Mepergan Fortis Capsules; Final Decision on Proposal To Refuse Approval of Supplemental New Drug Application; Availability of Final Decision, 53507-53508 [2017-24806]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Notices
insert the docket number, found in
brackets in the heading of this
document, into the ‘‘Search’’ box and
follow the prompts and/or go to the
Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday. Publicly available
submissions may be seen in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachael Vieder Linowes, Office of
Scientific Integrity, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4206, Silver Spring,
MD 20993, 240–402–5931.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
default.htm, or https://
www.regulations.gov.
Dated: November 13, 2017.
Anna K. Abram,
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning,
Legislation, and Analysis.
[FR Doc. 2017–24831 Filed 11–15–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–1981–N–0245 (Formerly
81N–0080)]
I. Background
Mepergan Fortis Capsules; Final
Decision on Proposal To Refuse
Approval of Supplemental New Drug
Application; Availability of Final
Decision
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration;
HHS.
ACTION:
Notice.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing that the Initial Decision of
the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), to
refuse approval of the supplemental
new drug application (sNDA) for
Mepergan Fortis Capsules (MFC)
(meperidine HCl, promethazine HCl), is
the final decision of the Commissioner
by operation of law. In the Initial
Decision, the ALJ found that MFC had
not been shown to be supported by
substantial evidence consisting of
adequate and well-controlled studies to
be effective for sedation and analgesia in
patients with concurrent moderate pain
and apprehension, such as
postoperative and post-trauma patients
with those symptoms; that the drug did
not satisfy the combination drug policy;
and that it is a ‘‘new drug.’’ The sNDA
applicant filed exceptions to the ALJ’s
Initial Decision. FDA recently requested
that the current owner of the sNDA
application affirm its desire to pursue
the appeal of the ALJ’s Initial Decision;
however, the applicant did not affirm its
desire to pursue the appeal within the
specified timeframe. Accordingly, FDA
now deems those exceptions as
withdrawn. Consequently, the
proceeding is in the same procedural
position as if no exceptions to the ALJ’s
Initial Decision had been filed;
therefore, the ALJ’s Initial Decision has
become the final decision of the
Commissioner by operation of law.
DATES: This final decision is effective
November 16, 2017.
ADDRESSES: For access to the docket, go
to https://www.regulations.gov and
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Nov 15, 2017
Jkt 244001
In 1962, the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) was
amended by the Drug Amendments Act
of 1962, and these amendments
provided that new drugs could no
longer be approved unless both safety
and efficacy had been established for
them. As amended, the FD&C Act also
required FDA to evaluate drugs
approved as safe between 1938 and
1962 to determine whether such drugs
were effective and to withdraw approval
for any new drug application (NDA)
where there was not substantial
evidence of the drug’s effectiveness. The
person contesting the withdrawal of the
approval had the burden of coming
forward with evidence of effectiveness
for the drug. FDA’s review of these pre1962 drugs is known as the Drug
Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI)
program.
In a document published in the
Federal Register of April 20, 1972 (37
FR 7827), after evaluating reports
received from the National Academy of
Sciences/National Research Council,
Drug Efficacy Study Group, and other
available evidence, FDA classified MFC
as ‘‘possibly effective’’ for moderate to
moderately severe pain. This document
also stated that no NDA had been
approved or deemed approved for MFC
and that additional evidence needed to
be submitted to FDA to establish MFC’s
effectiveness. Thereafter, Wyeth, a
division of American Home Products
(Wyeth), submitted a supplement to its
approved NDA 11–730 (Mepergan
Injection) for MFC (NDA 11–730, S–
003). In a document published in the
Federal Register of September 18, 1981
(46 FR 46404), the Director of the
Bureau of Drugs (now the Center for
Drug Evaluation and Research)
proposed to refuse approval of the
sNDA and offered Wyeth the
opportunity for a hearing.
Wyeth submitted its request for a
hearing and, by a document published
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53507
in the Federal Register of December 31,
1984 (49 FR 50788), the Office of the
Commissioner granted the hearing
request. Following the submission of
written testimony and documentary
evidence, an ALJ, Daniel J. Davidson,
conducted a hearing from January 14 to
17, 1986. He issued his Initial Decision
on December 4, 1987. The ALJ found
that: (1) The effectiveness of MFC had
not been proven by substantial evidence
of adequate and well-controlled clinical
trials, (2) the requirements of the
combination drug policy had not been
met, and (3) MFC is a new drug under
21 U.S.C. 321(p). Wyeth timely
appealed the ALJ’s Initial Decision by
filing exceptions with the Commissioner
under 21 CFR 12.125.
