505(b)(2) Development Resources

Camargo Counsel: The New Reality of Generics under GDUFA

How to Navigate the Impact of GDUFA From recent news, we know that the FDA has been under increasing pressure to reduce the timing of its reviews while maintaining the highest possible standards for safety and efficacy of the products it approves. This is the reason for the PDUFA and now the GDUFA goals. FDANews.com […]
Read More

Abuse-Deterrent Opioids – The Insider’s Guide to Innovation and Exclusivity in a Changing Regulatory Landscape

Abuse-Deterrent Opioids – The Insider’s Guide to Innovation and Exclusivity in a Changing Regulatory Landscape As discussed in a previous blog post (here), the 505(b)(2) development pathway provides a flexible path for developers of new abuse-deterrent formulations. The FDA has shown significant motivation and flexibility in its drive to work with innovators to address the […]
Read More

Special Protocol Assessment: Is It Important for Your Drug Development Program?

The overarching goal of the Special Protocol Assessment Draft Guidance for Industry May 2016 (HHS, FDA, CDER, & CBER) is to improve the quality of new drug applications (NDAs) and biologic license applications (BLAs) by providing more certainty in the clinical protocol design process. Among its several purposes, the Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) affords an […]
Read More

Getting Cannabis-related Products Approved: the 505(b)(2) 4-20 Projects

Several states in the US have already passed laws that remove state restrictions on the medical use of marijuana and its derivatives, and more states are considering such action. The market for medical marijuana in the US is expected to surpass $20 billion by 2020. However, federal restrictions prevent the use of medical marijuana as […]
Read More

505(b)(2) Approval Times: The Real Scoop

The Approval Time for 505(b)(2) and 505(b)(1) NME Products Is Similar A recent article by the Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development (summarized here) reported that approval times for New Molecular Entities (NMEs) approved via the 505(b)(2) pathway are nearly 5 months longer than that of NMEs approved by other pathways, 505(b)(1), or […]
Read More

Demystifying Orange Book Designations: The New Referencing Approved Drug Products in ANDA Submissions Draft Guidance

Demystifying Orange Book Designations Since its first appearance in 1980, the Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations publication (commonly referred to as the Orange Book) has served as a gateway for the emergence of generic drug products via the 505(j) drug approval pathway (and some new drug products submitted through the 505(b)(2) approval pathway). […]
Read More

Referencing a Listed Drug for the 505(b)(2) Pathway

Section 505(b)(2) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act describes a 505(b)(2) new drug application (NDA) as an application where at least some of the information required for approval comes from studies not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference. This type of information […]
Read More

On the Rise: 2016 505(b)(2) NDA Approvals

On the Rise: 2016 505(b)(2) NDA Approvals The total number of novel drug approvals in 2016 decreased by approximately half from last year (22 in 2016, from 45 in 2015) and is below the 10-year average of 29 drug approvals per year. Of these, how many were 505(b)(2)s? Were the number of 505(b)(2) approvals in […]
Read More

Dramatically Decrease Drug Development Costs Through Literature-Only 505(b)(2) NDA Submissions

Dramatically Decrease Drug Development Costs Through Literature-Only 505(b)(2) NDA Submissions How would you like to get an NDA approved without conducting any clinical studies? Camargo presented a poster on literature-only 505(b)(2) New Drug Application (NDA) approvals at the recent 2016 AAPS annual meeting and exposition in Denver, Colorado. Individuals from the FDA and the pharmaceutical […]
Read More

505(b)(2) Application Changes: What You Need to Know

505(b)(2) Application Changes: What You Need to Know Title XI of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) of 2003 was enacted in order to address concerns that had potential to delay access to more affordable drugs. The FDA has been implementing the MMA via the statute since it was enacted in 2003. […]
Read More

Improving Drug Development ROI in 2017

Time to Pick the Low-Hanging Fruit: Improving Drug Development ROI in 2017 With forecasts of decreasing peak sales for late pipeline drugs, a logical way to increase the return on investment (ROI) for pharmaceutical companies is to develop products with lower research and development (R&D) costs. How can this be achieved in an environment with […]
Read More

