs. Furthermore, we are
requesting comment on the use of
limited enforcement discretion as an
element of the overall strategy.
II. Background
New animal drugs cannot be legally
marketed unless they have been
reviewed and approved, conditionally
approved, or index-listed by FDA. The
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the FD&C Act) defines the term ‘‘drug’’
to include articles intended for use in
the diagnosis, cure, mitigation,
treatment, or prevention of disease in
man or other animals, and articles (other
than food) intended to affect the
structure or any function of the body of
man or other animals (section 201(g)(1)
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1)).
The FD&C Act also defines the term
‘‘new animal drug.’’ A ‘‘new animal
drug’’ includes any drug intended for
use for animals that is not generally
recognized as safe and effective for use
under the conditions listed in the drug’s
labeling (section 201(v) of the FD&C
Act).
Under the FD&C Act, a new animal
drug may not be legally introduced into
interstate commerce unless it is the
subject of an approved new animal drug
application (NADA) or abbreviated new
animal drug application (ANADA)
under section 512 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360b), a conditional approval
(CNADA) under section 571 of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360ccc), an index
listing under section 572 of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 360ccc–1), or an
investigational new animal drug
exemption (INAD) under section 512(j)
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)).
When this notice refers to an
‘‘unapproved animal drug,’’ we mean an
animal drug that does not have a
necessary approval, conditional
approval, index listing, or INAD
exemption.
The FD&C Act’s new animal drug
approval requirements provide
important protection for humans and
animals. Animal drugs that are
marketed without required FDA review
and approval may not meet
requirements and standards for, among
other things, safety and effectiveness.
The FDA drug approval process ensures,
through an evaluation of scientific
evidence, that animal drugs are safe and
effective. The approval process also
provides a review of product-specific
information that is critical to ensuring
the safety and effectiveness of the
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
79383
finished animal drug product. For
instance, the sponsor of an NADA must
demonstrate that the manufacturing
processes can reliably produce drug
products of expected identity, strength,
quality, and purity. Furthermore, FDA’s
review of the applicant’s labeling
assures that veterinarians, animal
owners and other consumers have the
information necessary to understand a
drug product’s risks. In addition, firms
marketing approved animal drug
products must report adverse events
associated with their product’s use,
which helps FDA continuously assess
the risks associated with a particular
product. Although the conditional
approval and indexing requirements
differ in some ways from the animal
drug approval process, they all provide
for a science-based review to assure the
drug will be safe for its intended use.
FDA employs these standards in the
new animal drug approval process to
protect both human and animal health.
For many years, FDA has been aware
that a wide variety of animal drug
products are being marketed that meet
the definition of ‘‘drug’’ and ‘‘new
animal drug’’ as defined in the FD&C
Act, but are not approved, conditionally
approved, or indexed. Many of these
unapproved animal drugs were, and
some continue to be, the standard of
care in treating animals, and some are
essential to protecting animal health
and ensuring an adequate food supply.
In general, the types of unapproved
animal drugs being marketed include,
but are not limited to, injectable
vitamins, various topical solutions,
shampoos, and liniments, electrolyte
and glucose solutions, and antidotes. In
addition, there are a variety of antiinfective and other animal drug
products marketed for use in a variety
of animal species. The Agency
determined, based on available
information, that some of these animal
drug products or categories of products
did not raise safety concerns. With
respect to those products, the Agency
historically exercised its enforcement
discretion, even though such products
lacked the required FDA marketing
approval. This approach has been
important for setting enforcement
priorities and for making decisions as to
whether to take action against an
illegally marketed unapproved drug or
class of drugs under particular
circumstances.
Some of these unapproved drugs
which did not raise safety concerns
have been marketed under an FDA letter
of ‘‘no objection,’’ issued in response to
a firm’s request, stating that FDA did
not at the time object to the marketing
of a particular unapproved new animal
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
79384
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
drug. In addition, some unapproved
drugs have been marketed under the
auspices of Compliance Policy Guides
issued by FDA to let its staff, the public,
and industry know the conditions under
which FDA would consider
enforcement action with respect to these
unapproved drugs. This practice of
proactively announcing the Agency’s
intent to exercise enforcement
discretion with respect to particular
types of unapproved drugs under
specified conditions has been used in
certain circumstances because of the
relatively limited number of approved
animal drugs available to meet the
animal health needs of a diverse number
of animal species.