On August 23, 2017, FDA sent a letter
to West-Ward Pharmaceuticals
Corporation (West-Ward), successor to
Wyeth, to determine whether WestWard remained interested in pursuing
its appeal of the ALJ’s Initial Decision.
FDA informed the company that if it did
not respond and affirm its desire to
pursue its appeal by September 21,
2017, the Office of the Commissioner
would conclude that West-Ward no
longer wishes to pursue the appeal of
the ALJ’s Initial Decision and will
proceed as if the appeal has been
withdrawn. The Office of the
Commissioner did not receive a
response from West-Ward by the given
date; therefore, the Commissioner now
deems the exceptions withdrawn.
II. Conclusion and Order
Given that the exceptions have been
deemed withdrawn, this proceeding is
now in the same procedural posture as
if no exceptions had ever been filed.
When parties do not file exceptions to
the ALJ’s Initial Decision, and the
Commissioner does not file a notice of
review, the ALJ’s Initial Decision
becomes the final decision of the
Commissioner (see 21 CFR 12.120(e)).
FDA will publish a notice in the Federal
Register when an initial decision
becomes the final decision of the
Commissioner without appeal to or
review by the Commissioner (see 21
CFR 12.120(f)).
Therefore, the ALJ’s Initial Decision is
the final decision of the Commissioner
effective November 16, 2017. Pursuant
to the findings in the ALJ’s Initial
Decision, under section 505(d) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355(d)) and under
the authority delegated by the Secretary
of Health and Human Services, the
Commissioner finds that there is a lack
of substantial evidence that MFC will
have the effect it purports or is
represented to have under the
conditions of use prescribed,
E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM
16NON1
53508
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 220 / Thursday, November 16, 2017 / Notices
recommended, or suggested in its
labeling for sedation and analgesia in
patients with concurrent moderate pain
and apprehension, such as
postoperative and post-trauma patients
with those symptoms. The
Commissioner further finds that MFC
does not meet the combination drug
policy in 21 CFR 300.50 and that it is
a ‘‘new drug’’ within the meaning of 21
U.S.C. 321(p). Therefore, approval of the
sNDA for MFC is denied. Distribution of
products subject to the ALJ’s Initial
Decision in interstate commerce without
an approved application is prohibited
and subject to regulatory action (see,
e.g., sections 505(a) and 301(d) (21
U.S.C. 331(d)) of the FD&C Act).
The full text of the ALJ’s Initial
Decision may be seen in the Dockets
Management Staff and in this docket
(see ADDRESSES).
Dated: November 7, 2017.
Denise Hinton,
Acting Chief Scientist.
[FR Doc. 2017–24806 Filed 11–15–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Electronic Submissions
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2017–N–6292]
Bone, Reproductive and Urologic
Drugs Advisory Committee; Notice of
Meeting; Establishment of a Public
Docket; Request for Comments
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notice; establishment of a
public docket; request for comments.
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or Agency)
announces a forthcoming public
advisory committee meeting of the
Bone, Reproductive and Urologic Drugs
Advisory Committee. The general
function of the committee is to provide
advice and recommendations to the
Agency on FDA’s regulatory issues. The
meeting will be open to the public. FDA
is establishing a docket for public
comment on this document.
DATES: The meeting will be held on
January 10, 2018, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
ADDRESSES: College Park Marriott Hotel
and Conference Center, Chesapeake
Ballroom, 3501 University Blvd. East,
Hyattsville, MD 20783. The conference
center’s telephone number is 301–985–
7300. Answers to commonly asked
questions about FDA Advisory
Committee meetings may be accessed at:
https://www.fda.gov/Advisory
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:52 Nov 15, 2017
Jkt 244001
Committees/AboutAdvisoryCommittees/
ucm408555.htm.
FDA is establishing a docket for
public comment on this meeting. The
docket number is FDA–2017–N–6292.
The docket will close on January 9,
2018. Submit either electronic or
written comments on this public
meeting by January 9, 2018. Please note
that late, untimely filed comments will
not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January
9, 2018. The https://www.regulations.
gov electronic filing system will accept
comments until midnight Eastern Time
at the end of January 9, 2018. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier
(for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are
postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that
date.
