Biologics License Applications and Master Files, 30968-30976 [2019-13753]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
30968
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
(2) The results of the flight tests
demonstrate that a speed in excess of
Mach 1 does not cause a measurable
sonic boom overpressure to reach the
surface; and
(3) The conditions and limitations
determined by that test represent all
foreseeable operating conditions and are
effective on all flights conducted under
an authorization.
(c) Environmental findings. (1) No
special flight authorization will be
granted if the Administrator finds that
such action is necessary to protect or
enhance the environment.
(2) The Administrator is required to
determine whether the issuance of an
authorization for a particular flight area
is a ‘‘major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment’’ pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), and related Executive Orders
and guidance. Accordingly, each
applicant must provide information that
sufficiently describes the environmental
impact of any flight in excess of Mach
1, including the effect of a sonic boom
reaching the surface in the proposed
flight area, as a means to inform a
determination by the Administrator.
Such information may take the form of:
(i) An Environmental Impact
Statement prepared for the proposed
flight area for the purpose of this
application;
(ii) An Environmental Impact
Statement previously prepared for the
proposed flight area, when the FAA has
reviewed it and determined the
continued adequacy, accuracy, validity
and timeliness of the findings it
contains; or
(iii) Another statement or finding of
environmental impact for the proposed
flight area, such as an Environmental
Assessment, when the FAA has
reviewed it and finds that such material
is sufficient for the Administrator to
make the required determinations for
the proposed flight area.
(d) Issuance. An authorization to
operate a civil aircraft in excess of Mach
1 may be issued only after an applicant
has submitted the information described
in this section and the Administrator
has taken the required action regarding
the environmental findings described in
paragraph (c) of this section.
(e) Duration. (1) An authorization to
exceed Mach 1 will be granted for the
time the Administrator determines
necessary to conduct the flights for the
described purposes.
(2) An authorization to exceed Mach
1 is effective until it expires or is
surrendered.
(3) An authorization to exceed Mach
1 may be terminated, suspended or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
amended by the Administrator at any
time the Administrator finds that such
action is necessary to protect the
environment.
(4) The holder of an authorization to
exceed Mach 1 may request
reconsideration of a termination,
amendment or suspension issued under
paragraph (e)(3) of this section within
30 days of notice of the action. Failure
to request reconsideration and provide
information why the Administrator’s
action is not appropriate will result in
permanent termination of the
authorization.
(5) Findings made by and actions
taken by the Administrator under this
section do not affect any certificate
issued under chapter 447 of title 49 of
the United States Code.
Appendix B to Part 91 [Removed and
Reserved]
4. Remove and reserve appendix B to
part 91.
■
Issued in Washington, DC, under the
authority of 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a)(5), and
44715, on June 14, 2019.
Kevin Welsh,
Executive Director for Environment and
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2019–13079 Filed 6–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 601
[Docket No. FDA–2019–N–1363]
RIN 0910–AH50
Biologics License Applications and
Master Files
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA, the Agency, or
we) is proposing to amend its
regulations concerning the use of master
files for biological products. This action,
if finalized, will allow certain biological
products approved under the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C
Act) to continue to incorporate by
reference information about drug
substances, drug substance
intermediates, or drug products
contained in master files after those
products are deemed to be licensed
under the Public Health Service Act
(PHS Act) on March 23, 2020. The
proposed rule also codifies FDA’s
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
practice of permitting applications for
biological products submitted under the
PHS Act to incorporate by reference
information other than drug substance,
drug substance intermediate, or drug
product information contained in a
master file. In addition, the proposed
rule codifies FDA’s practice of
permitting investigational new drug
applications to incorporate by reference
any information contained in a master
file for products subject to licensure
under the PHS Act.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments on the proposed rule
by August 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be
considered. Electronic comments must
be submitted on or before August 27,
2019. The https://www.regulations.gov
electronic filing system will accept
comments until 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time
at the end of August 27, 2019.
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.
Electronic Submissions
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
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and
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–
2019–N–1363 for ‘‘Biologics License
Applications and Master Files.’’
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 Dockets Management
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kavita Vyas, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave. Bldg. 51, Rm. 4154, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 301–796–4787,
kavita.vyas@fda.hhs.gov; or Stephen
Ripley, Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave. Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 240–402–7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the
Proposed Rule
C. Legal Authority
D. Costs and Benefits
II. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used
Acronyms in This Document
III. Background
A. Introduction
B. FDA’s Current Regulatory Framework
C. Need for the Regulation
D. History of the Rulemaking
IV. Legal Authority
V. Description of the Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (g)
B. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (i)
C. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (j)
D. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (h)
E. Proposed Records/Record Retention
Requirements
F. Proposed Enforcement Provisions
G. Proposed Technical/Conforming
Amendments
VI. Proposed Effective/Compliance Dates
VII. Preliminary Economic Analysis of
Impacts
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
X. Federalism
XI. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
XII. Reference
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to amend its
regulations to implement certain aspects
of section 7002(e) of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009
(BPCI Act). The proposed rule is
necessary to avoid unnecessary
disruptions with respect to biological
products originally approved under
section 505 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
355) when their applications are
deemed to be licenses under the PHS
Act and to prevent potential drug
shortages when those products are
transitioned to being regulated under
section 351 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C.
262). The proposed rule will also update
the regulation to reflect FDA’s
longstanding practices regarding the use
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30969
of master files referenced in
applications for biological products
submitted under section 351 of the PHS
Act.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of
the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to amend its
regulations concerning the use of master
files for biological products. The
proposed rule would allow certain
biological products, originally approved
in a new drug application (NDA) under
the FD&C Act, to continue relying on a
drug master file for information on a
drug substance, drug substance
intermediate, or drug product (DS/DSI/
DP) after the NDA is deemed to be a
license for a biological product under
the PHS Act on March 23, 2020. The
proposed rule also codifies FDA’s
existing practice that a biological
product in a biologics license
application (BLA) under the PHS Act
may rely on a master file, except for
information regarding a drug substance,
drug substance intermediate, or drug
product. In addition, the rule codifies
FDA’s practice that an investigational
new drug application (IND) for a
biological product may incorporate by
reference any information, including
drug substance, drug substance
intermediate, and drug product
information, contained in a master file.
C. Legal Authority
FDA is proposing to amend its
regulations, in part, to implement
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act. FDA’s
authority for this rule also derives from
the biological product provisions of the
PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264), and
the provisions of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 321, et seq.) applicable to drugs,
including section 701 (21 U.S.C. 371);
the FD&C Act provisions are applicable
to biological products under section
351(j) of the PHS Act.
D. Costs and Benefits
FDA anticipates that affected entities
would incur minimal costs to read and
understand the rule. By allowing
transitioned products to continue to
incorporate by reference information
contained in existing master files, FDA
avoids imposing a potential new
regulatory burden. FDA projects that
over 10 years at a discount rate of 7
percent the proposed rule would
generate annualized net cost savings
ranging from $0.3 million to $4.6
million with a primary estimate of $2.5
million; over 10 years at a discount rate
of 3 percent the proposed rule would
generate annualized net cost savings
ranging from $0.3 million to $4.8
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
30970
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
million with a primary estimate of $2.6
million.
II—TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS/COMMONLY USED ACRONYMS IN THIS
DOCUMENT
Abbreviation/
acronym
What it means
BLA ..............
BPCI Act ......
Biologics License Application.
Biologics Price Competition
and Innovation Act of 2009.
Drug Master File.
Drug Product.
Drug Substance.
Drug Substance Intermediate.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Investigational New Drug Application.
New Drug Application.
Public Health Service Act.
DMF .............
DP ................
DS ................
DSI ...............
FD&C Act .....
FDA ..............
IND ...............
NDA ..............
PHS Act .......
III. Background
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
A. Introduction
This proposed rule, when finalized,
would amend FDA regulations relating
to the use of master files in applications
for biological products subject to
regulation under the PHS Act. Section
7002(b)(1) of the BPCI Act revised
section 351(i) of the PHS Act, in part,
to amend the definition of a ‘‘biological
product’’ to include a ‘‘protein (except
any chemically synthesized
polypeptide).’’ 1 A number of products
approved in NDAs under section 505 of
the FD&C Act meet the revised
definition of biological product. Also,
section 7002(e)(4) of the BPCI Act
provided that, on March 23, 2020, an
application for a biological product
approved under section 505 of the FD&C
Act ‘‘shall be deemed to be a license for
the biological product under’’ section
351 of the PHS Act. This rule
implements FDA’s interpretation of the
‘‘deemed to be a license’’ provision of
the BPCI Act with respect to the use of
master files.2 In addition, this rule
codifies current Agency practices
1 On December 12, 2018, FDA issued a proposed
rule regarding its interpretation of the terms
‘‘protein’’ and ‘‘chemically synthesized
polypeptide’’ as used in section 351(i) of the PHS
Act (‘‘Definition of the term ‘Biological Product’ ’’,
83 FR 63817).
2 For more information about FDA’s
interpretation of the ‘‘deemed to be a license’’
provision of the BPCI Act, see guidance for industry
entitled ‘‘Interpretation of the ‘Deemed to be a
License’ Provision of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009’’
(December 2018). We update guidances
periodically. To make sure you have the most
recent version of a guidance, check the FDA Drugs
guidance web page at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/
GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/
Guidances/default.htm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
relating to the use of master files
referenced in applications for biological
products.
B. FDA’s Current Regulatory Framework
1. What are master files?
Master files are submissions to the
Agency that may be used to provide
detailed, confidential information to the
Agency about facilities, processes, or
articles used in the manufacturing,
processing, packaging, or storing of one
or more human drugs. Information
contained in a master file can be used
to support a submission to FDA by an
applicant or sponsor. The holder of a
master file can authorize one or more
applicants or sponsors to incorporate by
reference information contained in the
master file to support a submission to
FDA without having to disclose the
information in that master file (which
may contain trade secrets or other
confidential commercial information) to
the applicants or sponsors.3 4 The
submission of a master file is at the sole
discretion of the master file holder.
