Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network, 78216-78224 [2011-32204]
Download as PDF
78216
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 121
RIN 0906–AA73
Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network
Health Resources and Services
Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
This notice of proposed
rulemaking sets forth the Secretary’s
proposal to include vascularized
composite allografts, described below,
within the definition of organs covered
by the rules governing the operation of
the Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network. The Secretary
further proposes a corresponding
change to the definition of human
organs covered by section 301 of the
National Organ Transplant Act of 1984,
as amended.
DATES: To be considered, comments on
this proposed rule must be submitted by
February 14, 2012. Subject to
consideration of the comments
submitted, the Department intends to
publish final regulations.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by RIN 0906–AA73, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Agency Web site: https://
www.hrsa.gov/. Follow the instructions
for submitting comments on the Agency
Web site.
• Email:
VCATransplantation@hrsa.gov. Include
RIN 0906–AA73 in the subject line of
the message.
• Fax: (301) 594–6095.
• Mail: James Bowman, M.D.,
Medical Director, Division of
Transplantation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Room 12C–06, Rockville, Maryland
20857.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: James
Bowman, M.D., Medical Director,
Division of Transplantation, Healthcare
Systems Bureau, Health Resources and
Services Administration, 5600 Fishers
Lane, Room 12C–06, Rockville,
Maryland 20857.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
for this rulemaking. All comments
received will be posted without change
to https://www.hrsa.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to the Division
of Transplantation, Healthcare Systems
Bureau, Health Resources and Services
Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Room 12C–06, Rockville, Maryland
20857 weekdays (Federal holidays
excepted) between the hours of
8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. To schedule an
appointment to view public comments,
phone (301) 443–7757.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
James Bowman, M.D., at the above
address; telephone number (301) 443–
4861.
The
transplant community has performed
transplants of hands and various body
parts using the term composite tissue
allograft; however, for the purposes of
rulemaking, the Health Resources and
Services Administration (HRSA) has
defined a subset of such body parts as
vascularized composite allografts (VCA),
which share certain characteristics.
Based upon a review of VCA, the
Secretary believes that VCA should now
be included within the definition of
organs covered by the rules governing
the operation of the Organ Procurement
and Transplantation Network (OPTN)
(hereinafter the OPTN final rule) (42
CFR part 121). This notice sets forth the
history of VCA transplants, the factors
that have persuaded the Department of
the advisability of including VCA
within the authority of the regulations
governing the operation of the OPTN,
the Secretary’s oversight of VCA, and
the anticipated consequences of this
proposal. The notice also discusses the
Department’s proposal to include VCA
within the definition of human organs
covered by section 301 of the National
Organ Transplant Act of 1984, as
amended (hereinafter section 301 of
NOTA).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Participation
Through this notice, the Secretary
seeks comments from the public on the
proposals made. Additional information
on the submission of comments and/or
the rulemaking process can be obtained
from the Director, Division of Policy
Review and Coordination, Health
Resources and Services Administration,
5600 Fishers Lane, Room 14A–11,
Rockville, Maryland 20857.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Background
VCA transplantation comprises
transplants of a variety of body parts (all
of which contain similar characteristics,
described later) that are not currently
regulated under the OPTN final rule.
Perhaps the two most notable types to
date have been hand and face
transplants. The first successful hand
transplant in the United States was
performed in 1999 and the first face
transplant in the U.S. was performed in
2008. Worldwide, there have been over
three dozen limb transplants, at least a
dozen transplants of portions of the
face, and a small number of transplants
of other such anatomical parts (e.g.,
abdominal wall, vascularized skeletal
muscle, and digits). Accurate data about
the actual number of such transplants
have been difficult to obtain because
there is no requirement for reporting
these procedures in the U.S. Most of the
available information has been obtained
from published news accounts in the
popular press and anecdotal reports in
the medical literature.
Although the body parts involved
vary significantly, among their shared
characteristics is the fact that they are
susceptible to ischemia (damage or
death from lack of blood flow) and that
they need revascularization, done
through a surgical reconnection of blood
vessels to accomplish the transplant, as
opposed to secondary ingrowth of
vessels. In viable vascularized
transplants, immunosuppression is
necessary to prevent or treat rejection.
This immunosuppression has risks,
which have been justified in patients
needing organs as presently defined in
the OPTN final rule because of their
lifesaving potential. In the past, the risks
of immunosuppression have inhibited
transplantation of VCA because the risks
associated with the prolonged use of
immunosuppressive drugs were thought
to exceed the expected benefits of the
transplants. However, the powerful
impact these transplants can have to
improve the quality of life for
individuals with grievous disabilities
has become increasingly apparent.
Immunosuppressive management for
these transplants has also improved so
that risks associated with
immunosuppression, such as cancer,
infection, or other morbidities in
recipients, are lessened considerably. (F
Schuind, Hand transplantation and
vascularized composite tissue allografts
in orthopaedics and traumatology,
Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery
& Research (2010) 96, 283–290, and
Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative
Medicine Annual Report, 2009, pp II–1
and II–62 and II–63). In recent years, the
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs have initiated substantial
funding of clinical research programs
for limb and face transplantation
anticipating the reconstruction needs of
wounded service members returning
from the conflicts in Iraq and
Afghanistan. More than 1,000 military
men and women have lost an arm or leg
in these conflicts and 20 percent have
lost two or more limbs. As of midsummer 2010, it was estimated that as
many as 200 wounded troops might be
eligible for face transplantation and
about 50 for hand/forearm transplants.
Most of the funding for limb and face
transplantation research in the U.S.
currently comes from the Departments
of Defense and Veterans Affairs (Armed
Forces Institute of Regenerative
Medicine Annual Report, 2009, pp I–1
and I–2). For these reasons, it is likely
that the numbers of VCA transplanted
will increase in the future.
Human cells or tissue intended for
implantation, transplantation, infusion,
or transfer into a human recipient are
regulated as a human cells, tissues, and
cellular and tissue-based products or
HCT/Ps. The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) regulates HCT/Ps
under 21 CFR parts 1270 and 1271.
Examples of such tissues are bone, skin,
corneas, ligaments, tendons, dura mater,
heart valves, hematopoietic stem/
progenitor cells derived from peripheral
and cord blood, oocytes, and semen.
Face and hand allografts, and other
body parts meeting the proposed
definition of VCA in this notice are
currently not explicitly excluded from
the definition of HCT/Ps under FDA
regulations and are therefore subject to
FDA oversight. The FDA has no
statutory or regulatory authority to
mandate VCA allocation policies, direct
coordination of procurement efforts,
require consistent application of
recovery and logistics processes, or
establish mandatory outcomes reporting
and provide oversight of VCA transplant
programs. FDA does not regulate the
transplantation of vascularized human
organ transplants such as kidney, liver,
heart, lung, or pancreas. The Health
Resources Services Administration
oversees the transplantation of
vascularized human organs.
Given the anticipated increase in VCA
transplants, HRSA published a Request
for Information (RFI) on March 3, 2008,
in the Federal Register for the purpose
of soliciting feedback from stakeholders
and the public as to whether VCA
should be included within the
definition of organs covered by the
OPTN final rule and/or added to the
definition of human organs covered by
section 301 of NOTA. (73 FR 11420.)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
HRSA also sought feedback on the
optimal way to define VCA if either
definitional change was pursued.
Through the RFI, HRSA invited the
public to attend a meeting on April 4,
2008 to discuss the issues described
above. The meeting was well attended
and provided a venue for discussion on
VCA issues. Participants were
instructed to provide written comments
and the deadline for these comments to
be received by HRSA was extended to
July 2, 2008.
In response to its RFI, HRSA received
11 written comments about whether
VCA should be included within the
definition of organs covered by the
OPTN final rule.
Eight of the written comments
received supported including VCA
within the definition of organs covered
under the OPTN final rule. Many of
these comments included similar
supporting statements for OPTN
oversight. The commenters agreed that
the use of the existing solid organ
transplant infrastructure would ensure
rapid and equitable placement of VCA;
allow allocation of VCA over a wide
geographic area; facilitate identification
of appropriate VCA donor and recipient
pairs; provide assurance that all VCA
programs are following similar rules,
ensuring uniform and appropriate
clinical and ethical standards on both
the donation and transplantation side;
facilitate the development of expertise
and a body of knowledge that would be
a valuable resource to address questions
from the government or the public, and
in the development of future policy and
procedures in the field of VCA
transplantation; enhance public
transparency, increasing public
acceptance of donation of VCA; and
facilitate the protection of public health
and safety in the context of VCA
transplantation. Commenters also stated
that the structure and goals of the OPTN
are well aligned with the types of
clinical and ethical concerns raised by
VCA transplantation such as
contingency treatment plan for complete
face graft loss and fear of loss of facial
identity due to transfer of donor facial
characteristics (AJ Alexander et al,
Arguing the Ethics of Facial
Transplantation, Arch Facial Plast Surg.
2010;12(1):60–63) and with the types of
entities that would be carrying out these
activities, e.g., organ procurement
organizations (OPOs) and transplant
centers.
Of the three remaining comments, two
supported partial inclusion of VCA
within the OPTN final rule’s definition
of organs and the third comment did not
support having VCA included within
the OPTN final rule’s definition of
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
78217
organs. Of the two comments advocating
partial inclusion of VCA under the
OPTN final rule’s definition of organs,
one stated that VCA should be classified
as either ‘‘life extending’’ or ‘‘not life
extending.’’ Life extending VCA were
described as those involving: (a)
Vascularized tissue, such as the use of
abdominal wall transplanted to close a
ruptured wound in a small bowel
transplant recipient; and (b) nonvascularized tissue, such as a heart
valve. Not life extending VCA were
described as those involving: (c)
vascularized tissue, such as a hand
transplant; and (d) non-vascularized
tissue, such as an anterior cruci, bone,
or nerve grafts. The commenter
supported including ‘‘life extending’’
VCA (a and b in the above examples)
under the definition of organs under the
OPTN final rule. According to this
commenter, all life-saving VCA should
follow the same rigorous testing and
screening of donors and the
procurement that is currently conducted
by the OPTN contractor for organs
currently covered under the OPTN final
rule. However, the responder strongly
opposed regulating ‘‘not life extending’’
VCA (c and d in the above examples),
which are not conventional organ grafts,
under the OPTN final rule. The
responder suggested that although the
OPTN should regulate control of
distribution of the grafts, these two ‘‘not
life extending’’ types (c and d) should
be subject to less oversight. The
commenter recommended new
oversight legislation that would not
hamper the innovation and utilization
of these novel types of VCA. The
Secretary wishes to make clear that
certain of the body parts discussed by
this commenter (e.g., non-vascularized
tissues, such as heart valves and
anterior cruci, bone, or nerve grafts,
regardless of whether they would be
considered life-saving or life-enhancing)
are regulated by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) as HCT/Ps. (21
CFR part 1271).