Leveraging Postmarketing Safety Data in 505(b)(2) Drug Development Programs

A significant part of the FDA’s charge is ensuring the safety of drugs available to the public. While a substantial part of the FDA’s efforts in guaranteeing public safety go into the safety assessment process during drug development, the process does not end with NDA approval. Postmarketing assessments such as pharmacovigilance programs play a critical […]
Read More

The GRAS Is Not Always Greener

The GRAS Is Not Always Greener: Why GRAS Status Does Not Guarantee Excipient Safety Many, if not most, 505(b)(2) submissions represent a change to an approved drug, usually involving a formulation change. Understandably, the focus of sponsors is often primarily on supporting the safety and efficacy of the active ingredient(s). However, the safety of the […]
Read More

Back to Basics: 505(b)(2) FAQs Part 2: Clinical and Nonclinical Studies

As the 505(b)(2) expert, Camargo is frequently asked questions about how to get a product approved via the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway and if this pathway is appropriate. Given the growing popularity of the 505(b)(2) pathway for approval of repurposed, reformulated, or unapproved-marketed products, we thought it would be worth providing a refresher. Here is Part […]
Read More

Back to Basics: 505(b)(2) FAQs Part 1

As the 505(b)(2) expert, Camargo is frequently asked questions about how to get a product approved via the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway and if this pathway is appropriate. Given the growing popularity of the 505(b)(2) pathway for approval of repurposed, reformulated, or unapproved marketed products, we thought it would be worth providing a refresher. Here are […]
Read More

Statistical Bootstrapping Method To Take the Uncertainty out of Drug Development

Statistical Bootstrapping Method Using a Bias-Corrected Acceleration Approach Well-reasoned and properly conducted statistical analyses can be essential to successful drug development, particularly in the context of manufacturing scale-up, process and component changes, and in comparisons with a reference product. Similarity tests between dissolution profiles steer the development path forward based on the quality and interpretation […]
Read More

Fixed-Combination Drug Products: Are Phase 2 and 3 Studies Really Necessary?

Many fixed-dose drug-drug combination products arise from an observation that a synergistic effect occurs when two drugs are administered together, or that both drugs are frequently taken together for convenience. As one or both drugs are typically already approved, the 505(b)(2) pathway is the obvious choice for approval of many drug-drug combination products. We have […]
Read More

Faster Approval of Combination Drug Products Via the 505(b)(2) Pathway

On April 11 and 12, 2016, Ken Phelps, President and CEO of Camargo Pharmaceutical Services, spoke at the 505(b)(2) Forum and CTrials Conference in Tel Aviv, Israel, on the topic of 505(b)(2) Combination Drug Products. What is attractive about the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway, and specifically, why is it so beneficial for approval of combination products? […]
Read More

Product Ideation: Identifying Your Optimal Drug Development Candidate

It’s a familiar story: Pharmaceutical Company X spends years developing Product Y only to discover at a crucial point in the process that Product Y will not succeed. The result is often millions of dollars and development years wasted. But could drug development failure be prevented? Oftentimes, drug development failure can be attributed to misalignment […]
Read More

Pediatric Applicability or Not–This Revised Guidance Is for You

Since 1994, the statutory and regulatory requirements for drug product labeling for pediatric populations have been evolving. The FDA Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA) contained incentives for conducting pediatric studies on drugs that had exclusivity or patent protection. In 2003, the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) was signed into law requiring, for certain drugs, sponsors […]
Read More

Additional 505(b)(2) Benefits: Selective Safety Data Collection

  Last month CDER/CBER released a short, final guidance, “Determining the Extent of Safety Data Collection Needed in Late Stage Premarket and Postapproval Clinical Investigations.” (CDER/CBER, 2016) While brief, the guidance could provide a significant reduction in safety data collection for NDA sponsors. This could be especially true for sponsors using the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. […]
Read More

Return on Investment for 505(b)(2) Products: Is an “AB” Rating Possible?