Ordinarily, FDA neither independently
reviews nor approves submissions to a
master file; instead, the Agency reviews
such information only in the context of
an application that incorporates by
reference information contained in that
master file.
a. Drug master files. Some master files
contain information that is relevant to
applications for drug products. For
products regulated under section 505 of
the FD&C Act, FDA defines the term
‘‘drug master file’’ (DMF) in its drug
regulations (§ 314.420(a) (21 CFR
314.420(a))) and explicitly provides that
‘‘[a]n investigational new drug
application or an application,
abbreviated application, amendment, or
supplement may incorporate by
reference all or part of the contents of
any drug master file in support of the
submission’’ if the holder of the master
file authorizes the incorporation
(§ 314.420(b)). Section 314.420 also
describes several types of DMFs, each of
which typically contains certain kinds
of information (§ 314.420(a)): Drug
substance, drug substance intermediate,
and materials used in their preparation,
or drug product (referred to as Type II
DMFs); packaging materials (Type III);
excipient, colorant, flavor, essence, or
materials used in their preparation
(Type IV); and FDA-accepted reference
3 See, e.g., 21 CFR 314.420 and 47 FR 46622 at
46642 (October 19, 1982).
4 The holder of a master file (including a drug
master file) who expects that information in the file
will be incorporated by reference both in a BLA and
in an NDA or abbreviated new drug application
(ANDA) need only submit the master file to the
Agency once.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
information (Type V). (See also FDA
Guidance for Industry entitled ‘‘Drug
Master Files: Guidelines,’’ September
1989, available at https://www.fda.gov/
Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatory
Information/Guidances/ucm122886.htm
(accessed March 2019).)
b. Other master files. FDA also
permits reference to master files that are
not addressed by § 314.420, some of
which contain information that is
relevant to applications for biological
products.5 The Agency’s approach to
the terminology for types of master files
used for products regulated under the
PHS Act has generally tracked its
approach to the types of DMFs (e.g.,
Type II, Type III) used for products
regulated under the FD&C Act.
2. Biologics License Applications and
Master Files
a. FDA generally permits BLAs to
incorporate by reference information
contained in master files. Just as FDA
permits NDAs and ANDAs under the
FD&C Act to incorporate by reference
certain information contained in DMFs,
the Agency also generally permits
applications under the PHS Act (BLAs)
to incorporate by reference certain
information contained in master files,
including DMFs.
For most categories of information
and most application types (including
BLAs and INDs), the needs of master file
holders, applicants and sponsors, and
FDA have been adequately met through
this incorporation-by-reference
mechanism. This mechanism allows
applicants and sponsors to refer to
information contained in master files
without having knowledge of the
contents of those master files (§ 314.420;
47 FR 46622 at 46642). For products
licensed under section 351 of the PHS
Act, FDA has permitted, and will
generally continue to permit, the use of
information contained in most types of
master files (such as information about
excipients, stabilizers, penetrants, or
materials used in the preparation of DS/
DSI/DP) because the applicant generally
has the ability to independently identify
and mitigate the risk posed to product
quality by such components. For
example, applicants are permitted to
incorporate by reference in their BLA
information on container closures
contained in a master file. This is the
case because an applicant can
independently identify the risk to
product quality posed by a container
closure (for example, by leachables in
the closure) by performing appropriate
studies on stability and adequateness for
intended use and then taking steps to
5 See,
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
e.g., 21 CFR 601.51(a).
28JNP1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
mitigate any risks identified (for
example, by implementing appropriate
testing and controls). Thus, in such
cases, the feasibility of testing to
confirm the adequateness of intended
container closures mitigates the risks to
quality arising from the applicant’s lack
of access to the information contained
in the master file.
Accordingly, proposed § 601.2(i)
would codify FDA’s longstanding
practice of permitting biological
products in BLAs to incorporate by
reference most categories of information
contained in master files (other than
information about DS/DSI/DP,
discussed below).
b. FDA currently does not permit
biological products in BLAs to
incorporate by reference drug substance,
drug substance intermediate, or drug
product information in master files.
Although FDA’s approach to the use of
master files in BLAs largely parallels its
approach to the use of DMFs in
applications under the FD&C Act, there
is a significant difference: Unlike
applications submitted under section
505 of the FC&C Act, for biological
products in BLAs, the Agency has, as a
scientific matter, expected applicants to
submit information about DS/DSI/DP
directly to the BLA rather than
incorporating it by reference to a master
file. (See, e.g., FDA Guidance for
Industry entitled ‘‘Quality
Considerations in Demonstrating
Biosimilarity of a Therapeutic Protein
Product to a Reference Product’’ April
2015, available at https://www.fda.gov/
downloads/drugs/guidancecompliance
regulatoryinformation/guidances/
ucm291134.pdf (accessed March 2019).)
The risk associated with the
manufacture of complex biological
products is generally significantly
higher than that associated with the
manufacture of chemical entities, which
are often less complex.6 This is because
most biological products tend to have
certain features (e.g., amino acid
sequence, glycosylation, folding,
cellular phenotype) essential to their
intended effect and can be very
sensitive to changes to their
manufacturing process. In addition,
biological products derived from
biological sources may be complex
heterogeneous mixtures, which provides
another basis for having consistent
process controls to ensure quality.
6 The
Agency recognizes that, in limited
circumstances, this may not always be the case;
however, for purposes of administrative efficiency
and predictability, the Agency is proposing a bright
line between BLAs and NDAs regarding the
referencing of master files for DS/DSI/DP
information for biological products.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
For these reasons, the Agency
considers the establishment and
function of a robust quality assurance
program, with intimate knowledge of all
manufacturing steps, to be essential for
controlling and evaluating the process
and the biological product, and for
mitigating product quality risks. The
applicant for a BLA is expected to have
knowledge of and direct control over the
manufacturing process for the DS/DSI/
DP for a biological product (21 CFR
601.2 and 601.20). Absent this
knowledge and control, the applicant
generally cannot operate a robust
quality assurance program that
independently identifies and mitigates
quality risks, which is critical to
assuring the quality of a biological
product.
As a scientific matter, given the
complexity of biological products, the
Agency considers it generally
impractical for the applicant to confirm
the DS/DSI/DP quality characteristics of
a biological product without complete
knowledge of, and control over, all
aspects of the manufacturing process.
FDA has concluded that the risk to
quality arising from the fragmentation of
information about DS/DSI/DP for a
biological product between a master file
and a BLA is very difficult to mitigate.
As a result, FDA believes that this type
of information is generally best
submitted to the Agency directly in the
BLA, and that a BLA that incorporates
by reference DS/DSI/DP information for
a biological product contained in a
master file is generally inconsistent with
biological product licensing
requirements.7 8
Accordingly, proposed § 601.2(g)
would codify FDA’s longstanding
practice of not permitting a biological
product in a BLA to incorporate by
reference information regarding DS/DSI/
DP contained in master files.
7 FDA may permit, and generally will continue to
permit, an applicant to incorporate by reference
certain information about a product that is not the
subject of the applicant’s own BLA, such as
information about a comparator product used in
studies intended to support approval of the
applicant’s BLA. Incorporation of such information
by reference generally does not raise similar
concerns relating to an applicant’s knowledge and
control over all aspects of the manufacturing
process for the product that is the subject of the
applicant’s own BLA.
8 In lieu of the use of master files, other types of
contract manufacturing arrangements can be
considered if the sponsor does not intend to
manufacture all aspects of the product for licensure
and the licensee assumes responsibility for
compliance with the applicable product and
establishment standards. (See, e.g., FDA guidance
for industry entitled ‘‘Cooperative Manufacturing
Arrangements For Licensed Biologics,’’ November
2008, available at https://www.fda.gov/ucm/groups/
fdagov-public/@fdagov-bio-gen/documents/
document/ucm069908.pdf (accessed March 2019).)
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30971
3. The Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009
Section 7002(b) of the BPCI Act
amended, in part, the definition of a
‘‘biological product’’ in the PHS Act to
include a ‘‘protein (except any
chemically synthesized polypeptide).’’ 9
Accordingly, under section 351(i) of the
PHS Act, a ‘‘biological product’’ is now
defined as ‘‘a virus, therapeutic serum,
toxin, antitoxin, vaccine, blood, blood
component or derivative, allergenic
product, protein (except any chemically
synthesized polypeptide), or analogous
product, or arsphenamine or derivative
of arsphenamine (or any other trivalent
organic arsenic compound), applicable
to the prevention, treatment, or cure of
a disease or condition of human beings’’
(section 351(i) of the PHS Act; emphasis
added).
Some protein products have
historically been approved under
section 505 of the FD&C Act. However,
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act provides
that a marketing application for a
‘‘biological product’’ must be submitted
under section 351 of the PHS Act
(subject to certain exceptions during a
transition period ending on March 23,
2020). Section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act
also provides that, on March 23, 2020,
an application for a biological product
approved under section 505 of the FD&C
Act ‘‘shall be deemed to be a license for
a biological product under section 351’’
of the PHS Act.10 Such approved
applications are referred to as ‘‘deemed
BLAs’’ in this document.
C. Need for the Regulation
1. The Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009 and the Use of
Drug Master Files in BLAs
The BPCI Act is silent about
implementation of the ‘‘deemed to be a
license for a biological product’’
provision. In March 2016, FDA
published a draft guidance for industry
entitled ‘‘Interpretation of the ‘Deemed
to be a License’ Provision of the
Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009’’ (see 81 FR
13373, March 14, 2016). Footnote 12 of
that draft guidance explained that for
sponsors of proposed protein products
who intend to submit a BLA, a Type II
DMF for a drug substance, drug
substance intermediate, or drug product
would not be acceptable for a BLA
9 See
footnote 1.