The second comment supported
limited oversight of VCA by the OPTN
at this time. The commenter supported
OPTN oversight with respect to
designation of VCA transplant
programs, data submission regarding
transplant procedures, and donor
screening. However, the commenter
does not support allocation policies for
VCA at this time due to the unknown
clinical demand and overall future of
these transplants. As noted above,
clinical demand for VCA
transplantation appears to be increasing
now that immunosuppression protocols
have proven safer and support for
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
78218
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
military and veterans VCA
transplantation programs continues to
expand. The issues concerning
allocation, recipient safety, and
outcomes reporting are similar for VCA
and for organs currently under the
OPTN’s auspices. The VCA transplant
community has clearly indicated its
support for Federal oversight of VCA as
organs through the OPTN in a letter of
request from the Association of Organ
Procurement Organizations to the
Assistant Secretary of Health (December
9, 2010) and a publication of
recommendations by the American
Society of Transplant Surgeons in 2011
(Implementation of Vascularized
Composite Allografts in the United
States, American Journal of
Transplantation (2011) 11:13–17),
The third comment did not support
including VCA within the OPTN final
rule’s definition of organs. The
comment stated that VCA do not fit as
organs under HRSA oversight due to
differences between solid organs
procured for transplantation with the
intent to save lives and VCA that are not
used in life-saving applications. It also
stated that the regulations that govern
organ donation and transplantation are
designed to maximize donation and to
provide organs to as many waiting-list
recipients as possible to avoid death due
to their medical illness. According to
the commenter, VCA recipients should
not be subject to the same risks of donor
transmissible diseases as recipients of
traditional solid organs (e.g., heart, lung,
liver, and kidney). The commenter
suggests that human-derived graft
materials which enhance lives can be
designated by Federal regulations under
oversight of FDA as either an HCT/P, a
biologic, or a medical device. However,
both traditional organs and VCA
originate from the same pool of
potential donors and therefore subject
all of these transplant recipients to
similar risks of donor transmissible
diseases. As described elsewhere, VCA
share anatomic, clinical, allocationlogistical characteristics more closely
related to those of traditional organs
than biologics or medical devices.
Therefore, in the Secretary’s view, the
appropriate way to distinguish those
body parts that should be regulated as
organs under the OPTN final rule and
those that should not be similarly
defined is based upon the properties of
the body parts themselves rather than
whether the intent is considered lifesaving or life-enhancing. The OPTN
final rule does allow some flexibility
specific to each organ such that the
OPTN may develop distinct organspecific policies tailored to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
circumstances, including risk of donor
transmissible disease by transplanting
particular organs.
The Secretary has considered
comments that VCA such as hand
transplants are not life saving and
therefore are different from organs
presently under HRSA and OPTN
oversight. The Secretary does not agree
with a direct demarcation between lifesaving organ transplants and lifeenhancing organ transplants for the
purposes of defining organs under the
OPTN final rule. The kidney has always
been included in the list of organs
governed by NOTA, the OPTN final
rule, and the OPTN. Until additional life
years provided by a kidney transplant
(as opposed to continuing dialysis) were
demonstrated, a kidney transplant was
not understood to be life-saving. This
fact did not dissuade the Congress from
determining that kidneys should be
subject to oversight under NOTA at its
original enactment in 1984. As a result,
kidney transplants are under the
purview of the OPTN final rule and the
OPTN (and subject to oversight by
HRSA). Moreover, instead of adopting
an all or nothing approach (lifeextending versus life-enhancing), it may
be better to understand improvements to
the quality of life and increases to the
length of life as coexisting on a
spectrum of benefits. Hand and face
transplants, and transplants of other
body parts qualifying as VCA under the
definition proposed here, may prove to
be more powerful in improving a
recipient’s quality and extension of life
than previously understood. In the
Secretary’s view, the appropriate way to
distinguish between those VCA that
should be regulated as organs under the
OPTN final rule and body parts that
should not be similarly defined is based
upon the properties of the body parts
themselves, rather than their potential
impact upon the lives of their
recipients.
Upon consideration of the comments
received, and for the reasons described
below, the Secretary now proposes that
transplants of VCA be regulated under
the OPTN final rule and governed by
section 301 of NOTA.
Adding VCA to the Definition of Organs
Covered by the OPTN Final Rule
Through this notice, the Department
proposes adding VCA to the definition
of organs included in the OPTN final
rule, codified at 42 CFR 121.2, through
rulemaking. When it enacted NOTA in
1984, Congress included a definition of
the term organ and authorized the
Secretary to expand this definition by
regulation. The Secretary has previously
exercised this authority and expanded
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the statutory definition of organ.
Currently, the OPTN final rule defines
covered organs as ‘‘a human kidney,
liver, heart, lung, or pancreas, or
intestine (including the esophagus,
stomach, small and/or large intestine, or
any portion of the gastrointestinal tract).
Blood vessels recovered from an organ
donor during the recovery of such
organ(s) are considered part of an organ
with which they are procured for
purposes of this part if the vessels are
intended for use in organ
transplantation and labeled ‘For use in
organ transplantation only.’’’
One of the major reasons NOTA was
enacted and affirmed by several
amendments was to establish an organ
allocation system that functions
equitably on a nationwide basis with
provisions for outcomes reporting and
evaluation. Prior to the enactment of
NOTA, deceased donor organs were
allocated regionally, based on
relationships between transplant
programs and donor hospitals. Congress
recognized the need to allocate this
national resource on a national and
equitable basis. To ensure equitable
access for those awaiting VCA
transplantation, there is a need to
provide for consistency in allocation
processes and reliable outcomes
reporting on a nationwide basis.
Appropriate Federal oversight of a
national allocation system can increase
safety of such transplants and provides
equitable and consistent national access
to such transplants while also
conveying to the public that donation
for such purpose will serve an essential
medical need. The FDA does not have
statutory authority to provide oversight
of VCA allocation, outcomes reporting,
or promotion of donation. The Secretary
believes that the rationale for a national
system of organ allocation and outcomes
reporting underlying NOTA applies to
VCA.
Once a body part is defined as an
organ under the OPTN final rule, such
body parts are excluded from the
coverage of FDA regulations governing
HCT/Ps. In addition, transplants
involving body parts defined as organs
under the OPTN final rule are subject to
the requirements of the OPTN final rule.
For example, entities performing
transplants with covered organs must
receive designation as an organ-specific
designated transplant program (in this
case, a designation as a VCA-specific
transplant program) within an OPTN
member institution. Members must
comply with data submission
requirements of the OPTN final rule and
are subject to oversight by the OPTN
contractor for compliance with OPTN
policies, OPTN bylaws, and the OPTN
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
final rule. Members may be subject to
Federal enforcement actions for
violations of Federal regulations or
enforceable policies (those approved by
the Secretary of Health and Human
Services) or for actions or inactions that
indicate a risk to health of patients or
to the public safety. Finally, OPTN
members can be subject to OPTN
sanctions for violating OPTN bylaws
and non-enforceable OPTN policies
(e.g., being declared a member not in
good standing).
As previously discussed and also
explained in ‘‘Statement of Need’’
within the ‘‘Impact of the New Rule’’
section (below), the Secretary believes
that oversight of the VCA transplants is
necessary to ensure transplant recipient
safety and to provide a consistent
allocation process nationwide that will
ensure equitable access to those waiting
for VCA transplantation., to collect data
on VCA transplant outcomes, and to
maintain the public trust in the integrity
of the VCA donation, recovery and
transplant processes. Because of the
clinical, procurement, logistical,
allocation, and outcomes reporting
similarities between VCA and organs
currently under the OPTN’s auspices,
the Secretary believes that HRSA is the
appropriate HHS agency to assure
Federal oversight over VCA
transplantation. HRSA oversees
transplantation of vascularized human
organs through the OPTN, which sets
policies related to the procurement,
transplantation, allocation, and
outcomes reporting of human organs.
The OPTN serves the critical role of
matching donor organs to potential
recipients on a national basis. The
issues concerning allocation and
recipient safety are similar for VCA and
for organs currently under the OPTN’s
auspices. Additionally, the membership
of the OPTN, which is charged with
developing policies consistent with the
OPTN final rule, includes professionals
with expertise in the field. Therefore,
the Secretary believes that the OPTN,
with HRSA’s oversight, will be able to
effectively address issues involving the
regulation of the emerging field of VCA
transplantation.
If VCA are included within the OPTN
final rule’s definition of organs,
transplants involving VCA will be
subject to the requirements of the OPTN
final rule. For example, an entity
performing VCA transplants would have
to receive designation as a VCAdesignated transplant program within
an OPTN member institution. In
addition, OPTN members would be
required to comply with the OPTN final
rule’s data submission requirements
with respect to the transplants
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
performed. Thus, the OPTN would need
to devise certain policies with respect to
VCA, including allocation policies
meeting the requirements set forth in
the OPTN final rule. Finally, OPTN
members would be subject to oversight
by the OPTN contractor for compliance
with OPTN policies extending to VCA
(e.g., those concerning donor screening
and allocation), and could be subject to
enforcement actions for violations of
such policies.
Even so, the OPTN final rule does
allow some flexibility specific to each
organ. The OPTN sometimes fashions
distinct organ-specific policies tailored
to the circumstances of transplanting
particular organs. For example, the
training of professionals working for
designated programs may vary by organ
and OPTN policies with respect to
disease transmission protocols and
testing may diverge based on
circumstances relating to particular
organs. Likewise, the particular
characteristics of and circumstances
surrounding different types of organs
lead to different OPTN allocation
policies.
In addition, if VCA are added as
covered organs under the OPTN final
rule as proposed here, the Secretary will
continue to exercise oversight over
proposed and final OPTN policies with
respect to VCA, consistent with the
authority of the Secretary under 42 CFR
121.4. Given the relatively small
numbers of other VCA transplanted at
this time, the Secretary does not expect
that the OPTN would develop allocation
policies for all VCA within a short time
frame if VCA are added to the OPTN
final rule’s definition of organs. We
expect that the OPTN will initially
create policies addressing hands and
faces as these two VCA have been the
most frequently performed VCA
transplant procedures in the U.S. and
are the subject of extensive ongoing
clinical research programs by the
Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs. We expect that the OPTN will
wait to develop allocation policies for
other VCA until the field has more
clinically evolved. Given the Secretary’s
substantial interest in VCA policy and
involvement in the operations of the
OPTN, the Secretary will be notified of
proposals to develop policies for other
VCA as they are addressed in the future.
The nature of the regulatory
framework governing the operation of
the OPTN underlies the importance of
including VCA within the definition of
organs covered by the OPTN final rule.
Under the OPTN final rule, the OPTN
must submit proposed policies for
review and approval by the Secretary
(42 CFR 121.4). Upon consideration of
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
78219
public comments on proposed policies
that are considered significant, the
Secretary will determine whether to
make such proposed policies
enforceable in accordance with section
121.10 of the OPTN final rule. The
Secretary may direct the OPTN to
develop individual policies for specific
body components that are defined as
VCA in addition to OPTN policies that
apply to all VCA. Any transplant
hospital that fails to comply with any
policy approved as enforceable by the
Secretary under this process may be
subject to the enforcement sanctions
delineated in section 121.10 of the
OPTN final rule, including possible
termination from the Medicare and
Medicaid programs.
The Secretary has the following
additional authorities provided by the
OPTN final rule (42 CFR 121.4(b)(2)),
which she may exercise in the case of
policies extending to VCA: The
Secretary may require the OPTN Board
of Directors to provide to the Secretary,
at least 60 days prior to their proposed
implementation, proposed policies on
matters that the Secretary directs. The
Secretary will refer significant proposed
policies to the Advisory Committee on
Organ Transplantation (ACOT)
established under 42 CFR 121.12, and
publish them in the Federal Register for
public comment. This is in addition to
the public comment process that is
engaged in by the OPTN.
The Secretary also may seek the
advice of the ACOT on other proposed
policies and publish them in the
Federal Register for public comment.