FDA recognizes that it will be
necessary to continue to exercise
enforcement discretion in limited
circumstances for certain essential
unapproved animal drug products or
categories of products as the Agency
works to develop new ways to increase
the availability of products that are
approved or otherwise legally marketed.
However, it is the Agency’s general
expectation that new animal drugs must
be approved or otherwise legally
marketed as required by the FD&C Act.
Therefore, any exercise of the Agency’s
enforcement discretion with respect to
unapproved animal drugs should be
limited to the greatest extent possible.
To that end, the Agency is seeking
comment on strategies for increasing the
number of animal drug products that are
legally marketed, and thus decreasing
the number of currently marketed
products that lack approval or other
legal marketing status. Such strategies
may include alternative pathways to
achieve legal marketing status that
assure animal drug products meet safety
and effectiveness standards, including
human food safety standards. However,
even after alternative pathways to legal
marketing are established, some drugs
may not be well-suited to such
alternatives and may be required to go
through the new animal drug approval
process, especially in cases where there
are safety or effectiveness concerns. For
example, certain drug products
intended for use in food-producing
animals may only be able to achieve
legal marketing status through the
traditional new animal drug approval
process because of concerns about drug
residues appearing in edible tissues.
III. Agency Request for Comments
FDA is soliciting public comment on
potential actions the Agency can take to
help achieve the goal of obtaining legal
marketing status, as appropriate, for
unapproved animal drugs that are
currently being marketed in the United
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:18 Dec 17, 2010
Jkt 223001
States. We are interested in comments
on strategies that utilize FDA’s existing
regulatory framework for addressing this
issue as well as comments on novel
strategies not currently employed by the
Agency. In conjunction with pursuing
this goal, the Agency recognizes the
need for maintaining the availability of
essential animal drugs for pet owners,
veterinarians, and animal producers.
FDA is also specifically requesting
comments and information on the
questions and subjects below. This list
is not all-inclusive, however, and is not
intended to limit the range of options
available for public comment. The
Agency asks that comments be as
detailed as possible, with explanations
and information to assist FDA in
evaluating whether the approaches will
help accomplish the goal of increasing
the number of currently marketed
animal drug products that have
approval or other legal marketing status.
FDA’s intent is that of inquiry and not
for anyone to read this list as any
indication of the Agency’s position on a
particular approach or a determination
that the Agency has the resources to
implement such an approach.
A. Increasing the Availability of Legally
Marketed Animal Drug Products
In general, the types of unapproved
animal drugs being marketed include,
but are not limited to: Injectable
vitamins; various topical solutions,
shampoos, and liniments; electrolyte
and glucose solutions; and antidotes. In
addition, there are a variety of antiinfective and other animal drug
products marketed for use in a variety
of animal species. Given the broad array
of animal drug products that are
important for meeting the health needs
of a diverse number of animal species,
FDA is interested in exploring
alternative approaches (i.e., alternatives
to the existing new animal drug
approval process) by which those
products could be legally marketed.
Some examples of alternative
approaches are discussed in sections
III.A.1 and III.A.2 of this document.
1. Monographs
Certain over-the-counter (OTC) drugs
for humans are marketed under
monographs that establish the
conditions under which these drugs are
generally recognized as safe and
effective and not misbranded. The
monographs specify active ingredients,
dosage forms, product strengths,
indications for use, labeling, and other
conditions. Human OTC drug products
that comply with all of a monograph’s
conditions and the provisions in 21 CFR
part 330 may be manufactured and
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
distributed without applications or any
other premarket review. Monographs are
developed after review of available
information about safety and
effectiveness, including published and
unpublished data and information
submitted to the Agency, and must be
supported by adequate and wellcontrolled studies.
Does published literature of sufficient
quality exist for some currently
marketed unapproved animal drugs
such that monographs might be a
feasible approach? For which drugs
might this be feasible? What are the
attributes that make the published
literature suitable for this purpose?
What criteria should be used to
determine whether an animal drug is
potentially suitable for a monograph to
ensure that quality, safety and
effectiveness would not be
compromised in the absence of
premarket review?