FDA Guidance for Industry entitled
‘‘Interpretation of the ‘Deemed to be a License’
Provision of the Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009’’ (December 2018).
Available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/
GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/
Guidances/UCM490264.pdf (accessed March 2019).
10 See
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
30972
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
because a license holder is expected to
have knowledge of and control over the
manufacturing process for the biological
product for which it has a license. The
footnote went on to provide that FDA is
considering a mechanism that, in
limited circumstances, would allow
holders of approved applications under
section 505 of the FD&C Act that
reference a Type II DMF to continue to
reference the DMF after the application
is deemed to be a license under the PHS
Act on March 23, 2020. FDA finalized
this guidance in December 2018
(available at https://www.fda.gov/
downloads/Drugs/GuidanceCompliance
RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
UCM490264.pdf (accessed March
2019)), after considering comments in
its draft recommendations and without
including the corresponding footnote
from the draft guidance because this
proposed rule would establish such a
mechanism, while also codifying the
general longstanding practice that BLAs
and INDs for biological products can
reference information in master files
except, in the case of BLAs, for DS/DSI/
DP information for a biological product.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
2. Mechanism To Permit the Continued
Use of Currently Referenced DMFs by
‘‘Deemed BLAs’’
Biological products regulated under
the FD&C Act have been able to
incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP
information contained in DMFs to
support the approval of NDAs. As
explained above, for biological products
licensed under section 351 of the PHS
Act, incorporating by reference
information contained in master files on
DS/DSI/DP generally is not permitted.
This proposed regulation addresses,
in part, a specific issue related to
implementation of the ‘‘deemed to be a
license’’ provision of the BPCI Act:
Whether applications approved under
section 505 of the FD&C Act may
continue to incorporate by reference DS/
DSI/DP information contained in DMFs
once the applications are deemed to be
BLAs subject to licensure and regulation
under the PHS Act.
To date, FDA has identified
approximately 89 applications approved
under the FD&C Act that will be deemed
licensed under the PHS Act on March
23, 2020. Approximately 17 of these
applications incorporate by reference
information on DS/DSI/DP contained in
DMFs. Furthermore, the DS/DSI/DP
information incorporated by reference
into these 17 applications is drawn from
only 7 DMFs. Thus, this use of DMFs for
DS/DSI/DP information involves a small
subset of the deemed BLAs and only a
very small number of DMFs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
In light of FDA’s longstanding
practice of not permitting a biological
product in a BLA to incorporate by
reference information regarding DS/DSI/
DP contained in a master file, the
Agency is considering the appropriate
regulatory approach to the relatively few
deemed BLAs that reference DS/DSI/DP
information contained in DMFs. The
Agency is evaluating the risks and
benefits of allowing these deemed BLAs
to continue incorporating by reference
this type of information from those
DMFs. The analysis takes into account
clinical considerations and product
availability, as well as the limited
number of applications and the limited
number of DMFs that are involved.
Based on this analysis, the Agency
proposes that for biological products,
the appropriate mechanism with respect
to addressing incorporation by reference
of DS/DSI/DP information contained in
DMFs would be to implement the least
disruptive approach.
Some of the deemed BLAs that
currently incorporate by reference
information contained in DMFs to
support the application were approved
by the Agency based in part on DS/DSI/
DP information contained in those
DMFs. Many of these products have
been marketed for decades. Over this
period, none of these products have
been withdrawn or removed from the
market for reasons of safety or
effectiveness. For these products, the
Agency has no reason to believe that the
March 23, 2020, transition in and of
itself introduces new risks to product
safety, purity, and potency.
For some biological products, such as
certain reproductive hormones, treating
the deemed BLAs like other
applications for biological products
under the PHS Act with regard to the
use of DS/DSI/DP information contained
in a DMF would present a considerable
challenge. Nearly all approved
applications for these biological
products incorporate by reference DS/
DSI/DP information contained in a
DMF. This incorporation by reference
has resulted in drug substances for these
products of acceptable quality for
decades. For example, multiple Human
Chorionic Gonadotropins from urinary
sources have been on the market since
the mid-1970s using DMFs for
information on the drug substance, with
changes to the product being handled
through the DMF pathway. Disallowing
use of DMFs for these deemed BLAs
would curtail or halt production of
these products, resulting in imminent or
immediate drug shortages with
considerable negative impacts on public
health. FDA does not believe it was
Congress’s intent when enacting section
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7002(e) of the BPCI Act that deemed
BLAs would need to be removed from
the market on March 23, 2020.
Furthermore, the general concern
about fragmentation of DS/DSI/DP
information associated with the use of
DMFs is lessened in the case of the
deemed BLAs by the existence of
generally longstanding relationships
between the deemed-BLA applicants
and the DMF holders. For example, the
license holder of a deemed BLA may
have accumulated knowledge about the
quality of the biological product
supplied by the DMF holder over an
extended period. This accumulated
knowledge allows the deemed BLA
holder to implement a more robust
control strategy to mitigate the risk to
product quality posed by the applicant’s
limited knowledge of the manufacturing
process described in the DMF.
In light of these facts, FDA believes
that permitting a limited number of
deemed BLAs to continue to incorporate
by reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in a limited number of DMFs
will, on balance, protect and promote
the public health. In contrast, if nondeemed BLAs were to reference an
existing DMF, they would generally not
have the benefit of this accumulated
knowledge, and thus would not be able
to mitigate the resulting fragmentation
of information and risk to product
quality as effectively. Similarly, while
the lack of overt safety signals and the
absence of concerns about efficacy
provide a rationale for allowing a
deemed BLA to continue to rely on DS/
DSI/DP information contained in a
DMF, it may not be appropriate to
extend this rationale to a non-deemed
BLA. For these reasons, in proposed
§ 601.2(h), FDA would permit only
deemed BLAs that incorporate by
reference information on DS/DSI/DP
contained in particular DMFs in their
approved applications under section
505 of the FD&C Act to continue doing
so after these products are deemed to be
licensed under the PHS Act on March
23, 2020. BLAs for other biological
products will continue to not be
permitted to incorporate by reference
DS/DSI/DP information contained in a
master file, consistent with FDA’s
longstanding practice. Also, to enable
innovation for deemed BLAs that
reference an existing DMF, it is
important to preserve the ability to
make changes to the existing DMFs.
Therefore, the proposed rule will permit
holders of existing DMFs referenced for
deemed BLAs before transition to
modify these DMFs under § 314.420
after March 23, 2020.
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
3. Investigational New Drug
Applications and Master Files
Section 314.420(b) provides that ‘‘[a]n
investigational new drug application
. . . may incorporate by reference all or
part of the contents of any drug master
file in support of the submission’’ with
the DMF holder’s consent. In addition,
FDA typically permits an IND for a
biological product to incorporate by
reference information contained in other
master files, in addition to DMFs.
Furthermore, it has been FDA’s practice
to permit sponsors of INDs for biological
products to incorporate by reference DS/
DSI/DP information contained in a
master file.
FDA permits the use of DS/DSI/DP
master files in biological product INDs
for several reasons. Exposure to the
investigational product is limited in the
IND stage because it is only
administered to subjects enrolled in
clinical trials, which are typically
carried out in controlled settings.
Accordingly, the sponsor and FDA can
mitigate risk more effectively by closely
monitoring patients in those trials, in
order to evaluate the safety of the
investigational product, which is a
necessary component of the licensing
process.
Permitting the sponsor of an IND for
a biological product to incorporate by
reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in master files may also
facilitate product development. Without
this option, a sponsor might choose not
to make the significant investment to
manufacture the necessary DS/DSI/DP
for a biological product at this early
stage of development. However, even in
cases where an IND sponsor of a
biological product incorporates by
reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in a master file, FDA expects
the sponsor to have knowledge of and
direct control of the manufacturing
process by later stages of development.
Therefore, in proposed § 601.2(j), FDA
clarifies and codifies this practice.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
D. History of the Rulemaking
In response to the BPCI Act, public
meetings were held to discuss various
aspects of the statute. Also, public
comments on the current FDA practice
for biological products of not accepting
DMFs for biological products in BLAs
were received in the context of the draft
guidance for industry entitled
‘‘Interpretation of the ‘Deemed to be a
License’ Provision of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of
2009’’ (see 81 FR 13373). Comments, in
part: (1) Urged FDA to clarify its
position on the use of Type II DMFs for
applications that will be deemed BLAs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
on March 23, 2020, and, at least for
pancreatic enzyme products,
recommended FDA permit applications
to reference Type II DMFs after March
23, 2020, even if the application was not
approved as an NDA prior to the
transition date; 11 (2) urged FDA to
adopt a flexible approach toward the
continued referencing of existing
DMFs; 12 and (3) sought clarity on the
use of other categories of DMFs (e.g.,
Type III DMFs).13 FDA finalized this
guidance in December 2018 after
considering comments in its draft
recommendations. With respect to the
comments concerning DMFs, the
Agency undertook an analysis of the
number of DMFs, the number of
applications referencing these DMFs,
and considered the consequences of not
taking any action or taking the proposed
action. The Agency addressed all the
concerns identified in the public
comments through the actions described
in this proposed rule, which includes
allowing the incorporation by reference
of DS/DP/DSI information contained in
DMFs, provided the DMFs were
referenced prior to the application being
deemed a BLA on March 23, 2020, and
providing clarity on the use of other
categories of DMFs in BLAs.
IV. Legal Authority
FDA is proposing to amend its
regulations, in part, to implement
certain aspects of section 7002(e) of the
BPCI Act. FDA’s authority for this
proposed rule also derives from the
biological product licensing provisions
of the PHS Act and the provisions of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321, et seq.)
applicable to drugs. Under these
provisions, FDA has the authority to
issue regulations designed to ensure,
among other things, that biological
products are safe, pure, and potent and
manufactured in accordance with
current good manufacturing practice.