Return on Investment for 505(b)(2) Products: Is an “AB” Rating Possible? As new generic product options become more scarce and the competition more fierce, generic manufacturers have recently become very interested in the 505(b)(2) regulatory pathway. The benefits of the 505(b)(2) pathway are well known, such as a potentially lower cost and accelerated path to […]
Read More

2015 505(b)(2) NDA Approvals

2015 was a big year for FDA, with 45 novel new therapies approved — much higher than 28, the average number approved in the past decade. Of the 45 approved in 2015, how many were approved through the 505(b)(2) pathway? And how does the number of approvals through 505(b)(2) compare with previous years? The results […]
Read More

3-Year Exclusivity May Not Be Worth as Much as You Think

It is a widely held tenet that market exclusivity is essential for the successful launch of a new drug. But is this always the case? For products approved through the FDA 505(b)(2) pathway, is pursuing the 3-year period of exclusivity available through Hatch-Waxman always necessary? Or is it possible that a product may succeed without […]
Read More

Drug Development Question? Here’s how to communicate with the FDA!

Earlier this month FDA (CDER and CBER) issued a new draft guidance, Best Practices for Communication Between IND Sponsors and FDA During Drug Development. Based on Camargo’s frequent communications with the Agency during product development, the guidance does not present any profound or significant changes in how they conduct and or prefer communicating with IND […]
Read More

New Nonclinical Guidance for 505(b)(2) Products: No Cause for Alarm

On October 15, 2015, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a new guidance for industry and review staff with more uniform recommendations for the nonclinical safety evaluation of approved drug substances that are reformulated or in which a new route of administration is proposed for a previously approved drug product. These products, […]
Read More

The Winding Path to Derisking Formulation Changes

Originally posted by AAPS Blog 10/7/15 If you are a researcher involved in drug development, you are familiar with the inevitability of change and the need to manage and understand it throughout the development process. No question, it is the status quo, and it must be planned for and managed. As researchers, we know where […]
Read More

Encounters of the Third Sector

As I walked the floor at the International Generic Pharmaceutical Alliance (IGPA) conference in Toronto, I couldn’t help but feel a little gratified. Companies that were once disavowing the 505(b)(2) approval pathway are now driving the conversation. Investors that once shied away from 505(b)(2) products due to their unknown reputations despite the relatively low risks […]
Read More

Enforcement Activities: FDA removes unapproved prescription ear drops

For years FDA has threatened to remove unapproved products (so-called DESI products) from the marketplace. Recently, the FDA took enforcement action against  several unapproved prescription ear drops.  What products will be next?  DESI producers can use the 505(b)(2) pathway to avoid such actions on their products. Let’s take a look at the recent action and show an example of  […]
Read More

Examining the Amarin VASCEPA Saga

The headlines and newscasts reported Amarin’s success in wining off-label promotion, but behind the scenes, another noteworthy action took place – in a very rare action, the FDA rescinded a special protocol assessment (SPA) that would have enabled Amarin to promote the new indication. In this post, we’ll examine the reasons for FDA’s action and […]
Read More

Use of Extrusion-Enabled Pharmaceutical Processes in Drug Development via a Streamlined Regulatory Pathway

Extrusion-enabled pharmaceutical processing (E2P2) has long been employed in pharmaceutical development (Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy. 33:909-926,1043-1057 (2007)). Reasons for utilizing E2P2 include: Enhancing physico-chemical properties of APIs such as solubility and stability Modifying in vivo release of a drug to enhance bioavailability and clinical efficacy Facilitating development and manufacture of fixed combination drug products […]
Read More

Active Ingredients vs. Active Moieties – Perplexity of Understanding the Relationship or Distinction

Recently a federal district court spotlighted FDA’s apparently inconsistent definitions of what constitutes an “active ingredient (AI)”  in rejecting the Agency’s rationale for denying Amarin Pharmaceuticals Inc.’s fish oil capsule Vascepa (icosapent ethyl) (NDA 202057 approved July 26, 2012), request for 5 years of market exclusivity as a New Chemical Entity (NCE).  On Feb. 21, […]
Read More

To List or Not to List – That is the Question

A 505(b)(2) may rely on the FDA’s previous findings of safety and efficacy  of an approved drug product. It is possible to rely on more than one approved drug product.  It is also possible that a 505(b)(2) applicant does not have to rely on any approved drug. The correct choice of listed drug product may allow  […]
Read More

Pediatrics – What are the appropriate age ranges?