The Secretary will determine whether
proposed policies are consistent with
NOTA and the OPTN final rule, taking
into account the views of the ACOT and
public comments. Based on this review,
the Secretary may provide comments to
the OPTN.
If the Secretary concludes that a
proposed policy is inconsistent with
NOTA or the OPTN final rule, the
Secretary may direct the OPTN to revise
the proposed policy consistent with the
Secretary’s direction. If the OPTN does
not revise the proposed policy in a
timely manner, or if the Secretary
concludes that the proposed revision is
inconsistent with NOTA or the OPTN
final rule, the Secretary may take such
other action as the Secretary determines
appropriate, but only after additional
consultation with the ACOT on the
proposed action.
Also, the Secretary has the authority
under the OPTN Final Rule (42 CFR
121.4(a)(6)) to require the OPTN to
develop policies on such matters as the
Secretary directs.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
78220
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
The Secretary is legally obliged, as
part of her responsibilities in
administering the Medicare and
Medicaid programs, to require hospitals
that transplant organs to comply with
the rules and requirements of the OPTN
as a condition of their participation in
Medicare and Medicaid. (42 U.S.C.
1320b–8(a)(1)(B).) Because VCA are not
included within the OPTN final rule’s
definition of organs, the Secretary could
not currently make any VCA allocation
policy enforceable. If VCA are added as
covered organs under the OPTN final
rule as proposed here, the Secretary
could take appropriate enforcement
actions against an OPO or transplant
hospital for failing to comply with the
OPTN’s VCA retrieval and allocation
policy, if such a policy has been
approved as enforceable by the
Secretary under the process outlined
above. If VCA are defined as organs
under the OPTN final rule, then this
will ensure that VCA organ allocation,
whether pertaining to isolated VCA
transplants or combined/multi-organ
transplants, is consistent with OPTN
final rule’s goals, including that of an
equitable national system for organ
allocation, to be consistent with NOTA.
Even if OPTN policies pertaining to
VCA transplantation do not become
enforceable, all institutions performing
VCA transplantation would be required
to comply with the provisions of the
OPTN final rule (including the
requirement that such institutions
become members of the OPTN). Further,
such institutions could be subject to
sanctions by the OPTN for failure to
comply with allocation and other OPTN
policies. For example, a member may be
named a member not in good standing
by the OPTN for failing to comply with
such a policy.
As the field of VCA transplantation
evolves, it will become more critical
that VCA organ allocation keeps pace
with advances in the field; that the field
be subject to appropriate Federal
oversight; that policy developments
include performance indicators to assess
whether the goals of an equitable
transplant system are being achieved;
that the Secretary have the authority to
make those policies enforceable; and
that patients and physicians have timely
access to accurate data that will assist
them in making decisions regarding
VCA transplantation. Upon
consideration of the foregoing factors,
and to achieve the most equitable and
medically effective use of donated
organs, the Secretary proposes that VCA
should explicitly be added to the
definition of organs covered by the
OPTN final rule. The Secretary seeks
comments on this proposal.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
Defining Vascularized Composite
Allografts
At the time of the RFI, and to assist
the Secretary in adding VCA to the
definition of organs covered by the
OPTN final rule and/or to the definition
of human organs governed by section
301 of NOTA, HRSA sought feedback
from stakeholders and from the public
as to how such allografts should be
defined. HRSA identified two potential
approaches: (1) A broad regulatory
definition describing the common
features of VCA without listing covered
body parts; or (2) a definition listing
body parts that would qualify as VCA.
The Secretary has elected to propose
the first approach, a broad regulatory
definition that describes the features of
the allografts without listing particular
body parts. Under this approach, the
definition would extend to transplants
of particular body parts that are not
known to have been performed
clinically to date, or even to body parts
whose transplantation has not yet been
envisioned. The Secretary is proposing
which elements should be included in
the definition of VCA to be sufficiently
broad to cover the universe of intended
body parts, but narrow enough to put
the public on notice as to which parts
meet the regulatory definitions of
organs.
The Secretary proposes that for a body
part to be defined as a VCA, it must
have all the following characteristics: a
body part (1) That is vascularized and
requires blood flow by surgical
connection of blood vessels to function
after transplantation; (2) containing
multiple tissue types; (3) recovered from
a human donor as an anatomical/
structural unit; (4) transplanted into a
human recipient as an anatomical/
structural unit; (5) minimally
manipulated, (processing that does not
alter the original relevant characteristics
of the organ relating to the organ’s
utility for reconstruction, repair, or
replacement—examples of minimal
manipulation include cutting, grinding,
and shaping of a VCA); (6) for
homologous use, (the replacement or
supplementation of a recipient’s organ
with an organ that performs the same
basic function or functions in the
recipient as in the donor), (e.g., a hand
from the donor is to be used as a hand
in the recipient); (7) not combined with
another article such as a device; (8)
susceptible to ischemia and, therefore,
only stored temporarily (e.g., cold
storage in preservation medium and
intended for implantation into a
recipient within hours of the recovery)
and not cryopreserved; and (9)
susceptible to allograft rejection,
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requiring immunosuppression that may
increase infectious disease risk to the
recipient. This proposed definition is
intended to explain to the public which
body parts would be covered presently,
while allowing other body parts that are
transplanted to be covered as the field
of VCA transplantation advances. A
non-exclusive list of body parts that
would meet the proposed definition for
VCA here would include faces, hands,
fingers, toes, larynges, and abdominal
walls. Periodically, HRSA may publish
an updated list of VCA in the Federal
Register. In addition, through this
definition, the Secretary intends to
distinguish those body parts she
proposes to define as organs under the
OPTN final rule from other body parts
that are regulated as HCT/Ps under
FDA’s regulatory authority.
Under a second alternative, the
Secretary could have proposed a
definition that lists specific
transplantable body parts to be added to
the definition of organs (e.g., face, hand,
etc.). The Secretary finds this
unnecessary since the general set of
nine characteristics provide clear
identification of such body parts.
Moreover, definition by an explicit list
would likely exclude certain body parts
for which transplantation might be
possible, but not done to date (either in
the United States or internationally).
The Secretary is proposing the more
descriptive definition to avoid the need
of amending the regulatory definition to
extend its reach to new types of
transplantation that emerge in the
future.
HRSA received no negative feedback
in response to its request for
information on adopting this first
approach or on the criteria discussed in
the request for information (other than
the comment distinguishing between
those grafts that are lifesaving and those
that are life enhancing). Most of the
commenters supporting the inclusion of
VCA in the definition of organs covered
by the OPTN final rule would defer to
the physicians and surgeons involved to
determine the optimal way to define
VCA. Given that Congress authorized
the Department to modify the definition
of covered organs through rulemaking, it
would not be permissible to allow
transplant surgeons and physicians (or
others participating in the OPTN), on
their own, to define VCA for the
purposes of the final rule. However, the
Secretary seeks feedback from the
transplant community on the definition
of VCA proposed here.
Additionally, body parts allocated as
VCA are intended to be used ‘‘intact’’ as
a VCA until the transplant center
receiving the VCA determines that a
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
portion of the VCA is not needed for
transplantation of the remainder of the
VCA. If portions of a VCA are not used
in connection with the same transplant
(for example, left over bone or tendons
from a limb allocated as a VCA), such
body parts cannot be used for other
purposes including transplantation in a
different anatomical location in the
recipient who received the VCA or in a
different recipient. Disposition of such
remnants would be subject to OPTN
policies.
Because the Secretary is proposing a
definition that does not identify specific
VCA by name, the Secretary proposes
amending 42 CFR 121.4(e) to make clear
that the OPTN must identify the specific
body parts covered by any OPTN policy
specific to VCA. The purpose of this
proposal is to ensure that all OPTN
members and stakeholders understand
the body parts covered by OPTN
policies specific to VCA. Under this
proposal, any OPTN policy that applies
broadly to organs would apply to all
body parts meeting the proposed
definition for VCA unless otherwise
provided for.
State registries for organ and tissue
donors generally provide the option to
select organs, tissues, both, or neither.
In the future we anticipate that states
will likely further distinguish VCAs and
will continue to permit individuals to
select what they wish to donate. The
potential impact of including VCA in
the definition of organs on organ
donation efforts, including the number
of deceased donor organs that may
become available, has not been
explored. Therefore, the Secretary is
seeking public comment on what impact
this proposed expanded definition of
organs may have on efforts to increase
participation in deceased organ donor
registries, signing organ donor cards,
and general willingness of individuals
to agree to be deceased organ donors.
Including VCA Within the Definition of
Human Organs Covered by Section 301
of NOTA
The Secretary further proposes
including VCA within the definition of
human organs, as covered by section
301 of NOTA, which prohibits the
purchase or sale of human organs for
human transplantation. This criminal
prohibition provides in part that ‘‘[i]t
shall be unlawful for any person to
knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise
transfer any human organ for valuable
consideration for use in human
transplantation if the transfer affects
interstate commerce. The preceding
sentence does not apply with respect to
human organ paired donation.’’ (42
U.S.C. 274e(a).) Section 301 of NOTA
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
defines the term ‘‘human organ’’ to
mean ‘‘the human (including fetal)
kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas,
bone marrow, cornea, eye, bone, and
skin or any subpart thereof and any
other human organ (or any subpart
thereof, including that derived from a
fetus) specified by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services by
regulation.’’ (42 U.S.C. 274e(c)(1).)
As set forth by statute, Congress
authorized the Secretary to add
additional organs to the definition of
human organ covered by section 301
through rulemaking to include the
transplantation of additional human
organs within section 301’s prohibition.
The Secretary has previously exercised
this authority. Adding VCA to this
definition of human organs will subject
persons violating its terms to VCA to
criminal penalties.
Through this notice, the Secretary
proposes to add VCA to the list of
human organs covered by section 301 of
NOTA. The Secretary proposes
modifying 42 CFR 121.13, which
includes the definition of human organs
covered by section 301 of NOTA, to
include VCA (as defined in the
proposed amendment to section 121.2 of
the OPTN final rule). Subparts are being
added to this definition to conform with
Public Law 100–607, which added
subparts of covered human organs to the
statutory definition of human organs
governed by section 301 of NOTA.
Economic and Regulatory Impact
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
when rulemaking is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that provide the
greatest net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health,
safety, distributive and equity effects).
In addition, under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, if a rule has a significant
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities the Secretary must
specifically consider the economic
effect of a rule on small entities and
analyze regulatory options that could
lessen the impact of the rule.
Executive Order 12866 requires that
all regulations reflect consideration of
alternatives, costs, benefits, incentives,
equity, and available information.
Regulations must meet certain
standards, such as avoiding an
unnecessary burden. Regulations that
are significant because of cost, adverse
effects on the economy, inconsistency
with other agency actions, effects on the
budget, or novel legal or policy issues,
require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that
minimal resources are required to
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
78221
implement the requirements in this rule
because organizations involved (e.g.,
OPOs and transplant hospitals) already
implement related requirements for
other organs in the OPTN rule (42 CFR
121.2). Therefore, in accordance with
the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996,
which amended the RFA, the Secretary
certifies that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Secretary also has determined
that this proposed rule does not meet
the criteria for a major rule as defined
by Executive Order 12866 and would
have no major effect on the economy or
Federal expenditures. We have
determined that the proposed rule is not
a major rule within the meaning of the
statute providing for Congressional
Review of Agency Rulemaking, 5 U.S.C.