FDA also has general authority to
promulgate regulations for the efficient
enforcement of the FD&C Act and the
PHS Act, under section 701 of the FD&C
Act and section 351(j) of the PHS Act.
V. Description of the Proposed Rule
We propose to amend § 601.2 to add
new paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j).
Specifically, the proposed rule will
allow applications for biological
11 See Comment from Curemark, LLC to Docket
No. FDA–2015–D–4750 (available at https://
www.regulations.gov).
12 See Comment from Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) to Docket
No. FDA–2015–D–4750 (available at https://
www.regulations.gov).
13 See Comments from Biotechnology Innovation
Organization and from Novo Nordisk, Docket No.
FDA–2015–D–4750.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30973
products approved under section 505 of
the FD&C Act to continue to incorporate
by reference DS/DP/DSI information
contained in DMFs, provided the DMFs
were referenced before March 23, 2020.
Also, this proposed rule essentially
codifies, for biological products, the
longstanding Agency practices of
permitting BLAs to incorporate by
reference information other than on DS/
DP/DSI contained in master files and
INDs to incorporate any information
contained in master files. FDA is aware
that there are combination products
approved in BLAs under the PHS Act
and considers that the rationale
described in this rule for biological
products also applies to the biological
constituent part of such combination
products. FDA seeks comments on
whether applications for combination
products submitted in BLAs under the
PHS Act should be permitted to
incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP
information for any non-biological
constituent part (for example, the drug
constituent part of an antibody drug
conjugate).
A. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (g)
Proposed new paragraph (g) codifies
the Agency’s practice of not permitting
applications for biological products
submitted under section 351 of the PHS
Act to incorporate by reference
information on DS/DSI/DP contained in
a master file. Deemed BLAs are
excluded from this provision and are
addressed in proposed new paragraph
(h).
B. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (i)
Proposed new paragraph (i) codifies
the Agency’s practice of permitting
applications for biological products
submitted under section 351 of the PHS
Act to incorporate by reference
information other than DS/DSI/DP
information contained in master files,
including in DMFs.
C. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (j)
Proposed new paragraph (j) codifies
the Agency’s practice of permitting INDs
to incorporate by reference information
contained in master files, including
information on DS/DSI/DP.
D. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (h)
Proposed new paragraph (h) addresses
applications transitioning on March 23,
2020, under section 7002(e) of the BPCI
Act. It allows an application for a
biological product that has been
approved under section 505 of the FD&C
Act and that incorporates by reference
DS/DSI/DP information contained in a
DMF to continue to do so after that
application is deemed to be a BLA.
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
30974
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
The proposed rule is intended to
preserve the status quo both for the
small number of deemed BLAs and for
all other applications for biological
products submitted under section 351 of
the PHS Act: Deemed BLAs that
incorporate by reference information on
DS/DSI/DP contained in a DMF at the
time of their transition will be permitted
to continue to do so, but no other
applications for biological products will
be permitted to incorporate by reference
DS/DSI/DP information contained in
any master files.
The proposed rule is not intended to
alter a license holder’s ability to modify
a product under § 601.12 (21 CFR
601.12). The proposed rule is also not
intended to expand or reduce the
changes allowed to a deemed BLA that
incorporates by reference information
contained in master files. Under the
proposed rule, an applicant would be
permitted to supplement a deemed BLA
within the same application, as it would
any other BLA under § 601.12 and the
applicable bundling policy.14 However,
if modifications to the deemed BLA are
required that could not be effected in a
supplement and a new application is
required, that new BLA would not be
considered a deemed BLA. As is the
case with other (non-deemed)
applications for biological products, the
new BLA would not be permitted to
reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in any master file and would
need to submit this information as part
of the new BLA itself.
The proposed rule is also not
intended to limit or restrict the changes
that may be made to any master file,
including a DMF for DS/DSI/DP
information.
The proposed rule thus preserves the
relationship between a DMF and the
application that references it. This
ensures that the transition to regulation
under the PHS Act does not interrupt
the supply of biological products that
have already been shown to be safe and
effective.
E. Proposed Records/Record Retention
Requirements
None; existing records and retention
requirements will continue to apply.
F. Proposed Enforcement Provisions
None; existing enforcement
regulations will continue to apply.
G. Proposed Technical/Conforming
Amendments
None necessary.
VI. Proposed Effective/Compliance
Dates
If finalized on or before February 22,
2020, this rule would take effect on
March 23, 2020.
VII. Preliminary Economic Analysis of
Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the
proposed rule under Executive Order
12866, Executive Order 13563,
Executive Order 13771, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 direct us to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). Executive Order
13771 requires that the costs associated
with significant new regulations ‘‘shall,
to the extent permitted by law, be offset
by the elimination of existing costs
associated with at least two prior
regulations.’’ We believe that this
proposed rule is not a significant
regulatory action as defined by
Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires us to analyze regulatory options
that would minimize any significant
impact of a rule on small entities.
Because the proposed rule does not
impose any new burdens, we propose to
certify that the proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires us to
prepare a written statement, which
includes an assessment of anticipated
costs and benefits, before proposing
‘‘any rule that includes any Federal
mandate that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
one year.’’ The current threshold after
adjustment for inflation is $154 million,
using the most current (2018) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic
Product. This proposed rule would not
result in an expenditure in any year that
meets or exceeds this amount.
Table 1 summarizes our estimate of
the annualized costs and the annualized
cost-saving benefits of the proposed
rule.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF BENEFITS, COSTS, AND DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED RULE
Units
Category
Benefits:
Annualized Monetized $millions/year ..................
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Annualized Quantified .........................................
Qualitative ............................................................
Costs:
Annualized Monetized $millions/year ..................
Annualized Quantified .........................................
Qualitative ............................................................
Transfers:
Federal Annualized Monetized $millions/year ....
From/To ...............................................................
14 See guidance for industry entitled ‘‘Submitting
Separate Marketing Applications and Clinical Data
for Purposes of Assessing User Fees’’ (December
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
Primary
estimate
Low
estimate
High
estimate
Year dollars
$2.48
$2.56
......................
......................
$0.33
$0.32
......................
......................
$4.64
$4.80
......................
......................
2017
2017
......................
......................
$0.00
$0.00
......................
......................
$0.00
$0.00
......................
......................
$0.00
$0.00
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
From:
Notes
7
3
7
3
10
10
......................
......................
Cost savings.
Cost savings.
2017
2017
......................
......................
7
3
7
3
10
10
......................
......................
......................
7
3
......................
To:
2004). Available at https://www.fda.gov/ucm/
groups/fdagov-public/@fdagov-drugs-gen/
PO 00000
Period
covered
(years)
Discount rate
(%)
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
documents/document/ucm079320.pdf. (accessed
March 2019).
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
30975
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF BENEFITS, COSTS, AND DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED RULE—Continued
Units
Category
Other Annualized Monetized $millions/year ...............
From/To ...............................................................
Primary
estimate
Low
estimate
High
estimate
Year dollars
......................
......................
......................
......................
From:
Period
covered
(years)
Discount rate
(%)
7
3
Notes
......................
To:
Effects:
State, Local or Tribal Government: None.
Small Business: None.
Wages: None.
Growth: None.
In line with Executive Order 13771, in
table 2 we estimate present and
annualized values of costs and cost
savings over an infinite time horizon.
Based on these cost savings, this
proposed rule would be considered a
deregulatory action under Executive
Order 13771.
TABLE 2—E.O. 13771 SUMMARY TABLE
[$ million in 2016 dollars over an infinite horizon]
Lower bound
(7%)
Present Value of Costs ............................
Present Value of Cost-Savings ................
Present Value of Net Costs .....................
Annualized Costs .....................................
Annualized Cost-Savings .........................
Annualized Net Costs ..............................
$0.02
$2.49
($2.47)
$0.00
$0.17
($0.17)
We have developed a comprehensive
Preliminary Economic Analysis of
Impacts that assesses the impacts of the
proposed rule. The full preliminary
analysis of economic impacts is
available in the docket for this proposed
rule (Ref. 1) and at https://www.fda.gov/
AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/
Reports/EconomicAnalyses/default.htm.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
We have determined under 21 CFR
25.30(h) that this action is of a type that
does not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule refers to
previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR
part 314 and 21 CFR part 601 have been
approved under OMB control numbers
0910–0001 and 0910–0338, respectively.
X. Federalism
We have analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
Primary
(7%)
Upper bound
(7%)
$0.02
$18.66
($18.64)
$0.00
$1.31
($1.30)
$0.02
$34.83
($34.81)
$0.00
$2.44
($2.44)
forth in Executive Order 13132. We
have determined that this proposed rule
does not contain policies that have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Accordingly, we
conclude that the rule does not contain
policies that have federalism
implications as defined in the Executive
Order and, consequently, a federalism
summary impact statement is not
required.
XI. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
We have analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13175. We
have tentatively determined that the
rule does not contain policies that
would have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. The
Agency solicits comments from tribal
officials on any potential impact on
Indian Tribes from this proposed action.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Lower bound
(3%)
$0.02
$2.80
($2.77)
$0.00
$0.08
($0.08)
Primary
(3%)
$0.02
$22.47
($22.45)
$0.00
$0.67
($0.67)
Upper bound
(3%)
$0.03
$42.14
($42.12)
$0.00
$1.26
($1.26)
XII. Reference
The following reference is on display
at the Dockets Management Staff (see
ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing
by interested persons between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; it
is also available electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov.
1. FDA, Preliminary Regulatory Impact
Analysis, ‘‘Biologics License
Applications and Master Files.’’
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 601
Administrative practice and
procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
Therefore, under the Public Health
Service Act and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, we propose that 21 CFR part
601 be amended as follows:
PART 601—LICENSING
1. The authority citation for part 601
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1451–1561; 21 U.S.C.