As we have noted in this blog previously, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA), all new drug applications for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen, or new route of administration are required to contain an assessment of the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indication(s) […]
Read More

Priority Review Vouchers are a Big Carrot for Hungry Companies

Priority review vouchers (PRVs), which are fast-becoming a powerful incentive for drug companies, were originally based on a publication (Ridley et al. 2006) from a group at Fuqua School of Business at Duke University in NC. The idea behind PRVs was that developers of treatments for neglected infectious diseases (and later, rare pediatric diseases) would […]
Read More

PhRMA and GPhA team up (!) to offer their EAR proposal to solve generic safety labeling issue

FDA held a public hearing this past Friday (27March2015) to air their proposal that generic companies be responsible for updating their labeling whenever ‘new safety information’* is available. Generic companies argue against such a proposal because it would lead to confusion about safety warnings if every multisource product has different labeling (coincidentally, and privately,  they […]
Read More

Opportunities in Orphan Drug Development for Investors, Pharma and CROs

Orphan drugs, defined in the Orphan Drug Act as drugs developed to treat rare diseases that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S., have begun to make their mark for patients and drug companies. As the number of orphan drugs has increased over the past 30 years, many patients with rare diseases have benefited […]
Read More

MAPPing out the timing of a Complete Response submission

A type of FDA document which sometimes slides past under the radar is  MAPP, that is, Manual of Policies and Procedures.  These are actually internal FDA documents which are generally analogous to the SOPs FDA requires that industry have and follow.  However, by virtue of the various requirements for transparency placed on FDA, they are […]
Read More

Extending Exclusivity: How Long Will It Really Last?

Last week at the Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) Annual Meeting, the 21st Century Cures Act, a proposed bill with bipartisan support, was a topic of discussion. Specifically, subtitle L—Dormant Therapies, which would offer 15 years of exclusivity for drugs and biologics approved as dormant therapies. From the House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s bill summary/discussion […]
Read More

2014 505(b)(2) NDA Approvals

2014 drug approvals seem to have rebounded somewhat from the past year. In his annual CDER New Drug Review Update, FDA’s John Jenkins cited 35 NME NDA and BLA approvals (calculated through December 3, 2014), up from 27 in 2013 (see chart below). These approvals include 505(b)(1) NDAs as well as BLAs . Some interesting stats […]
Read More

Manufacturing Support for “Breakthrough Therapy” Designation for Solid Oral Dosage Forms

In November, this author participated in an open forum at the AAPS Annual Meeting focused on streamlining manufacturing and scale up to support ‘breakthrough therapy’ designation for solid oral dosage forms. The goal was to provide clarity for breakthrough therapies and chemistry, manufacturing and controls (CMC) challenges to develop a quality submission in a shortened timeframe where […]
Read More

Therapeutic Equivalence Ratings Under 505(b)(2)

The FDA listing of therapeutic equivalence (TE) ratings can be a murky area for products approved under 505(b)(2) applications. The concept of TE ratings emerged from FDA regulations for generics and revolve around the announcement that the FDA would publish a current listing of all of its approved drugs together with TE ratings. This was […]
Read More

Orphan Drug Exclusivity for a Previously Approved Drug: a 505(b)(2) Conundrum

Until now, if a Sponsor intended to request orphan designation with 7 years of marketing exclusivity for a drug that has already been granted orphan designation, FDA has followed the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), including the condition described in 21CFR §316.34(c): “If a drug is otherwise the same drug as a previously approved drug […]
Read More

5-Year Exclusivity for Certain Fixed-Combination Drugs with an NCE

The FDA recently posted new Guidance on its website awarding certain fixed-combination drug products (fixed-combinations) 5-year new chemical entity (NCE) exclusivity. While the Agency held previously that these products were ineligible for NCE exclusivity (5 years) if one component is already approved, with this new Guidance in effect, a drug product will be eligible for […]
Read More