801. Similarly, it will not have effects
on State, local, and tribal governments
or on the private sector such as to
require consultation under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995.
The provisions of this rule will not
affect the following elements of family
well-being: Family safety, family
stability, marital commitment; parental
rights in the education, nurture, and
supervision of their children; family
functioning, disposable income, or
poverty; or the behavior and personal
responsibility of youth, as determined
under section 654(c) of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999.
As stated above, this proposed rule
would modify the regulations governing
the OPTN and section 301 of NOTA
based on legal authority.
Impact of the New Rule
Statement of Need
The field of VCA transplantation has
advanced from the first hand transplant
in the U.S. in 1999 to the point that
there are now more than a dozen VCA
transplant centers extending from coast
to coast involving hand, face, abdominal
wall, larynx, and possibly other body
parts. The Departments of Defense and
Veterans Affairs have invested hundreds
of millions of dollars in clinical VCA
transplantation research programs for
the benefit of wounded warriors
returning from the Iraq and Afghanistan
conflicts with extensive debilitating
injuries of the face and multiple
extremities. Although the current
activity level is less than a dozen
transplants a year in the U.S., the VCA
transplant community has begun to
encounter the expansion problems faced
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
78222
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
in the early days of organ
transplantation with ensuring equitable
access for patients to VCA, uniform
allocation policies across the U.S.,
coordination of procurement efforts,
consistent application of recovery and
logistics processes, and monitoring
patient safety with appropriate
outcomes reporting and oversight of
transplant programs.
VCA transplantation consists of
surgical transplants of a variety of body
parts that currently do not fall within
the current regulatory definition of
‘‘organ’’ covered by the rules governing
the operation of the OPTN. Face and
hand allografts, and other body parts
meeting the definition of VCA in this
notice, currently are subject to FDA
oversight under 21 CFR parts 1270 and
1271. VCA, like organs, differ from
tissues in that they must be transplanted
within hours (not months or years),
recipients require immunosuppression
drugs to prevent or treat rejection, and
the allocation process requires specific
genetic and clinical matching between
donor and recipient.
The FDA has no statutory or
regulatory authority to mandate
allocation policies, direct coordination
of procurement efforts, require
consistent application of recovery and
logistics processes, or establish
mandatory outcomes reporting and
provide oversight of VCA transplant
programs. In short, the FDA’s authority
for regulation of tissues like VCA stops
at the hospital door. Only the OPTN,
under HRSA oversight, can provide
reliable consistent and mandatory
mechanisms and infrastructure to
address these problems facing the VCA
transplant community. Recognizing the
need for such efforts to continue to
advance the field of VCA
transplantation, the VCA transplant
community specifically requested the
Secretary of the Department of Health
and Human Services to provide the
necessary regulatory change to define
those body parts meeting the definition
of VCA in this notice as ‘‘organs’’ under
the OPTN Final Rule so that VCA
transplantation can continue to progress
in an appropriate manner that will best
serve the patients in need of such
allografts.
This proposed rule would have the
effect of including VCA within the
ambit of the regulations governing the
operation of the OPTN, and would
include transplanted human VCA
within the prohibition set forth at
section 301 of NOTA. If implemented,
the proposals set forth in this rule
would authorize the Secretary to take
enforcement actions against entities
violating OPTN policies pertaining to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
the transplantation of VCA once such
policies are approved as enforceable by
the Secretary. Even if the Secretary does
not approve such policies as
enforceable, OPTN members will be
subject to enforcement actions by the
OPTN for violations of OPTN policies
extending to VCA. If this rule is
promulgated, OPTN members will be
required to comply with requirements
set forth in the OPTN final rule,
including those pertaining to data
submission, as applied to VCA. Finally,
if this proposal is implemented,
individuals violating section 301 of
NOTA with respect to VCA transplants
would be subject to criminal penalties.
If this rule takes effect, transplant
centers that perform VCA
transplantation would be required to
take the necessary steps to ensure that
VCA transplant programs are in
compliance with any policies enacted
by the OPTN specific to designated VCA
allografts (e.g. hand, face). Such policies
typically specify the clinical submission
requirements for candidate registration
on the waiting list, clinical information
of the transplant procedure, follow up
reporting on graft and patient outcomes,
and reporting of potential donor disease
transmission events.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The amendments proposed in this
notice of proposed rulemaking contain
information collection activities that are
very similar to, and based on the data
collection requirements in, the OPTN
final rule approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB No.
0915–0157 and OMB No. 0915–0184).
Membership in the OPTN is determined
by submission of application materials
to the OPTN demonstrating that the
applicant meets all required criteria for
membership and will agree to comply
with all applicable provisions of the
National Organ Transplant Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 273 et seq. Section
1138 of the Social Security Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 1320b–8 requires
that hospitals in which transplants are
performed be members of, and abide by,
the rules and requirements (as approved
by the Secretary of the HHS) of the
OPTN as a condition of participation in
Medicare and Medicaid for the hospital.
Section 1138 contains a similar
provision for the organ procurement
organizations (OPOs) and makes
membership in the OPTN and
compliance with its operating rules and
requirements (as approved by the
Secretary of the HHS), including those
relating to data collection, mandatory
for all transplant programs and OPOs.
The information is used predominantly
to match donor organs with recipients,
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to monitor compliance of member
organizations with OPTN policies and
requirements to guide organ allocation
policy development, and to report
periodically on the clinical and
scientific status of organ donation and
transplantation in this country.
The currently-approved data
collection includes worksheets and
burden for organs and describes
respondents as non-profit institutions
and small organizations, which would
be the same for this proposed rule. The
title, description, and respondent
description of all information
collections relating to VCA are shown
below with similar estimates of annual
reporting and record keeping burden as
with other organs previously approved
in the OPTN final rule.
Currently there are approximately 10
hand, 2 face, and 1 abdominal wall
transplant programs in the U.S.,
although only 7 have actually performed
a clinical transplant operation to date.
Since the current rate of VCA
transplants is less than 10 a year (hand)
and less than 1 a year (face and
abdominal wall), for reporting burden
calculations (below) we have projected
a total of 20 VCA transplant programs
each registering 2 candidates a year to
the waiting list and each program
performing 1 transplant procedure a
year. The data burden calculation in the
table below assumes that data associated
with entering deceased donor
information is already accounted in the
current OMB approved data collection
forms. Specifically, it is reasonable to
assume that any donor that would be
considered as a VCA donor is also
considered to be a donor for other
organs covered by this rule. The hourly
rate used for calculation of total burden
cost to respondents is the average
hourly wage for a transplant data
coordinator ($26.00). This rate reflects
the median annual salary and benefits
for a Data Control Clerk II
(www.salary.com) The total annual
respondent burden hours (202)
represents 10.1 hours ($262.60) per
respondent.
Title: Organ Procurement and
Transplantation Network.
Description: Information will be
collected from transplant hospitals,
organ procurement organizations, and
histocompatibility laboratories
predominantly for the purpose of
matching donor VCA with potential
recipients, monitoring compliance of
member organizations with system
rules, conducting statistical analyses,
and developing policies relating to
organ procurement and transplantation.
The practical utility of the data
collection is further enhanced by
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
requirements that the OPTN must report
a variety of data to the Secretary,
including data on performance by organ
and status category, including programspecific data, OPO specific data, data by
program size, and data aggregated by
organ procurement area, OPTN region,
the nation as a whole, and other
geographic areas (42 CFR 121.8(c)(3)).
The OPTN must also transmit proposed
allocation policies and performance
indicators which will be used to assess
the likely effects of policy changes and
to ensure that the proposed policies are
consistent with the OPTN final rule.
The OPTN and Scientific Registry
must make available to the public
timely and accurate information
concerning the performance of
transplant programs, and must respond
to requests from the public for data
needed for bona fide research or
analysis purposes or to assess the
performance of the OPTN or Scientific
Registry, to assess individual transplant
programs, or for other purposes (42 CFR
121.11(b)(1)(C)).
The OPTN must provide to each
member OPO and transplant hospital
the plans and procedures for reviewing
Number of
respondents
Responses
per
respondent
applications and for monitoring
compliance with these rules and OPTN
policies. The OPTN must also report to
the Secretary on OPOs and transplant
hospitals that may not be in compliance
with these rules or OPTN policies, and
on their progress toward compliance.
The OPTN and Scientific Registry are
required to maintain and manage the
information on candidates, donors and
recipients.
Description of Respondents: Nonprofit institutions and small
organizations. The estimated annual
reporting burden is as follows:
Total
responses
Average
hours per
response
Section
Form
121.6(c) .........
Establishing Criteria for VCA Acceptance
20
1
20
0.5
121.7(b)(4) ....
Reasons for Refusal .................................
20
50
1000
0.1
121.9(b) ........
Designated Transplant Program Requirements.
Recipient Histo-compatibility .....................
20
1
20
2.0
20
1
20
0.2
VCA Candidate Registration .....................
20
2
40
0.5
121.11(b)(2) ..
VCA Recipient Registration ......................
20
1
20
0.75
121.11(b)(2) ..
VCA Follow-Up .........................................
20
1
20
0.65
Total .......
...................................................................
20
........................
1,140
0.18
121.11(b)(2) ..
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 121
Health care, Hospitals, Organ
transplantation, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 18, 2011.
Mary Wakefield,
Administrator, Health Resources and Services
Administration.
Approved: September 7, 2011.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
Accordingly, 42 CFR part 121 is
proposed to be amended as set forth
below:
PART 121—ORGAN PROCUREMENT
AND TRANSPLANTATION NETWORK
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
1. The authority citation for part 121
continues to read as follows:
Authority: Sections 215, 371–376 of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 216,
273–274d); sections 1102, 1106, 1138 and
1871 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1302, 1306, 1320b–8 and 1395hh); and
section 301 of the National Organ Transplant
Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 274e).
§ 121.2
[Amended]
2. Amend § 121.2 to revise definition
for Organ and add definition for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
Vascularized composite allograft to read
as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
Organ means a human kidney, liver,
heart, lung, pancreas, intestine
(including the esophagus, stomach,
small and/or large intestine, or any
portion of the gastrointestinal tract), or
vascularized composite allograft
(defined in this section). Blood vessels
recovered from an organ donor during
the recovery of such organ(s) are
considered part of an organ with which
they are procured for purposes of this
part if the vessels are intended for use
in organ transplantation and labeled
‘‘For use in organ transplantation only.’’
*
*
*
*
*
Vascularized composite allograft
means a body part:
(1) That is vascularized and requires
blood flow by surgical connection of
blood vessels to function after
transplantation;
(2) Containing multiple tissue types;
(3) Recovered from a human donor as
an anatomical/structural unit;
(4) Transplanted into a human
recipient as an anatomical/structural
unit;
(5) Minimally manipulated,
(processing that does not alter the
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
78223
Total burden
hours/
cost ($)
10
$260.00
100
$2,600.00
40
$1,040.00
4
$104.00
20
$520.00
15
$390.00
13
$338.00
202
$5,252.00
original relevant characteristics of the
organ relating to the organ’s utility for
reconstruction, repair, or replacement);
(6) For homologous use, (the
replacement or supplementation of a
recipient’s organ with an organ that
performs the same basic function or
functions in the recipient as in the
donor);
(7) Not combined with another article
such as a device;
(8) Susceptible to ischemia and,
therefore, only stored temporarily and
not cryopreserved; and
(9) Susceptible to allograft rejection,
requiring immunosuppression that may
increase infectious disease risk to the
recipient.