321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356b, 360, 360c–
360f, 360h–360j, 371, 374, 379e, 381; 42
U.S.C. 216, 241, 262, 263, 264; sec 122, Pub.
L. 105–115, 111 Stat. 2322 (21 U.S.C. 355
note), sec 7002(e), Pub. L. 111–148, 124 Stat.
817.
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
30976
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 125 / Friday, June 28, 2019 / Proposed Rules
2. Amend § 601.2 by adding
paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) to read as
follows:
■
§ 601.2 Applications for biologics
licenses; procedures for filing.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Except as provided in paragraph
(h) of this section, an application for a
biological product submitted to the
Food and Drug Administration for
licensure under section 351 of the
Public Health Service Act; licensed
under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act; or deemed, under section
7002(e) of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of
2009, to be licensed under section 351
of the Public Health Service Act may
not incorporate by reference drug
substance, drug substance intermediate,
or drug product information contained
in a master file, including a drug master
file submitted under § 314.420 of this
chapter. Amendments and supplements
submitted in support of these
applications also may not incorporate
by reference such information contained
in a master file.
(h) An application for a biological
product that:
(1) Was approved under section 505
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act;
(2) Was deemed on March 23, 2020,
to be a license for the biological product
under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act; and
(3) On March 23, 2020, incorporated
by reference drug substance, drug
substance intermediate, and/or drug
product information contained in a drug
master file submitted under § 314.420 of
this chapter may continue to
incorporate by reference the information
contained in that drug master file after
March 23, 2020. Amendments and
supplements submitted in support of
these applications may also incorporate
by reference the information contained
in that drug master file.
(i) Nothing in paragraph (g) of this
section limits or restricts an application
for a biological product submitted to the
Food and Drug Administration for
licensure under section 351 of the
Public Health Service Act; licensed
under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act; or deemed, under section
7002(e) of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of
2009, to be licensed under section 351
of the Public Health Service Act from
incorporating by reference information
contained in any master file, including
a drug master file submitted under
§ 314.420 of this chapter, that is not
drug substance, drug substance
intermediate, or drug product
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:43 Jun 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(RD) (7505P), main telephone number:
(703) 305–7090, email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov; or Robert
McNally, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division (BPPD) (7511P),
main telephone number: (703) 305–
7090, email address: BPPDFRNotices@
epa.gov. The mailing address for each
contact person is: Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460–0001. As part of
the mailing address, include the contact
person’s name, division, and mail code.
The division to contact is listed at the
end of each pesticide petition summary.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
40 CFR Parts 174 and 180
I. General Information
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2019–0041; FRL–9995–27]
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
information. Amendments and
supplements submitted in support of
these applications may also incorporate
by reference such information contained
in a master file.
(j) Nothing in paragraph (g) of this
section limits or restricts an
investigational new drug application for
a biological product from incorporating
by reference any information, including
drug substance, drug substance
intermediate, and drug product
information, contained in a master file,
including a drug master file submitted
under § 314.420 of this chapter.
Dated: June 17, 2019.
Norman E. Sharpless,
Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
Dated: June 21, 2019.
Eric D. Hargan,
Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and
Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2019–13753 Filed 6–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
Receipt of Several Pesticide Petitions
Filed for Residues of Pesticide
Chemicals In or On Various
Commodities (May 2019)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of filing of petitions and
request for comment.
AGENCY:
This document announces the
Agency’s receipt of several initial filings
of pesticide petitions requesting the
establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various commodities.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 29, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by the docket identification
(ID) number and pesticide petition
number (PP) of interest as shown in the
body of this document, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
E:\FR\FM\28JNP1.SGM
28JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 125 (Friday, June 28, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30968-30976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13753]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 601
[Docket No. FDA-2019-N-1363]
RIN 0910-AH50
Biologics License Applications and Master Files
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is
proposing to amend its regulations concerning the use of master files
for biological products. This action, if finalized, will allow certain
biological products approved under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FD&C Act) to continue to incorporate by reference information
about drug substances, drug substance intermediates, or drug products
contained in master files after those products are deemed to be
licensed under the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) on March 23,
2020. The proposed rule also codifies FDA's practice of permitting
applications for biological products submitted under the PHS Act to
incorporate by reference information other than drug substance, drug
substance intermediate, or drug product information contained in a
master file. In addition, the proposed rule codifies FDA's practice of
permitting investigational new drug applications to incorporate by
reference any information contained in a master file for products
subject to licensure under the PHS Act.
DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the proposed
rule by August 27, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before August 27, 2019. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of August 27, 2019. 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.
Electronic Submissions
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
[[Page 30969]]
Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and 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-2019-N-1363 for ``Biologics License Applications and Master
Files.'' 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/2015-23389.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 Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kavita Vyas, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 51, Rm. 4154, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-
796-4787, [email protected]; or Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave. Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
240-402-7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed Rule
C. Legal Authority
D. Costs and Benefits
II. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used Acronyms in This Document
III. Background
A. Introduction
B. FDA's Current Regulatory Framework
C. Need for the Regulation
D. History of the Rulemaking
IV. Legal Authority
V. Description of the Proposed Rule
A. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (g)
B. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (i)
C. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (j)
D. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (h)
E. Proposed Records/Record Retention Requirements
F. Proposed Enforcement Provisions
G. Proposed Technical/Conforming Amendments
VI. Proposed Effective/Compliance Dates
VII. Preliminary Economic Analysis of Impacts
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
X. Federalism
XI. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
XII. Reference
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to amend its regulations to implement certain aspects
of section 7002(e) of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation
Act of 2009 (BPCI Act). The proposed rule is necessary to avoid
unnecessary disruptions with respect to biological products originally
approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355) when their
applications are deemed to be licenses under the PHS Act and to prevent
potential drug shortages when those products are transitioned to being
regulated under section 351 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262). The
proposed rule will also update the regulation to reflect FDA's
longstanding practices regarding the use of master files referenced in
applications for biological products submitted under section 351 of the
PHS Act.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to amend its regulations concerning the use of master
files for biological products. The proposed rule would allow certain
biological products, originally approved in a new drug application
(NDA) under the FD&C Act, to continue relying on a drug master file for
information on a drug substance, drug substance intermediate, or drug
product (DS/DSI/DP) after the NDA is deemed to be a license for a
biological product under the PHS Act on March 23, 2020. The proposed
rule also codifies FDA's existing practice that a biological product in
a biologics license application (BLA) under the PHS Act may rely on a
master file, except for information regarding a drug substance, drug
substance intermediate, or drug product. In addition, the rule codifies
FDA's practice that an investigational new drug application (IND) for a
biological product may incorporate by reference any information,
including drug substance, drug substance intermediate, and drug product
information, contained in a master file.
C. Legal Authority
FDA is proposing to amend its regulations, in part, to implement
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act. FDA's authority for this rule also
derives from the biological product provisions of the PHS Act (42
U.S.C. 262 and 264), and the provisions of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321,
et seq.) applicable to drugs, including section 701 (21 U.S.C. 371);
the FD&C Act provisions are applicable to biological products under
section 351(j) of the PHS Act.
D. Costs and Benefits
FDA anticipates that affected entities would incur minimal costs to
read and understand the rule. By allowing transitioned products to
continue to incorporate by reference information contained in existing
master files, FDA avoids imposing a potential new regulatory burden.
FDA projects that over 10 years at a discount rate of 7 percent the
proposed rule would generate annualized net cost savings ranging from
$0.3 million to $4.6 million with a primary estimate of $2.5 million;
over 10 years at a discount rate of 3 percent the proposed rule would
generate annualized net cost savings ranging from $0.3 million to $4.8
[[Page 30970]]
million with a primary estimate of $2.6 million.
II--Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used Acronyms in This Document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviation/acronym What it means
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLA................................. Biologics License Application.
BPCI Act............................ Biologics Price Competition and
Innovation Act of 2009.
DMF................................. Drug Master File.
DP.................................. Drug Product.
DS.................................. Drug Substance.
DSI................................. Drug Substance Intermediate.
FD&C Act............................ Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act.
FDA................................. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
IND................................. Investigational New Drug
Application.
NDA................................. New Drug Application.
PHS Act............................. Public Health Service Act.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Background
A. Introduction
This proposed rule, when finalized, would amend FDA regulations
relating to the use of master files in applications for biological
products subject to regulation under the PHS Act. Section 7002(b)(1) of
the BPCI Act revised section 351(i) of the PHS Act, in part, to amend
the definition of a ``biological product'' to include a ``protein
(except any chemically synthesized polypeptide).'' \1\ A number of
products approved in NDAs under section 505 of the FD&C Act meet the
revised definition of biological product. Also, section 7002(e)(4) of
the BPCI Act provided that, on March 23, 2020, an application for a
biological product approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act ``shall
be deemed to be a license for the biological product under'' section
351 of the PHS Act. This rule implements FDA's interpretation of the
``deemed to be a license'' provision of the BPCI Act with respect to
the use of master files.\2\ In addition, this rule codifies current
Agency practices relating to the use of master files referenced in
applications for biological products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On December 12, 2018, FDA issued a proposed rule regarding
its interpretation of the terms ``protein'' and ``chemically
synthesized polypeptide'' as used in section 351(i) of the PHS Act
(``Definition of the term `Biological Product' '', 83 FR 63817).
\2\ For more information about FDA's interpretation of the
``deemed to be a license'' provision of the BPCI Act, see guidance
for industry entitled ``Interpretation of the `Deemed to be a
License' Provision of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation
Act of 2009'' (December 2018). We update guidances periodically. To
make sure you have the most recent version of a guidance, check the
FDA Drugs guidance web page at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. FDA's Current Regulatory Framework
1. What are master files?
Master files are submissions to the Agency that may be used to
provide detailed, confidential information to the Agency about
facilities, processes, or articles used in the manufacturing,
processing, packaging, or storing of one or more human drugs.