2. Use of Publicly Available Information
In some cases, human prescription
drugs have been approved and marketed
after FDA reviewed the existing
literature and data regarding a particular
drug or class of drugs. Examples of
drugs for which FDA has used this
approach include the following:
• Prussian Blue (see ‘‘Guidance for
Industry on Prussian Blue for Treatment
of Internal Contamination With
Thallium or Radioactive Cesium;
Availability’’ (68 FR 5645, February 4,
2003)) and
• Pancreatic Enzymes (see ‘‘Exocrine
Pancreatic Insufficiency Drug Products’’
(69 FR 23410, April 28, 2004), ‘‘Exocrine
Pancreatic Insufficiency Drug Products
for Over-the-Counter Human Use’’ (56
FR 32282, July 15, 1991), and ‘‘Guidance
for Industry: Exocrine Pancreatic
Insufficiency Drug Products—
Submitting NDAs,’’ issued in April 2006
and available online at
https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/
GuidanceComplianceRegulatory
Information/Guidances/
ucm071651.pdf).
For each of these drugs, FDA
reviewed the publicly available
information and published in the
Federal Register a discussion regarding
the drug’s safety and effectiveness, and
any conclusions reached by the Agency
based on that review. Firms then
submitted drug applications referencing
the public information and/or the
Federal Register notice to address
certain information requirements
needed for an application.
Does published literature of sufficient
quality exist for some animal drugs that
could be used to support safety and
effectiveness evaluations for these
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
79385
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 243 / Monday, December 20, 2010 / Notices
currently unapproved marketed drugs?
For which drugs might this be feasible?
What attributes make published
literature of sufficient quality to
contribute to such an evaluation?
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.
B. Limiting the Use of Enforcement
Discretion
As stated previously, the Agency
acknowledges that the practice of
exercising enforcement discretion in
certain circumstances is necessary to
ensure the availability of some essential
animal drug products. This practice of
exercising enforcement discretion (i.e., a
decision on the part of the Agency to
not take enforcement action in certain
circumstances) is not only important for
managing limited Agency resources
related to compliance activities but is
also important for assuring that certain
animal drug products remain available
for addressing the health needs of
animals. However, FDA’s goal is to
limit, to the extent possible, its use of
enforcement discretion for unapproved
animal drugs.
What factors should the Agency
consider when determining which
unapproved animal drug products or
categories of products should be the
subject of enforcement discretion?
Dated: December 15, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
IV. Comments
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written
comments regarding this document. 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
that has been extended, revised, or
implemented on or after October 1,
1995, unless it displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
[FR Doc. 2010–31889 Filed 12–17–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
National Institutes of Health
Submission for OMB; Comment
Request; National Epidemiologic
Survey on Alcohol and Related
Conditions—III
In compliance with the
requirement of Section 3507(a)(1)(D) of
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse
and Alcoholism (NIAAA), the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) has submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) a request for review and
approval of the information collection
listed below. This proposed information
collection was previously published in
the Federal Register on October 15,
2010, and allowed 60-days for public
comment. No public comments were
received. The purpose of this notice is
to allow an additional 30 days for public
comment. The National Institutes of
Health may not conduct or sponsor, and
the respondent is not required to
respond to, an information collection
SUMMARY:
Proposed Collection: Title: National
Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and
Related Conditions—III. Type of
Information Collection Request: NEW.
Need and Use of Information Collection:
This study will determine the
prevalence of alcohol use patterns and
alcohol use disorders and their
associated disabilities in a
representative sample of adults in the
United States population. The primary
objectives of this study are to: (1)
Understand the relationships between
alcohol use patterns and alcohol use
disorders and their related
psychological and medical disabilities
with a view toward designing more
effective treatment, prevention and
intervention programs; (2) identify
subgroups at high risk for alcohol use
disorders that are complicated by
associated disabilities; (3) understand
treatment utilization, unmet treatment
need, barriers to treatment, health
disparities, and economic costs of
alcohol use disorders and their
associated disabilities; and (4) identify
environmental and genetic risk factors
and their interactions that are associated
with harmful consumption patterns and
alcohol use disorders and their
associated disabilities. Frequency of
Response: On occasion. Affected Public:
Individuals. Type of Respondents:
Adults.
ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN
Estimated
number of
respondents
Type of
respondents
Estimated
number of
responses per
respondent
Average
burden hours
per response
Estimated
total annual
burden hours
requested
44,900
1,700
1
2
1.0
1.7
44,900
2,890
Total ..........................................................................................................
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Adults ...............................................................................................................
Adults ...............................................................................................................
........................
........................
........................
47,790
The annualized cost to respondents is
estimated to be $936,684.00. There are
no Capital Costs to report. There are no
Operating or Maintenance Costs to
report.
Request for Comments: Written
comments and/or suggestions from the
public and affected agencies are invited
on one or more of the following points:
(1) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the function of the
agency, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:18 Dec 17, 2010
Jkt 223001
(2) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, 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 those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Direct Comments to OMB: Written
comments and/or suggestions regarding
the item(s) contained in this notice,
especially regarding the estimated
public burden and associated response
time, should be directed to the: Office
of Management and Budget, Office of
Regulatory Affairs,
OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov or by
fax to 202–395–6974, Attention: Desk
Officer for NIH. To request more
information on the proposed project or
to obtain a copy of the data collection
plans and instruments, contact: Dr.
E:\FR\FM\20DEN1.SGM
20DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 243 (Monday, December 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79383-79385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31889]
[[Page 79383]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0528]
Unapproved Animal Drugs
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency) is
soliciting comments from stakeholders on strategies to address the
prevalence of animal drug products marketed in the United States
without approval or other legal marketing status. FDA is concerned that
the safety and effectiveness of these actively-marketed products has
not been demonstrated. Therefore, the Agency is requesting comments on
approaches for increasing the number of legally-marketed animal drug
products, as well as on the use of enforcement discretion for some
unapproved animal drug products in certain limited circumstances.
DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments by February 18,
2011.
ADDRESSES: 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, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey H. Forfa, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV-1), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9000. e-mail: tracey.forfa@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Purpose
FDA is soliciting comments from all stakeholders, including the
regulated industry, veterinary professionals, and the public on
strategies to address the prevalence of animal drug products marketed
in the United States without approval or other legal marketing status.
The Agency is concerned that the safety and effectiveness of these
marketed products has not been demonstrated. FDA recognizes that the
continued availability of a number of these products is important to
meet the health needs of animals. FDA is requesting comments on
approaches for increasing the number of currently marketed animal drug
products that have legal marketing status. Our focus at this time is
not on revising the current new animal drug approval process. Instead,
we wish to explore additional mechanisms that utilize FDA's existing
regulatory framework as well as novel strategies not currently employed
by the agency to increase the number of approved or otherwise legally
marketed animal drugs. Furthermore, we are requesting comment on the
use of limited enforcement discretion as an element of the overall
strategy.
II. Background
New animal drugs cannot be legally marketed unless they have been
reviewed and approved, conditionally approved, or index-listed by FDA.
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) defines the
term ``drug'' to include articles intended for use in the diagnosis,
cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man or other
animals, and articles (other than food) intended to affect the
structure or any function of the body of man or other animals (section
201(g)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1)). The FD&C Act also
defines the term ``new animal drug.'' A ``new animal drug'' includes
any drug intended for use for animals that is not generally recognized
as safe and effective for use under the conditions listed in the drug's
labeling (section 201(v) of the FD&C Act).
Under the FD&C Act, a new animal drug may not be legally introduced
into interstate commerce unless it is the subject of an approved new
animal drug application (NADA) or abbreviated new animal drug
application (ANADA) under section 512 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b),
a conditional approval (CNADA) under section 571 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360ccc), an index listing under section 572 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360ccc-1), or an investigational new animal drug exemption
(INAD) under section 512(j) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(j)). When
this notice refers to an ``unapproved animal drug,'' we mean an animal
drug that does not have a necessary approval, conditional approval,
index listing, or INAD exemption.