3. In § 121.4, add paragraph (e)(3) to
read as follows:
§ 121.4 OPTN policies: Secretarial review
and appeals.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(3) identify all covered body parts in
any policies specific to vascularized
composite allografts, defined in § 121.2.
4. Revise § 121.13 to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
78224
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 242 / Friday, December 16, 2011 / Proposed Rules
§ 121.13 Definition of Human Organ Under
section 301 of the National Organ
Transplant Act of 1984, as amended.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Human organ, as covered by section
301 of the National Organ Transplant
Act of 1984, as amended, means the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:22 Dec 15, 2011
Jkt 226001
human (including fetal) kidney, liver,
heart, lung, pancreas, bone marrow,
cornea, eye, bone, skin, intestine
(including the esophagus, stomach,
small and/or large intestine, or any
portion of the gastrointestinal tract), or
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
any vascularized composite allograft
defined in § 121.2. It also means any
subpart thereof, including that derived
from a fetus.
[FR Doc. 2011–32204 Filed 12–15–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165–15–P
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 242 (Friday, December 16, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 78216-78224]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32204]
[[Page 78216]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 121
RIN 0906-AA73
Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network
AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking sets forth the Secretary's
proposal to include vascularized composite allografts, described below,
within the definition of organs covered by the rules governing the
operation of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. The
Secretary further proposes a corresponding change to the definition of
human organs covered by section 301 of the National Organ Transplant
Act of 1984, as amended.
DATES: To be considered, comments on this proposed rule must be
submitted by February 14, 2012. Subject to consideration of the
comments submitted, the Department intends to publish final
regulations.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0906-AA73, by any
of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: https://www.hrsa.gov/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments on the Agency Web site.
Email: VCATransplantation@hrsa.gov. Include RIN 0906-AA73
in the subject line of the message.
Fax: (301) 594-6095.
Mail: James Bowman, M.D., Medical Director, Division of
Transplantation, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Health Resources and
Services Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 12C-06, Rockville,
Maryland 20857.
Hand Delivery/Courier: James Bowman, M.D., Medical
Director, Division of Transplantation, Healthcare Systems Bureau,
Health Resources and Services Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room
12C-06, Rockville, Maryland 20857.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name
and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All
comments received will be posted without change to https://www.hrsa.gov/
, including any personal information provided. For detailed
instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the
rulemaking process, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to the Division of Transplantation, Healthcare
Systems Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration, 5600
Fishers Lane, Room 12C-06, Rockville, Maryland 20857 weekdays (Federal
holidays excepted) between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. To
schedule an appointment to view public comments, phone (301) 443-7757.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Bowman, M.D., at the above
address; telephone number (301) 443-4861.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The transplant community has performed
transplants of hands and various body parts using the term composite
tissue allograft; however, for the purposes of rulemaking, the Health
Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) has defined a subset of
such body parts as vascularized composite allografts (VCA), which share
certain characteristics.
Based upon a review of VCA, the Secretary believes that VCA should
now be included within the definition of organs covered by the rules
governing the operation of the Organ Procurement and Transplantation
Network (OPTN) (hereinafter the OPTN final rule) (42 CFR part 121).
This notice sets forth the history of VCA transplants, the factors that
have persuaded the Department of the advisability of including VCA
within the authority of the regulations governing the operation of the
OPTN, the Secretary's oversight of VCA, and the anticipated
consequences of this proposal. The notice also discusses the
Department's proposal to include VCA within the definition of human
organs covered by section 301 of the National Organ Transplant Act of
1984, as amended (hereinafter section 301 of NOTA).
Public Participation
Through this notice, the Secretary seeks comments from the public
on the proposals made. Additional information on the submission of
comments and/or the rulemaking process can be obtained from the
Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination, Health Resources
and Services Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 14A-11, Rockville,
Maryland 20857.
Background
VCA transplantation comprises transplants of a variety of body
parts (all of which contain similar characteristics, described later)
that are not currently regulated under the OPTN final rule. Perhaps the
two most notable types to date have been hand and face transplants. The
first successful hand transplant in the United States was performed in
1999 and the first face transplant in the U.S. was performed in 2008.
Worldwide, there have been over three dozen limb transplants, at least
a dozen transplants of portions of the face, and a small number of
transplants of other such anatomical parts (e.g., abdominal wall,
vascularized skeletal muscle, and digits). Accurate data about the
actual number of such transplants have been difficult to obtain because
there is no requirement for reporting these procedures in the U.S. Most
of the available information has been obtained from published news
accounts in the popular press and anecdotal reports in the medical
literature.
Although the body parts involved vary significantly, among their
shared characteristics is the fact that they are susceptible to
ischemia (damage or death from lack of blood flow) and that they need
revascularization, done through a surgical reconnection of blood
vessels to accomplish the transplant, as opposed to secondary ingrowth
of vessels. In viable vascularized transplants, immunosuppression is
necessary to prevent or treat rejection. This immunosuppression has
risks, which have been justified in patients needing organs as
presently defined in the OPTN final rule because of their lifesaving
potential. In the past, the risks of immunosuppression have inhibited
transplantation of VCA because the risks associated with the prolonged
use of immunosuppressive drugs were thought to exceed the expected
benefits of the transplants. However, the powerful impact these
transplants can have to improve the quality of life for individuals
with grievous disabilities has become increasingly apparent.
Immunosuppressive management for these transplants has also improved so
that risks associated with immunosuppression, such as cancer,
infection, or other morbidities in recipients, are lessened
considerably. (F Schuind, Hand transplantation and vascularized
composite tissue allografts in orthopaedics and traumatology,
Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research (2010) 96, 283-290, and
Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine Annual Report, 2009, pp
II-1 and II-62 and II-63). In recent years, the
[[Page 78217]]
Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs have initiated substantial
funding of clinical research programs for limb and face transplantation
anticipating the reconstruction needs of wounded service members
returning from the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than 1,000
military men and women have lost an arm or leg in these conflicts and
20 percent have lost two or more limbs. As of mid-summer 2010, it was
estimated that as many as 200 wounded troops might be eligible for face
transplantation and about 50 for hand/forearm transplants. Most of the
funding for limb and face transplantation research in the U.S.
currently comes from the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs
(Armed Forces Institute of Regenerative Medicine Annual Report, 2009,
pp I-1 and I-2). For these reasons, it is likely that the numbers of
VCA transplanted will increase in the future.
Human cells or tissue intended for implantation, transplantation,
infusion, or transfer into a human recipient are regulated as a human
cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products or HCT/Ps. The
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates HCT/Ps under 21 CFR parts
1270 and 1271. Examples of such tissues are bone, skin, corneas,
ligaments, tendons, dura mater, heart valves, hematopoietic stem/
progenitor cells derived from peripheral and cord blood, oocytes, and
semen. Face and hand allografts, and other body parts meeting the
proposed definition of VCA in this notice are currently not explicitly
excluded from the definition of HCT/Ps under FDA regulations and are
therefore subject to FDA oversight. The FDA has no statutory or
regulatory authority to mandate VCA allocation policies, direct
coordination of procurement efforts, require consistent application of
recovery and logistics processes, or establish mandatory outcomes
reporting and provide oversight of VCA transplant programs. FDA does
not regulate the transplantation of vascularized human organ
transplants such as kidney, liver, heart, lung, or pancreas. The Health
Resources Services Administration oversees the transplantation of
vascularized human organs.
Given the anticipated increase in VCA transplants, HRSA published a
Request for Information (RFI) on March 3, 2008, in the Federal Register
for the purpose of soliciting feedback from stakeholders and the public
as to whether VCA should be included within the definition of organs
covered by the OPTN final rule and/or added to the definition of human
organs covered by section 301 of NOTA. (73 FR 11420.) HRSA also sought
feedback on the optimal way to define VCA if either definitional change
was pursued.
Through the RFI, HRSA invited the public to attend a meeting on
April 4, 2008 to discuss the issues described above. The meeting was
well attended and provided a venue for discussion on VCA issues.
Participants were instructed to provide written comments and the
deadline for these comments to be received by HRSA was extended to July
2, 2008.
In response to its RFI, HRSA received 11 written comments about
whether VCA should be included within the definition of organs covered
by the OPTN final rule.
Eight of the written comments received supported including VCA
within the definition of organs covered under the OPTN final rule. Many
of these comments included similar supporting statements for OPTN
oversight. The commenters agreed that the use of the existing solid
organ transplant infrastructure would ensure rapid and equitable
placement of VCA; allow allocation of VCA over a wide geographic area;
facilitate identification of appropriate VCA donor and recipient pairs;
provide assurance that all VCA programs are following similar rules,
ensuring uniform and appropriate clinical and ethical standards on both
the donation and transplantation side; facilitate the development of
expertise and a body of knowledge that would be a valuable resource to
address questions from the government or the public, and in the
development of future policy and procedures in the field of VCA
transplantation; enhance public transparency, increasing public
acceptance of donation of VCA; and facilitate the protection of public
health and safety in the context of VCA transplantation. Commenters
also stated that the structure and goals of the OPTN are well aligned
with the types of clinical and ethical concerns raised by VCA
transplantation such as contingency treatment plan for complete face
graft loss and fear of loss of facial identity due to transfer of donor
facial characteristics (AJ Alexander et al, Arguing the Ethics of
Facial Transplantation, Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2010;12(1):60-63) and
with the types of entities that would be carrying out these activities,
e.g., organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers.
Of the three remaining comments, two supported partial inclusion of
VCA within the OPTN final rule's definition of organs and the third
comment did not support having VCA included within the OPTN final
rule's definition of organs. Of the two comments advocating partial
inclusion of VCA under the OPTN final rule's definition of organs, one
stated that VCA should be classified as either ``life extending'' or
``not life extending.'' Life extending VCA were described as those
involving: (a) Vascularized tissue, such as the use of abdominal wall
transplanted to close a ruptured wound in a small bowel transplant
recipient; and (b) non-vascularized tissue, such as a heart valve. Not
life extending VCA were described as those involving: (c) vascularized
tissue, such as a hand transplant; and (d) non-vascularized tissue,
such as an anterior cruci, bone, or nerve grafts. The commenter
supported including ``life extending'' VCA (a and b in the above
examples) under the definition of organs under the OPTN final rule.
According to this commenter, all life-saving VCA should follow the same
rigorous testing and screening of donors and the procurement that is
currently conducted by the OPTN contractor for organs currently covered
under the OPTN final rule. However, the responder strongly opposed
regulating ``not life extending'' VCA (c and d in the above examples),
which are not conventional organ grafts, under the OPTN final rule. The
responder suggested that although the OPTN should regulate control of
distribution of the grafts, these two ``not life extending'' types (c
and d) should be subject to less oversight. The commenter recommended
new oversight legislation that would not hamper the innovation and
utilization of these novel types of VCA. The Secretary wishes to make
clear that certain of the body parts discussed by this commenter (e.g.,
non-vascularized tissues, such as heart valves and anterior cruci,
bone, or nerve grafts, regardless of whether they would be considered
life-saving or life-enhancing) are regulated by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) as HCT/Ps. (21 CFR part 1271).