Information contained in a master file can be used to support a
submission to FDA by an applicant or sponsor. The holder of a master
file can authorize one or more applicants or sponsors to incorporate by
reference information contained in the master file to support a
submission to FDA without having to disclose the information in that
master file (which may contain trade secrets or other confidential
commercial information) to the applicants or sponsors.3 4
The submission of a master file is at the sole discretion of the master
file holder. Ordinarily, FDA neither independently reviews nor approves
submissions to a master file; instead, the Agency reviews such
information only in the context of an application that incorporates by
reference information contained in that master file.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See, e.g., 21 CFR 314.420 and 47 FR 46622 at 46642 (October
19, 1982).
\4\ The holder of a master file (including a drug master file)
who expects that information in the file will be incorporated by
reference both in a BLA and in an NDA or abbreviated new drug
application (ANDA) need only submit the master file to the Agency
once.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Drug master files. Some master files contain information that is
relevant to applications for drug products. For products regulated
under section 505 of the FD&C Act, FDA defines the term ``drug master
file'' (DMF) in its drug regulations (Sec. 314.420(a) (21 CFR
314.420(a))) and explicitly provides that ``[a]n investigational new
drug application or an application, abbreviated application, amendment,
or supplement may incorporate by reference all or part of the contents
of any drug master file in support of the submission'' if the holder of
the master file authorizes the incorporation (Sec. 314.420(b)).
Section 314.420 also describes several types of DMFs, each of which
typically contains certain kinds of information (Sec. 314.420(a)):
Drug substance, drug substance intermediate, and materials used in
their preparation, or drug product (referred to as Type II DMFs);
packaging materials (Type III); excipient, colorant, flavor, essence,
or materials used in their preparation (Type IV); and FDA-accepted
reference information (Type V). (See also FDA Guidance for Industry
entitled ``Drug Master Files: Guidelines,'' September 1989, available
at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm122886.htm (accessed March 2019).)
b. Other master files. FDA also permits reference to master files
that are not addressed by Sec. 314.420, some of which contain
information that is relevant to applications for biological
products.\5\ The Agency's approach to the terminology for types of
master files used for products regulated under the PHS Act has
generally tracked its approach to the types of DMFs (e.g., Type II,
Type III) used for products regulated under the FD&C Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., 21 CFR 601.51(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Biologics License Applications and Master Files
a. FDA generally permits BLAs to incorporate by reference
information contained in master files. Just as FDA permits NDAs and
ANDAs under the FD&C Act to incorporate by reference certain
information contained in DMFs, the Agency also generally permits
applications under the PHS Act (BLAs) to incorporate by reference
certain information contained in master files, including DMFs.
For most categories of information and most application types
(including BLAs and INDs), the needs of master file holders, applicants
and sponsors, and FDA have been adequately met through this
incorporation-by-reference mechanism. This mechanism allows applicants
and sponsors to refer to information contained in master files without
having knowledge of the contents of those master files (Sec. 314.420;
47 FR 46622 at 46642). For products licensed under section 351 of the
PHS Act, FDA has permitted, and will generally continue to permit, the
use of information contained in most types of master files (such as
information about excipients, stabilizers, penetrants, or materials
used in the preparation of DS/DSI/DP) because the applicant generally
has the ability to independently identify and mitigate the risk posed
to product quality by such components. For example, applicants are
permitted to incorporate by reference in their BLA information on
container closures contained in a master file. This is the case because
an applicant can independently identify the risk to product quality
posed by a container closure (for example, by leachables in the
closure) by performing appropriate studies on stability and
adequateness for intended use and then taking steps to
[[Page 30971]]
mitigate any risks identified (for example, by implementing appropriate
testing and controls). Thus, in such cases, the feasibility of testing
to confirm the adequateness of intended container closures mitigates
the risks to quality arising from the applicant's lack of access to the
information contained in the master file.
Accordingly, proposed Sec. 601.2(i) would codify FDA's
longstanding practice of permitting biological products in BLAs to
incorporate by reference most categories of information contained in
master files (other than information about DS/DSI/DP, discussed below).
b. FDA currently does not permit biological products in BLAs to
incorporate by reference drug substance, drug substance intermediate,
or drug product information in master files. Although FDA's approach to
the use of master files in BLAs largely parallels its approach to the
use of DMFs in applications under the FD&C Act, there is a significant
difference: Unlike applications submitted under section 505 of the FC&C
Act, for biological products in BLAs, the Agency has, as a scientific
matter, expected applicants to submit information about DS/DSI/DP
directly to the BLA rather than incorporating it by reference to a
master file. (See, e.g., FDA Guidance for Industry entitled ``Quality
Considerations in Demonstrating Biosimilarity of a Therapeutic Protein
Product to a Reference Product'' April 2015, available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/guidances/ucm291134.pdf (accessed March 2019).)
The risk associated with the manufacture of complex biological
products is generally significantly higher than that associated with
the manufacture of chemical entities, which are often less complex.\6\
This is because most biological products tend to have certain features
(e.g., amino acid sequence, glycosylation, folding, cellular phenotype)
essential to their intended effect and can be very sensitive to changes
to their manufacturing process. In addition, biological products
derived from biological sources may be complex heterogeneous mixtures,
which provides another basis for having consistent process controls to
ensure quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Agency recognizes that, in limited circumstances, this
may not always be the case; however, for purposes of administrative
efficiency and predictability, the Agency is proposing a bright line
between BLAs and NDAs regarding the referencing of master files for
DS/DSI/DP information for biological products.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, the Agency considers the establishment and
function of a robust quality assurance program, with intimate knowledge
of all manufacturing steps, to be essential for controlling and
evaluating the process and the biological product, and for mitigating
product quality risks. The applicant for a BLA is expected to have
knowledge of and direct control over the manufacturing process for the
DS/DSI/DP for a biological product (21 CFR 601.2 and 601.20). Absent
this knowledge and control, the applicant generally cannot operate a
robust quality assurance program that independently identifies and
mitigates quality risks, which is critical to assuring the quality of a
biological product.
As a scientific matter, given the complexity of biological
products, the Agency considers it generally impractical for the
applicant to confirm the DS/DSI/DP quality characteristics of a
biological product without complete knowledge of, and control over, all
aspects of the manufacturing process. FDA has concluded that the risk
to quality arising from the fragmentation of information about DS/DSI/
DP for a biological product between a master file and a BLA is very
difficult to mitigate. As a result, FDA believes that this type of
information is generally best submitted to the Agency directly in the
BLA, and that a BLA that incorporates by reference DS/DSI/DP
information for a biological product contained in a master file is
generally inconsistent with biological product licensing
requirements.7 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ FDA may permit, and generally will continue to permit, an
applicant to incorporate by reference certain information about a
product that is not the subject of the applicant's own BLA, such as
information about a comparator product used in studies intended to
support approval of the applicant's BLA. Incorporation of such
information by reference generally does not raise similar concerns
relating to an applicant's knowledge and control over all aspects of
the manufacturing process for the product that is the subject of the
applicant's own BLA.
\8\ In lieu of the use of master files, other types of contract
manufacturing arrangements can be considered if the sponsor does not
intend to manufacture all aspects of the product for licensure and
the licensee assumes responsibility for compliance with the
applicable product and establishment standards. (See, e.g., FDA
guidance for industry entitled ``Cooperative Manufacturing
Arrangements For Licensed Biologics,'' November 2008, available at
https://www.fda.gov/ucm/groups/fdagov-public/@fdagov-bio-gen/documents/document/ucm069908.pdf (accessed March 2019).)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, proposed Sec. 601.2(g) would codify FDA's
longstanding practice of not permitting a biological product in a BLA
to incorporate by reference information regarding DS/DSI/DP contained
in master files.
3. The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009
Section 7002(b) of the BPCI Act amended, in part, the definition of
a ``biological product'' in the PHS Act to include a ``protein (except
any chemically synthesized polypeptide).'' \9\ Accordingly, under
section 351(i) of the PHS Act, a ``biological product'' is now defined
as ``a virus, therapeutic serum, toxin, antitoxin, vaccine, blood,
blood component or derivative, allergenic product, protein (except any
chemically synthesized polypeptide), or analogous product, or
arsphenamine or derivative of arsphenamine (or any other trivalent
organic arsenic compound), applicable to the prevention, treatment, or
cure of a disease or condition of human beings'' (section 351(i) of the
PHS Act; emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See footnote 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some protein products have historically been approved under section
505 of the FD&C Act. However, section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act provides
that a marketing application for a ``biological product'' must be
submitted under section 351 of the PHS Act (subject to certain
exceptions during a transition period ending on March 23, 2020).
Section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act also provides that, on March 23, 2020,
an application for a biological product approved under section 505 of
the FD&C Act ``shall be deemed to be a license for a biological product
under section 351'' of the PHS Act.\10\ Such approved applications are
referred to as ``deemed BLAs'' in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See FDA Guidance for Industry entitled ``Interpretation of
the `Deemed to be a License' Provision of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009'' (December 2018). Available
at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM490264.pdf
(accessed March 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Need for the Regulation
1. The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 and the
Use of Drug Master Files in BLAs
The BPCI Act is silent about implementation of the ``deemed to be a
license for a biological product'' provision. In March 2016, FDA
published a draft guidance for industry entitled ``Interpretation of
the `Deemed to be a License' Provision of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009'' (see 81 FR 13373, March 14,
2016). Footnote 12 of that draft guidance explained that for sponsors
of proposed protein products who intend to submit a BLA, a Type II DMF
for a drug substance, drug substance intermediate, or drug product
would not be acceptable for a BLA
[[Page 30972]]
because a license holder is expected to have knowledge of and control
over the manufacturing process for the biological product for which it
has a license. The footnote went on to provide that FDA is considering
a mechanism that, in limited circumstances, would allow holders of
approved applications under section 505 of the FD&C Act that reference
a Type II DMF to continue to reference the DMF after the application is
deemed to be a license under the PHS Act on March 23, 2020. FDA
finalized this guidance in December 2018 (available at https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM490264.pdf (accessed March 2019)), after considering
comments in its draft recommendations and without including the
corresponding footnote from the draft guidance because this proposed
rule would establish such a mechanism, while also codifying the general
longstanding practice that BLAs and INDs for biological products can
reference information in master files except, in the case of BLAs, for
DS/DSI/DP information for a biological product.