The FD&C Act's new animal drug approval requirements provide
important protection for humans and animals. Animal drugs that are
marketed without required FDA review and approval may not meet
requirements and standards for, among other things, safety and
effectiveness. The FDA drug approval process ensures, through an
evaluation of scientific evidence, that animal drugs are safe and
effective. The approval process also provides a review of product-
specific information that is critical to ensuring the safety and
effectiveness of the finished animal drug product. For instance, the
sponsor of an NADA must demonstrate that the manufacturing processes
can reliably produce drug products of expected identity, strength,
quality, and purity. Furthermore, FDA's review of the applicant's
labeling assures that veterinarians, animal owners and other consumers
have the information necessary to understand a drug product's risks. In
addition, firms marketing approved animal drug products must report
adverse events associated with their product's use, which helps FDA
continuously assess the risks associated with a particular product.
Although the conditional approval and indexing requirements differ in
some ways from the animal drug approval process, they all provide for a
science-based review to assure the drug will be safe for its intended
use. FDA employs these standards in the new animal drug approval
process to protect both human and animal health.
For many years, FDA has been aware that a wide variety of animal
drug products are being marketed that meet the definition of ``drug''
and ``new animal drug'' as defined in the FD&C Act, but are not
approved, conditionally approved, or indexed. Many of these unapproved
animal drugs were, and some continue to be, the standard of care in
treating animals, and some are essential to protecting animal health
and ensuring an adequate food supply.
In general, the types of unapproved animal drugs being marketed
include, but are not limited to, injectable vitamins, various topical
solutions, shampoos, and liniments, electrolyte and glucose solutions,
and antidotes. In addition, there are a variety of anti-infective and
other animal drug products marketed for use in a variety of animal
species. The Agency determined, based on available information, that
some of these animal drug products or categories of products did not
raise safety concerns. With respect to those products, the Agency
historically exercised its enforcement discretion, even though such
products lacked the required FDA marketing approval. This approach has
been important for setting enforcement priorities and for making
decisions as to whether to take action against an illegally marketed
unapproved drug or class of drugs under particular circumstances.
Some of these unapproved drugs which did not raise safety concerns
have been marketed under an FDA letter of ``no objection,'' issued in
response to a firm's request, stating that FDA did not at the time
object to the marketing of a particular unapproved new animal
[[Page 79384]]
drug. In addition, some unapproved drugs have been marketed under the
auspices of Compliance Policy Guides issued by FDA to let its staff,
the public, and industry know the conditions under which FDA would
consider enforcement action with respect to these unapproved drugs.
This practice of proactively announcing the Agency's intent to exercise
enforcement discretion with respect to particular types of unapproved
drugs under specified conditions has been used in certain circumstances
because of the relatively limited number of approved animal drugs
available to meet the animal health needs of a diverse number of animal
species.
FDA recognizes that it will be necessary to continue to exercise
enforcement discretion in limited circumstances for certain essential
unapproved animal drug products or categories of products as the Agency
works to develop new ways to increase the availability of products that
are approved or otherwise legally marketed. However, it is the Agency's
general expectation that new animal drugs must be approved or otherwise
legally marketed as required by the FD&C Act. Therefore, any exercise
of the Agency's enforcement discretion with respect to unapproved
animal drugs should be limited to the greatest extent possible. To that
end, the Agency is seeking comment on strategies for increasing the
number of animal drug products that are legally marketed, and thus
decreasing the number of currently marketed products that lack approval
or other legal marketing status. Such strategies may include
alternative pathways to achieve legal marketing status that assure
animal drug products meet safety and effectiveness standards, including
human food safety standards. However, even after alternative pathways
to legal marketing are established, some drugs may not be well-suited
to such alternatives and may be required to go through the new animal
drug approval process, especially in cases where there are safety or
effectiveness concerns. For example, certain drug products intended for
use in food-producing animals may only be able to achieve legal
marketing status through the traditional new animal drug approval
process because of concerns about drug residues appearing in edible
tissues.
III. Agency Request for Comments
FDA is soliciting public comment on potential actions the Agency
can take to help achieve the goal of obtaining legal marketing status,
as appropriate, for unapproved animal drugs that are currently being
marketed in the United States. We are interested in comments on
strategies that utilize FDA's existing regulatory framework for
addressing this issue as well as comments on novel strategies not
currently employed by the Agency. In conjunction with pursuing this
goal, the Agency recognizes the need for maintaining the availability
of essential animal drugs for pet owners, veterinarians, and animal
producers.