The second comment supported limited oversight of VCA by the OPTN
at this time. The commenter supported OPTN oversight with respect to
designation of VCA transplant programs, data submission regarding
transplant procedures, and donor screening. However, the commenter does
not support allocation policies for VCA at this time due to the unknown
clinical demand and overall future of these transplants. As noted
above, clinical demand for VCA transplantation appears to be increasing
now that immunosuppression protocols have proven safer and support for
[[Page 78218]]
military and veterans VCA transplantation programs continues to expand.
The issues concerning allocation, recipient safety, and outcomes
reporting are similar for VCA and for organs currently under the OPTN's
auspices. The VCA transplant community has clearly indicated its
support for Federal oversight of VCA as organs through the OPTN in a
letter of request from the Association of Organ Procurement
Organizations to the Assistant Secretary of Health (December 9, 2010)
and a publication of recommendations by the American Society of
Transplant Surgeons in 2011 (Implementation of Vascularized Composite
Allografts in the United States, American Journal of Transplantation
(2011) 11:13-17),
The third comment did not support including VCA within the OPTN
final rule's definition of organs. The comment stated that VCA do not
fit as organs under HRSA oversight due to differences between solid
organs procured for transplantation with the intent to save lives and
VCA that are not used in life-saving applications. It also stated that
the regulations that govern organ donation and transplantation are
designed to maximize donation and to provide organs to as many waiting-
list recipients as possible to avoid death due to their medical
illness. According to the commenter, VCA recipients should not be
subject to the same risks of donor transmissible diseases as recipients
of traditional solid organs (e.g., heart, lung, liver, and kidney). The
commenter suggests that human-derived graft materials which enhance
lives can be designated by Federal regulations under oversight of FDA
as either an HCT/P, a biologic, or a medical device. However, both
traditional organs and VCA originate from the same pool of potential
donors and therefore subject all of these transplant recipients to
similar risks of donor transmissible diseases. As described elsewhere,
VCA share anatomic, clinical, allocation-logistical characteristics
more closely related to those of traditional organs than biologics or
medical devices. Therefore, in the Secretary's view, the appropriate
way to distinguish those body parts that should be regulated as organs
under the OPTN final rule and those that should not be similarly
defined is based upon the properties of the body parts themselves
rather than whether the intent is considered life-saving or life-
enhancing. The OPTN final rule does allow some flexibility specific to
each organ such that the OPTN may develop distinct organ-specific
policies tailored to the circumstances, including risk of donor
transmissible disease by transplanting particular organs.
The Secretary has considered comments that VCA such as hand
transplants are not life saving and therefore are different from organs
presently under HRSA and OPTN oversight. The Secretary does not agree
with a direct demarcation between life-saving organ transplants and
life-enhancing organ transplants for the purposes of defining organs
under the OPTN final rule. The kidney has always been included in the
list of organs governed by NOTA, the OPTN final rule, and the OPTN.
Until additional life years provided by a kidney transplant (as opposed
to continuing dialysis) were demonstrated, a kidney transplant was not
understood to be life-saving. This fact did not dissuade the Congress
from determining that kidneys should be subject to oversight under NOTA
at its original enactment in 1984. As a result, kidney transplants are
under the purview of the OPTN final rule and the OPTN (and subject to
oversight by HRSA). Moreover, instead of adopting an all or nothing
approach (life-extending versus life-enhancing), it may be better to
understand improvements to the quality of life and increases to the
length of life as coexisting on a spectrum of benefits. Hand and face
transplants, and transplants of other body parts qualifying as VCA
under the definition proposed here, may prove to be more powerful in
improving a recipient's quality and extension of life than previously
understood. In the Secretary's view, the appropriate way to distinguish
between those VCA that should be regulated as organs under the OPTN
final rule and body parts that should not be similarly defined is based
upon the properties of the body parts themselves, rather than their
potential impact upon the lives of their recipients.
Upon consideration of the comments received, and for the reasons
described below, the Secretary now proposes that transplants of VCA be
regulated under the OPTN final rule and governed by section 301 of
NOTA.
Adding VCA to the Definition of Organs Covered by the OPTN Final Rule
Through this notice, the Department proposes adding VCA to the
definition of organs included in the OPTN final rule, codified at 42
CFR 121.2, through rulemaking. When it enacted NOTA in 1984, Congress
included a definition of the term organ and authorized the Secretary to
expand this definition by regulation. The Secretary has previously
exercised this authority and expanded the statutory definition of
organ. Currently, the OPTN final rule defines covered organs as ``a
human kidney, liver, heart, lung, or pancreas, or intestine (including
the esophagus, stomach, small and/or large intestine, or any portion of
the gastrointestinal tract). Blood vessels recovered from an organ
donor during the recovery of such organ(s) are considered part of an
organ with which they are procured for purposes of this part if the
vessels are intended for use in organ transplantation and labeled `For
use in organ transplantation only.'''
One of the major reasons NOTA was enacted and affirmed by several
amendments was to establish an organ allocation system that functions
equitably on a nationwide basis with provisions for outcomes reporting
and evaluation. Prior to the enactment of NOTA, deceased donor organs
were allocated regionally, based on relationships between transplant
programs and donor hospitals. Congress recognized the need to allocate
this national resource on a national and equitable basis. To ensure
equitable access for those awaiting VCA transplantation, there is a
need to provide for consistency in allocation processes and reliable
outcomes reporting on a nationwide basis. Appropriate Federal oversight
of a national allocation system can increase safety of such transplants
and provides equitable and consistent national access to such
transplants while also conveying to the public that donation for such
purpose will serve an essential medical need. The FDA does not have
statutory authority to provide oversight of VCA allocation, outcomes
reporting, or promotion of donation. The Secretary believes that the
rationale for a national system of organ allocation and outcomes
reporting underlying NOTA applies to VCA.
Once a body part is defined as an organ under the OPTN final rule,
such body parts are excluded from the coverage of FDA regulations
governing HCT/Ps. In addition, transplants involving body parts defined
as organs under the OPTN final rule are subject to the requirements of
the OPTN final rule. For example, entities performing transplants with
covered organs must receive designation as an organ-specific designated
transplant program (in this case, a designation as a VCA-specific
transplant program) within an OPTN member institution. Members must
comply with data submission requirements of the OPTN final rule and are
subject to oversight by the OPTN contractor for compliance with OPTN
policies, OPTN bylaws, and the OPTN
[[Page 78219]]
final rule. Members may be subject to Federal enforcement actions for
violations of Federal regulations or enforceable policies (those
approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services) or for actions
or inactions that indicate a risk to health of patients or to the
public safety. Finally, OPTN members can be subject to OPTN sanctions
for violating OPTN bylaws and non-enforceable OPTN policies (e.g.,
being declared a member not in good standing).
As previously discussed and also explained in ``Statement of Need''
within the ``Impact of the New Rule'' section (below), the Secretary
believes that oversight of the VCA transplants is necessary to ensure
transplant recipient safety and to provide a consistent allocation
process nationwide that will ensure equitable access to those waiting
for VCA transplantation., to collect data on VCA transplant outcomes,
and to maintain the public trust in the integrity of the VCA donation,
recovery and transplant processes. Because of the clinical,
procurement, logistical, allocation, and outcomes reporting
similarities between VCA and organs currently under the OPTN's
auspices, the Secretary believes that HRSA is the appropriate HHS
agency to assure Federal oversight over VCA transplantation. HRSA
oversees transplantation of vascularized human organs through the OPTN,
which sets policies related to the procurement, transplantation,
allocation, and outcomes reporting of human organs. The OPTN serves the
critical role of matching donor organs to potential recipients on a
national basis. The issues concerning allocation and recipient safety
are similar for VCA and for organs currently under the OPTN's auspices.
Additionally, the membership of the OPTN, which is charged with
developing policies consistent with the OPTN final rule, includes
professionals with expertise in the field. Therefore, the Secretary
believes that the OPTN, with HRSA's oversight, will be able to
effectively address issues involving the regulation of the emerging
field of VCA transplantation.
If VCA are included within the OPTN final rule's definition of
organs, transplants involving VCA will be subject to the requirements
of the OPTN final rule. For example, an entity performing VCA
transplants would have to receive designation as a VCA-designated
transplant program within an OPTN member institution. In addition, OPTN
members would be required to comply with the OPTN final rule's data
submission requirements with respect to the transplants performed.
Thus, the OPTN would need to devise certain policies with respect to
VCA, including allocation policies meeting the requirements set forth
in the OPTN final rule. Finally, OPTN members would be subject to
oversight by the OPTN contractor for compliance with OPTN policies
extending to VCA (e.g., those concerning donor screening and
allocation), and could be subject to enforcement actions for violations
of such policies.
Even so, the OPTN final rule does allow some flexibility specific
to each organ. The OPTN sometimes fashions distinct organ-specific
policies tailored to the circumstances of transplanting particular
organs. For example, the training of professionals working for
designated programs may vary by organ and OPTN policies with respect to
disease transmission protocols and testing may diverge based on
circumstances relating to particular organs. Likewise, the particular
characteristics of and circumstances surrounding different types of
organs lead to different OPTN allocation policies.
In addition, if VCA are added as covered organs under the OPTN
final rule as proposed here, the Secretary will continue to exercise
oversight over proposed and final OPTN policies with respect to VCA,
consistent with the authority of the Secretary under 42 CFR 121.4.
Given the relatively small numbers of other VCA transplanted at this
time, the Secretary does not expect that the OPTN would develop
allocation policies for all VCA within a short time frame if VCA are
added to the OPTN final rule's definition of organs. We expect that the
OPTN will initially create policies addressing hands and faces as these
two VCA have been the most frequently performed VCA transplant
procedures in the U.S. and are the subject of extensive ongoing
clinical research programs by the Departments of Defense and Veterans
Affairs. We expect that the OPTN will wait to develop allocation
policies for other VCA until the field has more clinically evolved.
Given the Secretary's substantial interest in VCA policy and
involvement in the operations of the OPTN, the Secretary will be
notified of proposals to develop policies for other VCA as they are
addressed in the future.
The nature of the regulatory framework governing the operation of
the OPTN underlies the importance of including VCA within the
definition of organs covered by the OPTN final rule. Under the OPTN
final rule, the OPTN must submit proposed policies for review and
approval by the Secretary (42 CFR 121.4). Upon consideration of public
comments on proposed policies that are considered significant, the
Secretary will determine whether to make such proposed policies
enforceable in accordance with section 121.10 of the OPTN final rule.
The Secretary may direct the OPTN to develop individual policies for
specific body components that are defined as VCA in addition to OPTN
policies that apply to all VCA. Any transplant hospital that fails to
comply with any policy approved as enforceable by the Secretary under
this process may be subject to the enforcement sanctions delineated in
section 121.10 of the OPTN final rule, including possible termination
from the Medicare and Medicaid programs.
The Secretary has the following additional authorities provided by
the OPTN final rule (42 CFR 121.4(b)(2)), which she may exercise in the
case of policies extending to VCA: The Secretary may require the OPTN
Board of Directors to provide to the Secretary, at least 60 days prior
to their proposed implementation, proposed policies on matters that the
Secretary directs. The Secretary will refer significant proposed
policies to the Advisory Committee on Organ Transplantation (ACOT)
established under 42 CFR 121.12, and publish them in the Federal
Register for public comment. This is in addition to the public comment
process that is engaged in by the OPTN.
The Secretary also may seek the advice of the ACOT on other
proposed policies and publish them in the Federal Register for public
comment.