Comments received on or before
December 22, 2017, will be provided to
the committee. Comments received after
that date will be taken into
consideration by the Agency.
You may submit comments as
follows:
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments submitted electronically,
including attachments, to https://www.
regulations.gov will be posted to the
docket unchanged. Because your
comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your
comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a
third party may not wish to be posted,
such as medical information, your or
anyone else’s Social Security number, or
confidential business information, such
as a manufacturing process. Please note
that if you include your name, contact
information, or other information that
identifies you in the body of your
comments, that information will be
posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
• If you want to submit a comment
with confidential information that you
do not wish to be made available to the
public, submit the comment as a
written/paper submission and in the
manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper
Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’).
Written/Paper Submissions
Submit written/paper submissions as
follows:
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
written/paper submissions): Dockets
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
• For written/paper comments
submitted to the Dockets Management
Staff, FDA will post your comment, as
well as any attachments, except for
information submitted, marked and
identified, as confidential, if submitted
as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket No. FDA–
2017–N–6292 for ‘‘Bone, Reproductive
and Urologic Drugs Advisory
Committee; Notice of Meeting;
Establishment of a Public Docket;
Request for Comments.’’ Received
comments, those filed in a timely
manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed
in the docket and, except for those
submitted as ‘‘Confidential
Submissions,’’ publicly viewable at
https://www.regulations.gov or at the
Dockets Management Staff between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
• Confidential Submissions—To
submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be
made publicly available, submit your
comments only as a written/paper
submission. You should submit two
copies total. One copy will include the
information you claim to be confidential
with a heading or cover note that states
‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The
Agency will review this copy, including
the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The
second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information
redacted/blacked out, will be available
for public viewing and posted on
https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
both copies to the Dockets Management
Staff. If you do not wish your name and
contact information to be made publicly
available, you can provide this
information on the cover sheet and not
in the body of your comments and you
must identify this information as
‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked
as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed
except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20
and other applicable disclosure law. For
more information about FDA’s posting
of comments to public dockets, see 80
FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access
the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/201523389.pdf.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or the
electronic and written/paper comments
received, go to https://www.regulations.
gov and insert the docket number, found
in brackets in the heading of this
document, into the ‘‘Search’’ box and
follow the prompts and/or go to the
E:\FR\FM\16NON1.SGM
16NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 220 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53507-53508]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24806]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-1981-N-0245 (Formerly 81N-0080)]
Mepergan Fortis Capsules; Final Decision on Proposal To Refuse
Approval of Supplemental New Drug Application; Availability of Final
Decision
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration; HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing that the Initial Decision of the Administrative Law Judge
(ALJ), to refuse approval of the supplemental new drug application
(sNDA) for Mepergan Fortis Capsules (MFC) (meperidine HCl, promethazine
HCl), is the final decision of the Commissioner by operation of law. In
the Initial Decision, the ALJ found that MFC had not been shown to be
supported by substantial evidence consisting of adequate and well-
controlled studies to be effective for sedation and analgesia in
patients with concurrent moderate pain and apprehension, such as
postoperative and post-trauma patients with those symptoms; that the
drug did not satisfy the combination drug policy; and that it is a
``new drug.'' The sNDA applicant filed exceptions to the ALJ's Initial
Decision. FDA recently requested that the current owner of the sNDA
application affirm its desire to pursue the appeal of the ALJ's Initial
Decision; however, the applicant did not affirm its desire to pursue
the appeal within the specified timeframe. Accordingly, FDA now deems
those exceptions as withdrawn. Consequently, the proceeding is in the
same procedural position as if no exceptions to the ALJ's Initial
Decision had been filed; therefore, the ALJ's Initial Decision has
become the final decision of the Commissioner by operation of law.
DATES: This final decision is effective November 16, 2017.
ADDRESSES: For access to the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov
and insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this
document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to
the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852 between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. Publicly
available submissions may be seen in the docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rachael Vieder Linowes, Office of
Scientific Integrity, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 1, Rm. 4206, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-402-5931.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In 1962, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act)
was amended by the Drug Amendments Act of 1962, and these amendments
provided that new drugs could no longer be approved unless both safety
and efficacy had been established for them. As amended, the FD&C Act
also required FDA to evaluate drugs approved as safe between 1938 and
1962 to determine whether such drugs were effective and to withdraw
approval for any new drug application (NDA) where there was not
substantial evidence of the drug's effectiveness. The person contesting
the withdrawal of the approval had the burden of coming forward with
evidence of effectiveness for the drug. FDA's review of these pre-1962
drugs is known as the Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI)
program.