Alkermes Prodrug for Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis: NCE?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) began requiring drug efficacy, in addition to safety, for approval in 1962 based on the Kefauver-Harris Amendment. Despite this requirement, many drugs that have been approved by FDA have limited efficacy (eg, drugs that treat cancer or Alzheimer’s disease). In many cases, some portion of the limited efficacy is […]
Read More

Paper Submissions: Going, going…away

In order to fulfill a requirement specified in Section 745A(a) of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (aka FDASIA), FDA recently issued a draft guidance directing mandatory use of electronic filing and formatting for most regulatory submissions which currently can still be submitted in paper format.  The change is not exactly imminent, but […]
Read More

MannKind Breathes Easier – Inhaled Insulin Finally Approved

MannKind’s Afrezza Receives FDA Approval In June of this year, MannKind Corporation announced that they received FDA approval for Afrezza®, their rapid-acting inhaled insulin product. MannKind is currently working to identify a pharma partner to manufacture and distribute Afrezza, and the product could be available as soon as January 2015. This approval has been a […]
Read More

The Road to Commercial Success – The Target Product Profile

The goal of drug product development is commercial success.  If this statement wasn’t true, how would patients access the live-saving or life-enhancing drugs we are developing.  Yet, all too many companies focus just on FDA approval, which in our view should be just a very important milestone. When embarking on the drug development journey, it is […]
Read More

Top Generic CEO’s confirm importance of 505(b)(2) in their company’s financial future

Development stage companies are seeing more opportunities to license their products to generic companies.  Recently, generic company CEOs reinforced the importance of 505(b)(2)-developed products to their financial future. The 2014 Generic Pharmaceutical Association (GPhA) annual meeting concluded this pastweek in Orlando.  This is the largest gathering of C-level executives from the generic industry.  Camargo has exhibited and I […]
Read More

2013 505(b)(2) NDA Approvals

2013 appears to be a challenging year for FDA NDA approvals.  FDA’s John Jenkins reviewed the  NME NDA and BLA approvals through November 2013, showing that 25 such products were approved (see chart below).  These 25 approvals are 505(b)(1)NDA and BLA’s.  Generally, this performance was seen as disappointing, but readers of this blog know that the number […]
Read More

Expensive, cheap, value? CMO costs.

Contract manufacturing organization (CMO) A bids $600,000.  CMO B bids $450,000.  Which bid is cheaper? Assume for the moment that both CMOs provide equal service parameters: skill, capacity, timelines, regulatory history, experience, etc. and we are judging both based only on price. No, this is a not trick question.  But the result is not obvious. Even with a detailed […]
Read More

ANDA but No NDA – What to Rely on?

Camargo participates in 2-5 PIND meetings each month and one thing we notice in the FDA minutes is that the boilerplate answer to ‘does the Agency agree this ….. is appropriate for filing under 505(b)(2)?’ keeps getting longer.  Recently, the Agency (or, at least, some divisions) is informing sponsors that they cannot use a product approved under […]
Read More

PREA – Pediatric Plan Timing Changed by PDUFA V

The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA; also known as PDUFA V), signed into law on July 9, 2012, contains amendments to the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA) that specifically detail the timing of the submission of a Pediatric Study Plan (PSP). In order to direct greater adherence to the PREA requirements before […]
Read More

FDA Goes Against Advisory Committee and Approves Low Dose Paroxentine for Hot Flashes

On 6/30/2013, FDA approved Noven Pharmaceuticals Brisdelle (paroxetine) for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms (hot flashes).  This 505(b)(2)  approval is notable since it is the first non-hormonal product product approved for this indication. But from a regulatory point of view, it is even more interesting – FDA went against a 10-4 Advisory Committee vote against […]
Read More

505(b)(2) Prodrug Fails Phase III Study

Development of drugs for new indications entails more risk of failure than simply changing formulations.  Just ask XenoPort, which announced May 19th that its prodrug of R-baclofen, arbaclofen placarbil,   failed to show efficacy in a Phase III clinical trial. Arbaclofen placarbil was being studied for multiple sclerosis-related spasticity. Racemic baclofen,  now generic, is indicated for treating muscle […]
Read More