The Secretary will determine whether proposed policies are
consistent with NOTA and the OPTN final rule, taking into account the
views of the ACOT and public comments. Based on this review, the
Secretary may provide comments to the OPTN.
If the Secretary concludes that a proposed policy is inconsistent
with NOTA or the OPTN final rule, the Secretary may direct the OPTN to
revise the proposed policy consistent with the Secretary's direction.
If the OPTN does not revise the proposed policy in a timely manner, or
if the Secretary concludes that the proposed revision is inconsistent
with NOTA or the OPTN final rule, the Secretary may take such other
action as the Secretary determines appropriate, but only after
additional consultation with the ACOT on the proposed action.
Also, the Secretary has the authority under the OPTN Final Rule (42
CFR 121.4(a)(6)) to require the OPTN to develop policies on such
matters as the Secretary directs.
[[Page 78220]]
The Secretary is legally obliged, as part of her responsibilities
in administering the Medicare and Medicaid programs, to require
hospitals that transplant organs to comply with the rules and
requirements of the OPTN as a condition of their participation in
Medicare and Medicaid. (42 U.S.C. 1320b-8(a)(1)(B).) Because VCA are
not included within the OPTN final rule's definition of organs, the
Secretary could not currently make any VCA allocation policy
enforceable. If VCA are added as covered organs under the OPTN final
rule as proposed here, the Secretary could take appropriate enforcement
actions against an OPO or transplant hospital for failing to comply
with the OPTN's VCA retrieval and allocation policy, if such a policy
has been approved as enforceable by the Secretary under the process
outlined above. If VCA are defined as organs under the OPTN final rule,
then this will ensure that VCA organ allocation, whether pertaining to
isolated VCA transplants or combined/multi-organ transplants, is
consistent with OPTN final rule's goals, including that of an equitable
national system for organ allocation, to be consistent with NOTA.
Even if OPTN policies pertaining to VCA transplantation do not
become enforceable, all institutions performing VCA transplantation
would be required to comply with the provisions of the OPTN final rule
(including the requirement that such institutions become members of the
OPTN). Further, such institutions could be subject to sanctions by the
OPTN for failure to comply with allocation and other OPTN policies. For
example, a member may be named a member not in good standing by the
OPTN for failing to comply with such a policy.
As the field of VCA transplantation evolves, it will become more
critical that VCA organ allocation keeps pace with advances in the
field; that the field be subject to appropriate Federal oversight; that
policy developments include performance indicators to assess whether
the goals of an equitable transplant system are being achieved; that
the Secretary have the authority to make those policies enforceable;
and that patients and physicians have timely access to accurate data
that will assist them in making decisions regarding VCA
transplantation. Upon consideration of the foregoing factors, and to
achieve the most equitable and medically effective use of donated
organs, the Secretary proposes that VCA should explicitly be added to
the definition of organs covered by the OPTN final rule. The Secretary
seeks comments on this proposal.
Defining Vascularized Composite Allografts
At the time of the RFI, and to assist the Secretary in adding VCA
to the definition of organs covered by the OPTN final rule and/or to
the definition of human organs governed by section 301 of NOTA, HRSA
sought feedback from stakeholders and from the public as to how such
allografts should be defined. HRSA identified two potential approaches:
(1) A broad regulatory definition describing the common features of VCA
without listing covered body parts; or (2) a definition listing body
parts that would qualify as VCA.
The Secretary has elected to propose the first approach, a broad
regulatory definition that describes the features of the allografts
without listing particular body parts. Under this approach, the
definition would extend to transplants of particular body parts that
are not known to have been performed clinically to date, or even to
body parts whose transplantation has not yet been envisioned. The
Secretary is proposing which elements should be included in the
definition of VCA to be sufficiently broad to cover the universe of
intended body parts, but narrow enough to put the public on notice as
to which parts meet the regulatory definitions of organs.
The Secretary proposes that for a body part to be defined as a VCA,
it must have all the following characteristics: a body part (1) That is
vascularized and requires blood flow by surgical connection of blood
vessels to function after transplantation; (2) containing multiple
tissue types; (3) recovered from a human donor as an anatomical/
structural unit; (4) transplanted into a human recipient as an
anatomical/structural unit; (5) minimally manipulated, (processing that
does not alter the original relevant characteristics of the organ
relating to the organ's utility for reconstruction, repair, or
replacement--examples of minimal manipulation include cutting,
grinding, and shaping of a VCA); (6) for homologous use, (the
replacement or supplementation of a recipient's organ with an organ
that performs the same basic function or functions in the recipient as
in the donor), (e.g., a hand from the donor is to be used as a hand in
the recipient); (7) not combined with another article such as a device;
(8) susceptible to ischemia and, therefore, only stored temporarily
(e.g., cold storage in preservation medium and intended for
implantation into a recipient within hours of the recovery) and not
cryopreserved; and (9) susceptible to allograft rejection, requiring
immunosuppression that may increase infectious disease risk to the
recipient. This proposed definition is intended to explain to the
public which body parts would be covered presently, while allowing
other body parts that are transplanted to be covered as the field of
VCA transplantation advances. A non-exclusive list of body parts that
would meet the proposed definition for VCA here would include faces,
hands, fingers, toes, larynges, and abdominal walls. Periodically, HRSA
may publish an updated list of VCA in the Federal Register. In
addition, through this definition, the Secretary intends to distinguish
those body parts she proposes to define as organs under the OPTN final
rule from other body parts that are regulated as HCT/Ps under FDA's
regulatory authority.
Under a second alternative, the Secretary could have proposed a
definition that lists specific transplantable body parts to be added to
the definition of organs (e.g., face, hand, etc.). The Secretary finds
this unnecessary since the general set of nine characteristics provide
clear identification of such body parts. Moreover, definition by an
explicit list would likely exclude certain body parts for which
transplantation might be possible, but not done to date (either in the
United States or internationally). The Secretary is proposing the more
descriptive definition to avoid the need of amending the regulatory
definition to extend its reach to new types of transplantation that
emerge in the future.
HRSA received no negative feedback in response to its request for
information on adopting this first approach or on the criteria
discussed in the request for information (other than the comment
distinguishing between those grafts that are lifesaving and those that
are life enhancing). Most of the commenters supporting the inclusion of
VCA in the definition of organs covered by the OPTN final rule would
defer to the physicians and surgeons involved to determine the optimal
way to define VCA. Given that Congress authorized the Department to
modify the definition of covered organs through rulemaking, it would
not be permissible to allow transplant surgeons and physicians (or
others participating in the OPTN), on their own, to define VCA for the
purposes of the final rule. However, the Secretary seeks feedback from
the transplant community on the definition of VCA proposed here.
Additionally, body parts allocated as VCA are intended to be used
``intact'' as a VCA until the transplant center receiving the VCA
determines that a
[[Page 78221]]
portion of the VCA is not needed for transplantation of the remainder
of the VCA. If portions of a VCA are not used in connection with the
same transplant (for example, left over bone or tendons from a limb
allocated as a VCA), such body parts cannot be used for other purposes
including transplantation in a different anatomical location in the
recipient who received the VCA or in a different recipient. Disposition
of such remnants would be subject to OPTN policies.
Because the Secretary is proposing a definition that does not
identify specific VCA by name, the Secretary proposes amending 42 CFR
121.4(e) to make clear that the OPTN must identify the specific body
parts covered by any OPTN policy specific to VCA. The purpose of this
proposal is to ensure that all OPTN members and stakeholders understand
the body parts covered by OPTN policies specific to VCA. Under this
proposal, any OPTN policy that applies broadly to organs would apply to
all body parts meeting the proposed definition for VCA unless otherwise
provided for.
State registries for organ and tissue donors generally provide the
option to select organs, tissues, both, or neither. In the future we
anticipate that states will likely further distinguish VCAs and will
continue to permit individuals to select what they wish to donate. The
potential impact of including VCA in the definition of organs on organ
donation efforts, including the number of deceased donor organs that
may become available, has not been explored. Therefore, the Secretary
is seeking public comment on what impact this proposed expanded
definition of organs may have on efforts to increase participation in
deceased organ donor registries, signing organ donor cards, and general
willingness of individuals to agree to be deceased organ donors.
Including VCA Within the Definition of Human Organs Covered by Section
301 of NOTA
The Secretary further proposes including VCA within the definition
of human organs, as covered by section 301 of NOTA, which prohibits the
purchase or sale of human organs for human transplantation. This
criminal prohibition provides in part that ``[i]t shall be unlawful for
any person to knowingly acquire, receive, or otherwise transfer any
human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation
if the transfer affects interstate commerce. The preceding sentence
does not apply with respect to human organ paired donation.'' (42
U.S.C. 274e(a).) Section 301 of NOTA defines the term ``human organ''
to mean ``the human (including fetal) kidney, liver, heart, lung,
pancreas, bone marrow, cornea, eye, bone, and skin or any subpart
thereof and any other human organ (or any subpart thereof, including
that derived from a fetus) specified by the Secretary of Health and
Human Services by regulation.'' (42 U.S.C. 274e(c)(1).)
As set forth by statute, Congress authorized the Secretary to add
additional organs to the definition of human organ covered by section
301 through rulemaking to include the transplantation of additional
human organs within section 301's prohibition. The Secretary has
previously exercised this authority. Adding VCA to this definition of
human organs will subject persons violating its terms to VCA to
criminal penalties.
Through this notice, the Secretary proposes to add VCA to the list
of human organs covered by section 301 of NOTA. The Secretary proposes
modifying 42 CFR 121.13, which includes the definition of human organs
covered by section 301 of NOTA, to include VCA (as defined in the
proposed amendment to section 121.2 of the OPTN final rule). Subparts
are being added to this definition to conform with Public Law 100-607,
which added subparts of covered human organs to the statutory
definition of human organs governed by section 301 of NOTA.
Economic and Regulatory Impact
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when rulemaking is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that provide the greatest
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health, safety, distributive and equity effects). In addition, under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act, if a rule has a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities the Secretary must
specifically consider the economic effect of a rule on small entities
and analyze regulatory options that could lessen the impact of the
rule.
Executive Order 12866 requires that all regulations reflect
consideration of alternatives, costs, benefits, incentives, equity, and
available information. Regulations must meet certain standards, such as
avoiding an unnecessary burden. Regulations that are significant
because of cost, adverse effects on the economy, inconsistency with
other agency actions, effects on the budget, or novel legal or policy
issues, require special analysis.
The Secretary has determined that minimal resources are required to
implement the requirements in this rule because organizations involved
(e.g., OPOs and transplant hospitals) already implement related
requirements for other organs in the OPTN rule (42 CFR 121.2).
Therefore, in accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA), and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 1996, which
amended the RFA, the Secretary certifies that this rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Secretary also has determined that this proposed rule does not
meet the criteria for a major rule as defined by Executive Order 12866
and would have no major effect on the economy or Federal expenditures.
We have determined that the proposed rule is not a major rule within
the meaning of the statute providing for Congressional Review of Agency
Rulemaking, 5 U.S.C. 801. Similarly, it will not have effects on State,
local, and tribal governments or on the private sector such as to
require consultation under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The provisions of this rule will not affect the following elements
of family well-being: Family safety, family stability, marital
commitment; parental rights in the education, nurture, and supervision
of their children; family functioning, disposable income, or poverty;
or the behavior and personal responsibility of youth, as determined
under section 654(c) of the Treasury and General Government
Appropriations Act of 1999.