In a document published in the Federal Register of April 20, 1972
(37 FR 7827), after evaluating reports received from the National
Academy of Sciences/National Research Council, Drug Efficacy Study
Group, and other available evidence, FDA classified MFC as ``possibly
effective'' for moderate to moderately severe pain. This document also
stated that no NDA had been approved or deemed approved for MFC and
that additional evidence needed to be submitted to FDA to establish
MFC's effectiveness. Thereafter, Wyeth, a division of American Home
Products (Wyeth), submitted a supplement to its approved NDA 11-730
(Mepergan Injection) for MFC (NDA 11-730, S-003). In a document
published in the Federal Register of September 18, 1981 (46 FR 46404),
the Director of the Bureau of Drugs (now the Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research) proposed to refuse approval of the sNDA and offered Wyeth
the opportunity for a hearing.
Wyeth submitted its request for a hearing and, by a document
published in the Federal Register of December 31, 1984 (49 FR 50788),
the Office of the Commissioner granted the hearing request. Following
the submission of written testimony and documentary evidence, an ALJ,
Daniel J. Davidson, conducted a hearing from January 14 to 17, 1986. He
issued his Initial Decision on December 4, 1987. The ALJ found that:
(1) The effectiveness of MFC had not been proven by substantial
evidence of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, (2) the
requirements of the combination drug policy had not been met, and (3)
MFC is a new drug under 21 U.S.C. 321(p). Wyeth timely appealed the
ALJ's Initial Decision by filing exceptions with the Commissioner under
21 CFR 12.125.
On August 23, 2017, FDA sent a letter to West-Ward Pharmaceuticals
Corporation (West-Ward), successor to Wyeth, to determine whether West-
Ward remained interested in pursuing its appeal of the ALJ's Initial
Decision. FDA informed the company that if it did not respond and
affirm its desire to pursue its appeal by September 21, 2017, the
Office of the Commissioner would conclude that West-Ward no longer
wishes to pursue the appeal of the ALJ's Initial Decision and will
proceed as if the appeal has been withdrawn. The Office of the
Commissioner did not receive a response from West-Ward by the given
date; therefore, the Commissioner now deems the exceptions withdrawn.
II. Conclusion and Order
Given that the exceptions have been deemed withdrawn, this
proceeding is now in the same procedural posture as if no exceptions
had ever been filed. When parties do not file exceptions to the ALJ's
Initial Decision, and the Commissioner does not file a notice of
review, the ALJ's Initial Decision becomes the final decision of the
Commissioner (see 21 CFR 12.120(e)). FDA will publish a notice in the
Federal Register when an initial decision becomes the final decision of
the Commissioner without appeal to or review by the Commissioner (see
21 CFR 12.120(f)).
Therefore, the ALJ's Initial Decision is the final decision of the
Commissioner effective November 16, 2017. Pursuant to the findings in
the ALJ's Initial Decision, under section 505(d) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 355(d)) and under the authority delegated by the Secretary of
Health and Human Services, the Commissioner finds that there is a lack
of substantial evidence that MFC will have the effect it purports or is
represented to have under the conditions of use prescribed,
[[Page 53508]]
recommended, or suggested in its labeling for sedation and analgesia in
patients with concurrent moderate pain and apprehension, such as
postoperative and post-trauma patients with those symptoms. The
Commissioner further finds that MFC does not meet the combination drug
policy in 21 CFR 300.50 and that it is a ``new drug'' within the
meaning of 21 U.S.C. 321(p). Therefore, approval of the sNDA for MFC is
denied. Distribution of products subject to the ALJ's Initial Decision
in interstate commerce without an approved application is prohibited
and subject to regulatory action (see, e.g., sections 505(a) and 301(d)
(21 U.S.C. 331(d)) of the FD&C Act).
The full text of the ALJ's Initial Decision may be seen in the
Dockets Management Staff and in this docket (see ADDRESSES).
Dated: November 7, 2017.
Denise Hinton,
Acting Chief Scientist.
[FR Doc. 2017-24806 Filed 11-15-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P