2. Mechanism To Permit the Continued Use of Currently Referenced DMFs
by ``Deemed BLAs''
Biological products regulated under the FD&C Act have been able to
incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information contained in DMFs to
support the approval of NDAs. As explained above, for biological
products licensed under section 351 of the PHS Act, incorporating by
reference information contained in master files on DS/DSI/DP generally
is not permitted.
This proposed regulation addresses, in part, a specific issue
related to implementation of the ``deemed to be a license'' provision
of the BPCI Act: Whether applications approved under section 505 of the
FD&C Act may continue to incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in DMFs once the applications are deemed to be BLAs subject
to licensure and regulation under the PHS Act.
To date, FDA has identified approximately 89 applications approved
under the FD&C Act that will be deemed licensed under the PHS Act on
March 23, 2020. Approximately 17 of these applications incorporate by
reference information on DS/DSI/DP contained in DMFs. Furthermore, the
DS/DSI/DP information incorporated by reference into these 17
applications is drawn from only 7 DMFs. Thus, this use of DMFs for DS/
DSI/DP information involves a small subset of the deemed BLAs and only
a very small number of DMFs.
In light of FDA's longstanding practice of not permitting a
biological product in a BLA to incorporate by reference information
regarding DS/DSI/DP contained in a master file, the Agency is
considering the appropriate regulatory approach to the relatively few
deemed BLAs that reference DS/DSI/DP information contained in DMFs. The
Agency is evaluating the risks and benefits of allowing these deemed
BLAs to continue incorporating by reference this type of information
from those DMFs. The analysis takes into account clinical
considerations and product availability, as well as the limited number
of applications and the limited number of DMFs that are involved. Based
on this analysis, the Agency proposes that for biological products, the
appropriate mechanism with respect to addressing incorporation by
reference of DS/DSI/DP information contained in DMFs would be to
implement the least disruptive approach.
Some of the deemed BLAs that currently incorporate by reference
information contained in DMFs to support the application were approved
by the Agency based in part on DS/DSI/DP information contained in those
DMFs. Many of these products have been marketed for decades. Over this
period, none of these products have been withdrawn or removed from the
market for reasons of safety or effectiveness. For these products, the
Agency has no reason to believe that the March 23, 2020, transition in
and of itself introduces new risks to product safety, purity, and
potency.
For some biological products, such as certain reproductive
hormones, treating the deemed BLAs like other applications for
biological products under the PHS Act with regard to the use of DS/DSI/
DP information contained in a DMF would present a considerable
challenge. Nearly all approved applications for these biological
products incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information contained in a
DMF. This incorporation by reference has resulted in drug substances
for these products of acceptable quality for decades. For example,
multiple Human Chorionic Gonadotropins from urinary sources have been
on the market since the mid-1970s using DMFs for information on the
drug substance, with changes to the product being handled through the
DMF pathway. Disallowing use of DMFs for these deemed BLAs would
curtail or halt production of these products, resulting in imminent or
immediate drug shortages with considerable negative impacts on public
health. FDA does not believe it was Congress's intent when enacting
section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act that deemed BLAs would need to be
removed from the market on March 23, 2020.
Furthermore, the general concern about fragmentation of DS/DSI/DP
information associated with the use of DMFs is lessened in the case of
the deemed BLAs by the existence of generally longstanding
relationships between the deemed-BLA applicants and the DMF holders.
For example, the license holder of a deemed BLA may have accumulated
knowledge about the quality of the biological product supplied by the
DMF holder over an extended period. This accumulated knowledge allows
the deemed BLA holder to implement a more robust control strategy to
mitigate the risk to product quality posed by the applicant's limited
knowledge of the manufacturing process described in the DMF.
In light of these facts, FDA believes that permitting a limited
number of deemed BLAs to continue to incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP
information contained in a limited number of DMFs will, on balance,
protect and promote the public health. In contrast, if non-deemed BLAs
were to reference an existing DMF, they would generally not have the
benefit of this accumulated knowledge, and thus would not be able to
mitigate the resulting fragmentation of information and risk to product
quality as effectively. Similarly, while the lack of overt safety
signals and the absence of concerns about efficacy provide a rationale
for allowing a deemed BLA to continue to rely on DS/DSI/DP information
contained in a DMF, it may not be appropriate to extend this rationale
to a non-deemed BLA. For these reasons, in proposed Sec. 601.2(h), FDA
would permit only deemed BLAs that incorporate by reference information
on DS/DSI/DP contained in particular DMFs in their approved
applications under section 505 of the FD&C Act to continue doing so
after these products are deemed to be licensed under the PHS Act on
March 23, 2020. BLAs for other biological products will continue to not
be permitted to incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in a master file, consistent with FDA's longstanding
practice. Also, to enable innovation for deemed BLAs that reference an
existing DMF, it is important to preserve the ability to make changes
to the existing DMFs. Therefore, the proposed rule will permit holders
of existing DMFs referenced for deemed BLAs before transition to modify
these DMFs under Sec. 314.420 after March 23, 2020.
[[Page 30973]]
3. Investigational New Drug Applications and Master Files
Section 314.420(b) provides that ``[a]n investigational new drug
application . . . may incorporate by reference all or part of the
contents of any drug master file in support of the submission'' with
the DMF holder's consent. In addition, FDA typically permits an IND for
a biological product to incorporate by reference information contained
in other master files, in addition to DMFs. Furthermore, it has been
FDA's practice to permit sponsors of INDs for biological products to
incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information contained in a master
file.
FDA permits the use of DS/DSI/DP master files in biological product
INDs for several reasons. Exposure to the investigational product is
limited in the IND stage because it is only administered to subjects
enrolled in clinical trials, which are typically carried out in
controlled settings. Accordingly, the sponsor and FDA can mitigate risk
more effectively by closely monitoring patients in those trials, in
order to evaluate the safety of the investigational product, which is a
necessary component of the licensing process.
Permitting the sponsor of an IND for a biological product to
incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information contained in master
files may also facilitate product development. Without this option, a
sponsor might choose not to make the significant investment to
manufacture the necessary DS/DSI/DP for a biological product at this
early stage of development. However, even in cases where an IND sponsor
of a biological product incorporates by reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in a master file, FDA expects the sponsor to have knowledge
of and direct control of the manufacturing process by later stages of
development.
Therefore, in proposed Sec. 601.2(j), FDA clarifies and codifies
this practice.
D. History of the Rulemaking
In response to the BPCI Act, public meetings were held to discuss
various aspects of the statute. Also, public comments on the current
FDA practice for biological products of not accepting DMFs for
biological products in BLAs were received in the context of the draft
guidance for industry entitled ``Interpretation of the `Deemed to be a
License' Provision of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation
Act of 2009'' (see 81 FR 13373). Comments, in part: (1) Urged FDA to
clarify its position on the use of Type II DMFs for applications that
will be deemed BLAs on March 23, 2020, and, at least for pancreatic
enzyme products, recommended FDA permit applications to reference Type
II DMFs after March 23, 2020, even if the application was not approved
as an NDA prior to the transition date; \11\ (2) urged FDA to adopt a
flexible approach toward the continued referencing of existing DMFs;
\12\ and (3) sought clarity on the use of other categories of DMFs
(e.g., Type III DMFs).\13\ FDA finalized this guidance in December 2018
after considering comments in its draft recommendations. With respect
to the comments concerning DMFs, the Agency undertook an analysis of
the number of DMFs, the number of applications referencing these DMFs,
and considered the consequences of not taking any action or taking the
proposed action. The Agency addressed all the concerns identified in
the public comments through the actions described in this proposed
rule, which includes allowing the incorporation by reference of DS/DP/
DSI information contained in DMFs, provided the DMFs were referenced
prior to the application being deemed a BLA on March 23, 2020, and
providing clarity on the use of other categories of DMFs in BLAs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Comment from Curemark, LLC to Docket No. FDA-2015-D-
4750 (available at https://www.regulations.gov).
\12\ See Comment from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers
of America (PhRMA) to Docket No. FDA-2015-D-4750 (available at
https://www.regulations.gov).
\13\ See Comments from Biotechnology Innovation Organization and
from Novo Nordisk, Docket No. FDA-2015-D-4750.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Legal Authority
FDA is proposing to amend its regulations, in part, to implement
certain aspects of section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act. FDA's authority for
this proposed rule also derives from the biological product licensing
provisions of the PHS Act and the provisions of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
321, et seq.) applicable to drugs. Under these provisions, FDA has the
authority to issue regulations designed to ensure, among other things,
that biological products are safe, pure, and potent and manufactured in
accordance with current good manufacturing practice. FDA also has
general authority to promulgate regulations for the efficient
enforcement of the FD&C Act and the PHS Act, under section 701 of the
FD&C Act and section 351(j) of the PHS Act.
V. Description of the Proposed Rule
We propose to amend Sec. 601.2 to add new paragraphs (g), (h),
(i), and (j). Specifically, the proposed rule will allow applications
for biological products approved under section 505 of the FD&C Act to
continue to incorporate by reference DS/DP/DSI information contained in
DMFs, provided the DMFs were referenced before March 23, 2020. Also,
this proposed rule essentially codifies, for biological products, the
longstanding Agency practices of permitting BLAs to incorporate by
reference information other than on DS/DP/DSI contained in master files
and INDs to incorporate any information contained in master files. FDA
is aware that there are combination products approved in BLAs under the
PHS Act and considers that the rationale described in this rule for
biological products also applies to the biological constituent part of
such combination products. FDA seeks comments on whether applications
for combination products submitted in BLAs under the PHS Act should be
permitted to incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information for any
non-biological constituent part (for example, the drug constituent part
of an antibody drug conjugate).
A. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (g)
Proposed new paragraph (g) codifies the Agency's practice of not
permitting applications for biological products submitted under section
351 of the PHS Act to incorporate by reference information on DS/DSI/DP
contained in a master file. Deemed BLAs are excluded from this
provision and are addressed in proposed new paragraph (h).
B. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (i)
Proposed new paragraph (i) codifies the Agency's practice of
permitting applications for biological products submitted under section
351 of the PHS Act to incorporate by reference information other than
DS/DSI/DP information contained in master files, including in DMFs.
C. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (j)
Proposed new paragraph (j) codifies the Agency's practice of
permitting INDs to incorporate by reference information contained in
master files, including information on DS/DSI/DP.
D. Proposed Provision of Paragraph (h)
Proposed new paragraph (h) addresses applications transitioning on
March 23, 2020, under section 7002(e) of the BPCI Act. It allows an
application for a biological product that has been approved under
section 505 of the FD&C Act and that incorporates by reference DS/DSI/
DP information contained in a DMF to continue to do so after that
application is deemed to be a BLA.
[[Page 30974]]
The proposed rule is intended to preserve the status quo both for
the small number of deemed BLAs and for all other applications for
biological products submitted under section 351 of the PHS Act: Deemed
BLAs that incorporate by reference information on DS/DSI/DP contained
in a DMF at the time of their transition will be permitted to continue
to do so, but no other applications for biological products will be
permitted to incorporate by reference DS/DSI/DP information contained
in any master files.
The proposed rule is not intended to alter a license holder's
ability to modify a product under Sec. 601.12 (21 CFR 601.12). The
proposed rule is also not intended to expand or reduce the changes
allowed to a deemed BLA that incorporates by reference information
contained in master files. Under the proposed rule, an applicant would
be permitted to supplement a deemed BLA within the same application, as
it would any other BLA under Sec. 601.12 and the applicable bundling
policy.\14\ However, if modifications to the deemed BLA are required
that could not be effected in a supplement and a new application is
required, that new BLA would not be considered a deemed BLA. As is the
case with other (non-deemed) applications for biological products, the
new BLA would not be permitted to reference DS/DSI/DP information
contained in any master file and would need to submit this information
as part of the new BLA itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See guidance for industry entitled ``Submitting Separate
Marketing Applications and Clinical Data for Purposes of Assessing
User Fees'' (December 2004). Available at https://www.fda.gov/ucm/groups/fdagov-public/@fdagov-drugs-gen/documents/document/ucm079320.pdf. (accessed March 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule is also not intended to limit or restrict the
changes that may be made to any master file, including a DMF for DS/
DSI/DP information.
The proposed rule thus preserves the relationship between a DMF and
the application that references it. This ensures that the transition to
regulation under the PHS Act does not interrupt the supply of
biological products that have already been shown to be safe and
effective.
E. Proposed Records/Record Retention Requirements
None; existing records and retention requirements will continue to
apply.
F. Proposed Enforcement Provisions
None; existing enforcement regulations will continue to apply.
G. Proposed Technical/Conforming Amendments
None necessary.
VI. Proposed Effective/Compliance Dates
If finalized on or before February 22, 2020, this rule would take
effect on March 23, 2020.
VII. Preliminary Economic Analysis of Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13771, the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and
13563 direct us to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). Executive Order 13771
requires that the costs associated with significant new regulations
``shall, to the extent permitted by law, be offset by the elimination
of existing costs associated with at least two prior regulations.'' We
believe that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action
as defined by Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the proposed rule does not impose any new burdens, we
propose to certify that the proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires
us to prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $154 million, using the most current (2018) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This proposed rule would
not result in an expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this
amount.
Table 1 summarizes our estimate of the annualized costs and the
annualized cost-saving benefits of the proposed rule.
Table 1--Summary of Benefits, Costs, and Distributional Effects of Proposed Rule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Units
------------------------------------------
Category Primary Low estimate High Period Notes
estimate estimate Year dollars Discount covered
rate (%) (years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits:
Annualized Monetized $millions/year. $2.48 $0.33 $4.64 2017 7 10 Cost savings.
$2.56 $0.32 $4.80 2017 3 10 Cost savings.
Annualized Quantified............... ............ ............ ............ ............ 7 ............ ..........................
Qualitative......................... ............ ............ ............ ............ 3 ............ ..........................
Costs:
Annualized Monetized $millions/year. $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2017 7 10 ..........................
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2017 3 10
Annualized Quantified............... ............ ............ ............ ............ 7 ............ ..........................
Qualitative......................... ............ ............ ............ ............ 3 ............ ..........................
Transfers:
Federal Annualized Monetized ............ ............ ............ ............ 7 ............ ..........................
$millions/year. 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................. From:
To:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30975]]
Other Annualized Monetized $millions/ ............ ............ ............ ............ 7 ............ ..........................
year. 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................. From:
To:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effects:
State, Local or Tribal Government: None.
Small Business: None.
Wages: None.
Growth: None.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In line with Executive Order 13771, in table 2 we estimate present
and annualized values of costs and cost savings over an infinite time
horizon. Based on these cost savings, this proposed rule would be
considered a deregulatory action under Executive Order 13771.
Table 2--E.O. 13771 Summary Table
[$ million in 2016 dollars over an infinite horizon]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower bound Upper bound Lower bound Upper bound
(7%) Primary (7%) (7%) (3%) Primary (3%) (3%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present Value of Costs.................................. $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.02 $0.03
Present Value of Cost-Savings........................... $2.49 $18.66 $34.83 $2.80 $22.47 $42.14
Present Value of Net Costs.............................. ($2.47) ($18.64) ($34.81) ($2.77) ($22.45) ($42.12)
Annualized Costs........................................ $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Annualized Cost-Savings................................. $0.17 $1.31 $2.44 $0.08 $0.67 $1.26
Annualized Net Costs.................................... ($0.17) ($1.30) ($2.44) ($0.08) ($0.67) ($1.26)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have developed a comprehensive Preliminary Economic Analysis of
Impacts that assesses the impacts of the proposed rule. The full
preliminary analysis of economic impacts is available in the docket for
this proposed rule (Ref. 1) and at https://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/EconomicAnalyses/default.htm.
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
We have determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) that this action is of a
type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule refers to previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-
3520). The collections of information in 21 CFR part 314 and 21 CFR
part 601 have been approved under OMB control numbers 0910-0001 and
0910-0338, respectively.
X. Federalism
We have analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. We have determined that
this proposed rule does not contain policies that have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly,
we conclude that the rule does not contain policies that have
federalism implications as defined in the Executive Order and,
consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not required.
XI. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
We have analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13175. We have tentatively
determined that the rule does not contain policies that would have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes. The Agency solicits comments from tribal
officials on any potential impact on Indian Tribes from this proposed
action.
XII. Reference
The following reference is on display at the Dockets Management
Staff (see ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing by interested
persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday; it is also
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov.
1. FDA, Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis, ``Biologics License
Applications and Master Files.''
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 601
Administrative practice and procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
Therefore, under the Public Health Service Act and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, we propose that 21 CFR
part 601 be amended as follows:
PART 601--LICENSING
0
1. The authority citation for part 601 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1451-1561; 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 356b, 360, 360c-360f, 360h-360j, 371, 374, 379e, 381; 42 U.S.C.
216, 241, 262, 263, 264; sec 122, Pub. L. 105-115, 111 Stat. 2322
(21 U.S.C. 355 note), sec 7002(e), Pub. L. 111-148, 124 Stat. 817.
[[Page 30976]]
0
2. Amend Sec. 601.2 by adding paragraphs (g), (h), (i), and (j) to
read as follows:
Sec. 601.2 Applications for biologics licenses; procedures for
filing.
* * * * *
(g) Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this section, an
application for a biological product submitted to the Food and Drug
Administration for licensure under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act; licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service
Act; or deemed, under section 7002(e) of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, to be licensed under section
351 of the Public Health Service Act may not incorporate by reference
drug substance, drug substance intermediate, or drug product
information contained in a master file, including a drug master file
submitted under Sec. 314.420 of this chapter. Amendments and
supplements submitted in support of these applications also may not
incorporate by reference such information contained in a master file.
(h) An application for a biological product that:
(1) Was approved under section 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act;
(2) Was deemed on March 23, 2020, to be a license for the
biological product under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act;
and
(3) On March 23, 2020, incorporated by reference drug substance,
drug substance intermediate, and/or drug product information contained
in a drug master file submitted under Sec. 314.420 of this chapter may
continue to incorporate by reference the information contained in that
drug master file after March 23, 2020. Amendments and supplements
submitted in support of these applications may also incorporate by
reference the information contained in that drug master file.
(i) Nothing in paragraph (g) of this section limits or restricts an
application for a biological product submitted to the Food and Drug
Administration for licensure under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act; licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service
Act; or deemed, under section 7002(e) of the Biologics Price
Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, to be licensed under section
351 of the Public Health Service Act from incorporating by reference
information contained in any master file, including a drug master file
submitted under Sec. 314.420 of this chapter, that is not drug
substance, drug substance intermediate, or drug product information.
Amendments and supplements submitted in support of these applications
may also incorporate by reference such information contained in a
master file.
(j) Nothing in paragraph (g) of this section limits or restricts an
investigational new drug application for a biological product from
incorporating by reference any information, including drug substance,
drug substance intermediate, and drug product information, contained in
a master file, including a drug master file submitted under Sec.
314.420 of this chapter.
Dated: June 17, 2019.
Norman E. Sharpless,
Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
Dated: June 21, 2019.
Eric D. Hargan,
Deputy Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2019-13753 Filed 6-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P