FDA is also specifically requesting comments and information on the
questions and subjects below. This list is not all-inclusive, however,
and is not intended to limit the range of options available for public
comment. The Agency asks that comments be as detailed as possible, with
explanations and information to assist FDA in evaluating whether the
approaches will help accomplish the goal of increasing the number of
currently marketed animal drug products that have approval or other
legal marketing status. FDA's intent is that of inquiry and not for
anyone to read this list as any indication of the Agency's position on
a particular approach or a determination that the Agency has the
resources to implement such an approach.
A. Increasing the Availability of Legally Marketed Animal Drug Products
In general, the types of unapproved animal drugs being marketed
include, but are not limited to: Injectable vitamins; various topical
solutions, shampoos, and liniments; electrolyte and glucose solutions;
and antidotes. In addition, there are a variety of anti-infective and
other animal drug products marketed for use in a variety of animal
species. Given the broad array of animal drug products that are
important for meeting the health needs of a diverse number of animal
species, FDA is interested in exploring alternative approaches (i.e.,
alternatives to the existing new animal drug approval process) by which
those products could be legally marketed. Some examples of alternative
approaches are discussed in sections III.A.1 and III.A.2 of this
document.
1. Monographs
Certain over-the-counter (OTC) drugs for humans are marketed under
monographs that establish the conditions under which these drugs are
generally recognized as safe and effective and not misbranded. The
monographs specify active ingredients, dosage forms, product strengths,
indications for use, labeling, and other conditions. Human OTC drug
products that comply with all of a monograph's conditions and the
provisions in 21 CFR part 330 may be manufactured and distributed
without applications or any other premarket review. Monographs are
developed after review of available information about safety and
effectiveness, including published and unpublished data and information
submitted to the Agency, and must be supported by adequate and well-
controlled studies.
Does published literature of sufficient quality exist for some
currently marketed unapproved animal drugs such that monographs might
be a feasible approach? For which drugs might this be feasible? What
are the attributes that make the published literature suitable for this
purpose? What criteria should be used to determine whether an animal
drug is potentially suitable for a monograph to ensure that quality,
safety and effectiveness would not be compromised in the absence of
premarket review?
2. Use of Publicly Available Information
In some cases, human prescription drugs have been approved and
marketed after FDA reviewed the existing literature and data regarding
a particular drug or class of drugs. Examples of drugs for which FDA
has used this approach include the following:
Prussian Blue (see ``Guidance for Industry on Prussian
Blue for Treatment of Internal Contamination With Thallium or
Radioactive Cesium; Availability'' (68 FR 5645, February 4, 2003)) and
Pancreatic Enzymes (see ``Exocrine Pancreatic
Insufficiency Drug Products'' (69 FR 23410, April 28, 2004), ``Exocrine
Pancreatic Insufficiency Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use''
(56 FR 32282, July 15, 1991), and ``Guidance for Industry: Exocrine
Pancreatic Insufficiency Drug Products--Submitting NDAs,'' issued in
April 2006 and available online at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm071651.pdf).
For each of these drugs, FDA reviewed the publicly available
information and published in the Federal Register a discussion
regarding the drug's safety and effectiveness, and any conclusions
reached by the Agency based on that review. Firms then submitted drug
applications referencing the public information and/or the Federal
Register notice to address certain information requirements needed for
an application.
Does published literature of sufficient quality exist for some
animal drugs that could be used to support safety and effectiveness
evaluations for these
[[Page 79385]]
currently unapproved marketed drugs? For which drugs might this be
feasible? What attributes make published literature of sufficient
quality to contribute to such an evaluation?
B. Limiting the Use of Enforcement Discretion
As stated previously, the Agency acknowledges that the practice of
exercising enforcement discretion in certain circumstances is necessary
to ensure the availability of some essential animal drug products. This
practice of exercising enforcement discretion (i.e., a decision on the
part of the Agency to not take enforcement action in certain
circumstances) is not only important for managing limited Agency
resources related to compliance activities but is also important for
assuring that certain animal drug products remain available for
addressing the health needs of animals. However, FDA's goal is to
limit, to the extent possible, its use of enforcement discretion for
unapproved animal drugs.
What factors should the Agency consider when determining which
unapproved animal drug products or categories of products should be the
subject of enforcement discretion?
IV. Comments
Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. 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.
Dated: December 15, 2010.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-31889 Filed 12-17-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P