As stated above, this proposed rule would modify the regulations
governing the OPTN and section 301 of NOTA based on legal authority.
Impact of the New Rule
Statement of Need
The field of VCA transplantation has advanced from the first hand
transplant in the U.S. in 1999 to the point that there are now more
than a dozen VCA transplant centers extending from coast to coast
involving hand, face, abdominal wall, larynx, and possibly other body
parts. The Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs have invested
hundreds of millions of dollars in clinical VCA transplantation
research programs for the benefit of wounded warriors returning from
the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts with extensive debilitating injuries
of the face and multiple extremities. Although the current activity
level is less than a dozen transplants a year in the U.S., the VCA
transplant community has begun to encounter the expansion problems
faced
[[Page 78222]]
in the early days of organ transplantation with ensuring equitable
access for patients to VCA, uniform allocation policies across the
U.S., coordination of procurement efforts, consistent application of
recovery and logistics processes, and monitoring patient safety with
appropriate outcomes reporting and oversight of transplant programs.
VCA transplantation consists of surgical transplants of a variety
of body parts that currently do not fall within the current regulatory
definition of ``organ'' covered by the rules governing the operation of
the OPTN. Face and hand allografts, and other body parts meeting the
definition of VCA in this notice, currently are subject to FDA
oversight under 21 CFR parts 1270 and 1271. VCA, like organs, differ
from tissues in that they must be transplanted within hours (not months
or years), recipients require immunosuppression drugs to prevent or
treat rejection, and the allocation process requires specific genetic
and clinical matching between donor and recipient.
The FDA has no statutory or regulatory authority to mandate
allocation policies, direct coordination of procurement efforts,
require consistent application of recovery and logistics processes, or
establish mandatory outcomes reporting and provide oversight of VCA
transplant programs. In short, the FDA's authority for regulation of
tissues like VCA stops at the hospital door. Only the OPTN, under HRSA
oversight, can provide reliable consistent and mandatory mechanisms and
infrastructure to address these problems facing the VCA transplant
community. Recognizing the need for such efforts to continue to advance
the field of VCA transplantation, the VCA transplant community
specifically requested the Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services to provide the necessary regulatory change to define
those body parts meeting the definition of VCA in this notice as
``organs'' under the OPTN Final Rule so that VCA transplantation can
continue to progress in an appropriate manner that will best serve the
patients in need of such allografts.
This proposed rule would have the effect of including VCA within
the ambit of the regulations governing the operation of the OPTN, and
would include transplanted human VCA within the prohibition set forth
at section 301 of NOTA. If implemented, the proposals set forth in this
rule would authorize the Secretary to take enforcement actions against
entities violating OPTN policies pertaining to the transplantation of
VCA once such policies are approved as enforceable by the Secretary.
Even if the Secretary does not approve such policies as enforceable,
OPTN members will be subject to enforcement actions by the OPTN for
violations of OPTN policies extending to VCA. If this rule is
promulgated, OPTN members will be required to comply with requirements
set forth in the OPTN final rule, including those pertaining to data
submission, as applied to VCA. Finally, if this proposal is
implemented, individuals violating section 301 of NOTA with respect to
VCA transplants would be subject to criminal penalties.
If this rule takes effect, transplant centers that perform VCA
transplantation would be required to take the necessary steps to ensure
that VCA transplant programs are in compliance with any policies
enacted by the OPTN specific to designated VCA allografts (e.g. hand,
face). Such policies typically specify the clinical submission
requirements for candidate registration on the waiting list, clinical
information of the transplant procedure, follow up reporting on graft
and patient outcomes, and reporting of potential donor disease
transmission events.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The amendments proposed in this notice of proposed rulemaking
contain information collection activities that are very similar to, and
based on the data collection requirements in, the OPTN final rule
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB No. 0915-0157 and
OMB No. 0915-0184). Membership in the OPTN is determined by submission
of application materials to the OPTN demonstrating that the applicant
meets all required criteria for membership and will agree to comply
with all applicable provisions of the National Organ Transplant Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 273 et seq. Section 1138 of the Social Security Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1320b-8 requires that hospitals in which
transplants are performed be members of, and abide by, the rules and
requirements (as approved by the Secretary of the HHS) of the OPTN as a
condition of participation in Medicare and Medicaid for the hospital.
Section 1138 contains a similar provision for the organ procurement
organizations (OPOs) and makes membership in the OPTN and compliance
with its operating rules and requirements (as approved by the Secretary
of the HHS), including those relating to data collection, mandatory for
all transplant programs and OPOs. The information is used predominantly
to match donor organs with recipients, to monitor compliance of member
organizations with OPTN policies and requirements to guide organ
allocation policy development, and to report periodically on the
clinical and scientific status of organ donation and transplantation in
this country.
The currently-approved data collection includes worksheets and
burden for organs and describes respondents as non-profit institutions
and small organizations, which would be the same for this proposed
rule. The title, description, and respondent description of all
information collections relating to VCA are shown below with similar
estimates of annual reporting and record keeping burden as with other
organs previously approved in the OPTN final rule.
Currently there are approximately 10 hand, 2 face, and 1 abdominal
wall transplant programs in the U.S., although only 7 have actually
performed a clinical transplant operation to date. Since the current
rate of VCA transplants is less than 10 a year (hand) and less than 1 a
year (face and abdominal wall), for reporting burden calculations
(below) we have projected a total of 20 VCA transplant programs each
registering 2 candidates a year to the waiting list and each program
performing 1 transplant procedure a year. The data burden calculation
in the table below assumes that data associated with entering deceased
donor information is already accounted in the current OMB approved data
collection forms. Specifically, it is reasonable to assume that any
donor that would be considered as a VCA donor is also considered to be
a donor for other organs covered by this rule. The hourly rate used for
calculation of total burden cost to respondents is the average hourly
wage for a transplant data coordinator ($26.00). This rate reflects the
median annual salary and benefits for a Data Control Clerk II
(www.salary.com) The total annual respondent burden hours (202)
represents 10.1 hours ($262.60) per respondent.
Title: Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
Description: Information will be collected from transplant
hospitals, organ procurement organizations, and histocompatibility
laboratories predominantly for the purpose of matching donor VCA with
potential recipients, monitoring compliance of member organizations
with system rules, conducting statistical analyses, and developing
policies relating to organ procurement and transplantation.
The practical utility of the data collection is further enhanced by
[[Page 78223]]
requirements that the OPTN must report a variety of data to the
Secretary, including data on performance by organ and status category,
including program-specific data, OPO specific data, data by program
size, and data aggregated by organ procurement area, OPTN region, the
nation as a whole, and other geographic areas (42 CFR 121.8(c)(3)). The
OPTN must also transmit proposed allocation policies and performance
indicators which will be used to assess the likely effects of policy
changes and to ensure that the proposed policies are consistent with
the OPTN final rule.
The OPTN and Scientific Registry must make available to the public
timely and accurate information concerning the performance of
transplant programs, and must respond to requests from the public for
data needed for bona fide research or analysis purposes or to assess
the performance of the OPTN or Scientific Registry, to assess
individual transplant programs, or for other purposes (42 CFR
121.11(b)(1)(C)).
The OPTN must provide to each member OPO and transplant hospital
the plans and procedures for reviewing applications and for monitoring
compliance with these rules and OPTN policies. The OPTN must also
report to the Secretary on OPOs and transplant hospitals that may not
be in compliance with these rules or OPTN policies, and on their
progress toward compliance.
The OPTN and Scientific Registry are required to maintain and
manage the information on candidates, donors and recipients.
Description of Respondents: Non-profit institutions and small
organizations. The estimated annual reporting burden is as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total burden
Section Form Number of Responses per Total Average hours hours/ cost
respondents respondent responses per response ($)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
121.6(c).......................... Establishing Criteria for VCA 20 1 20 0.5 10
Acceptance. $260.00
121.7(b)(4)....................... Reasons for Refusal................. 20 50 1000 0.1 100
$2,600.00
121.9(b).......................... Designated Transplant Program 20 1 20 2.0 40
Requirements. $1,040.00
121.11(b)(2)...................... Recipient Histo-compatibility....... 20 1 20 0.2 4
$104.00
VCA Candidate Registration.......... 20 2 40 0.5 20
$520.00
121.11(b)(2)...................... VCA Recipient Registration.......... 20 1 20 0.75 15
$390.00
121.11(b)(2)...................... VCA Follow-Up....................... 20 1 20 0.65 13
$338.00
Total......................... .................................... 20 .............. 1,140 0.18 202
$5,252.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 42 CFR Part 121
Health care, Hospitals, Organ transplantation, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 18, 2011.
Mary Wakefield,
Administrator, Health Resources and Services Administration.
Approved: September 7, 2011.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
Accordingly, 42 CFR part 121 is proposed to be amended as set forth
below:
PART 121--ORGAN PROCUREMENT AND TRANSPLANTATION NETWORK
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sections 215, 371-376 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 273-274d); sections 1102, 1106, 1138 and 1871 of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302, 1306, 1320b-8 and 1395hh);
and section 301 of the National Organ Transplant Act, as amended (42
U.S.C. 274e).
Sec. 121.2 [Amended]
2. Amend Sec. 121.2 to revise definition for Organ and add
definition for Vascularized composite allograft to read as follows:
* * * * *
Organ means a human kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, intestine
(including the esophagus, stomach, small and/or large intestine, or any
portion of the gastrointestinal tract), or vascularized composite
allograft (defined in this section). Blood vessels recovered from an
organ donor during the recovery of such organ(s) are considered part of
an organ with which they are procured for purposes of this part if the
vessels are intended for use in organ transplantation and labeled ``For
use in organ transplantation only.''
* * * * *
Vascularized composite allograft means a body part:
(1) That is vascularized and requires blood flow by surgical
connection of blood vessels to function after transplantation;
(2) Containing multiple tissue types;
(3) Recovered from a human donor as an anatomical/structural unit;
(4) Transplanted into a human recipient as an anatomical/structural
unit;
(5) Minimally manipulated, (processing that does not alter the
original relevant characteristics of the organ relating to the organ's
utility for reconstruction, repair, or replacement);
(6) For homologous use, (the replacement or supplementation of a
recipient's organ with an organ that performs the same basic function
or functions in the recipient as in the donor);
(7) Not combined with another article such as a device;
(8) Susceptible to ischemia and, therefore, only stored temporarily
and not cryopreserved; and
(9) Susceptible to allograft rejection, requiring immunosuppression
that may increase infectious disease risk to the recipient.
3. In Sec. 121.4, add paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 121.4 OPTN policies: Secretarial review and appeals.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) identify all covered body parts in any policies specific to
vascularized composite allografts, defined in Sec. 121.2.
4. Revise Sec. 121.13 to read as follows:
[[Page 78224]]
Sec. 121.13 Definition of Human Organ Under section 301 of the
National Organ Transplant Act of 1984, as amended.
Human organ, as covered by section 301 of the National Organ
Transplant Act of 1984, as amended, means the human (including fetal)
kidney, liver, heart, lung, pancreas, bone marrow, cornea, eye, bone,
skin, intestine (including the esophagus, stomach, small and/or large
intestine, or any portion of the gastrointestinal tract), or any
vascularized composite allograft defined in Sec. 121.2. It also means
any subpart thereof, including that derived from a fetus.
[FR Doc. 2011-32204 Filed 12-15-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P