Don’t conduct unneeded tox studies

In April I presented a webinar under the auspices of the DIA concerning preclinical bridging. During this webinar, we discussed the need to fill the toxicology gaps that may have been created during the time since the original reference listed drug was approved. These gaps, I stated, has led to the unfounded belief that the […]
Read More

Merck Uses 505(b)(2) for New Combo

On May 3, 2013 FDA approved Merck’s  Liptruzet, which combines the its Zetia (ezetimibe) and atorvastatin – Pfizer’s Lipitor which has gone generic.  According to the Merck press release, Liptruzet was approved “for the treatment of elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients with primary or mixed hyperlipidemia as adjunctive therapy to diet when diet alone […]
Read More

Raptor’s Procysbi Costs More Than A Generic (!)

Again we have the media troubled by new, improved drugs that cost more than the generic they are based on rather than trumpeting the improvements.  Raptor Pharmaceutical received approval of its Procysbi (cysteamine bitartrate) for the treatment of  nephropathic cystinosis, an orphan disease affecting an estimated 500 patients in the U.S.  FDA approved Procysbi under 505(b)(2) on April […]
Read More

Non-clinical bridging – Most 505(b)(2)’s Don’t Require Full Tox Package

I have just finished a webinar under the sponsorship of the DIA dealing with non-clinical bridging. In this post, I’d like to share one of the case studies from my presentation to illustrate what should be considered during development. The example is the development of gabapentin enacarbil by XenoPort/GSK for restless leg syndrome. Gabapentin enacarbil […]
Read More

New PDUFA V Meeting Timelines

PDUFA V ushered in new industry and FDA commitments.  Among these are changes in meeting timelines. A significant change from PDUFA IV is the timeline for Type A meetings. Under PDUFA IV the meeting package was due 30 days in advance of the meeting.  Now, under PDUFA V, this package is due at the time of […]
Read More

Advisory Committee Cool on Non-Steroid Hot Flash Treatments

The Camargo team got its start in the 505(b)(2) process at Duramed Pharmaceuticals with the 1990’s development and approval of Cenestin (synthetic conjugated estrogens, A).  The product was approved based on a Phase 3 clinical study demonstrating the treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause –   (known as ‘hot flashes’).  For decades, estrogens have […]
Read More

Orphan Designation Granted Letter

Camargo is privileged to work with many clients to develop Orphan drugs.  In order to obtain an Orphan drug approval the sponsor must first request that the drug and indication be granted orphan-drug designation.  This process requires research into both the indication and the potential population.  If the FDA’s Office of Orphan Products Development agrees, […]
Read More

Are 505(b)(2)’s “Super Generics” or what do we call them?

When we started Camargo almost 10 years ago, products approved under 505j were called ‘generics’ and 505(b)(1) ‘new drugs’.  We could find no consensus of a name for products approved via 505(b)(2). Of course, when Camargo started business, there had been very few 505(b)(2) products approved.  Fast forward 10 years and we have seen an explosion of 505(b)(2) products […]
Read More

KV Appeals Makena Decision

We have followed the saga of KV’s Makena for two reasons.  The most important reason is that the submission, review and approval of Makena is perhaps the best example of using a publicly funded clinical study for NDA approval, despite the clinical trial material not being sourced by the sponsor of the NDA.  The other reason is […]
Read More

No 5-Year Exclusivity for Combinations Drugs with an NCE

One anomaly to the exclusivity rules is that a combination drug product containing a new chemical entity (NCE) and one or more previously approved drugs does not receive the 5-year exclusivity that a single-component NCE drug would receive. Thus, Ferring Pharmaceuticals Prepopik (sodium picosulfate, citric acid and magnesium oxide) was approved as a 505(b)(2) in July, 2012, […]
Read More

2012 505(b)(2) Approvals – Record Year

Nice going!  2012 saw a record number of 505(b)(2) drugs approved – 47.  As is usual at this time of the year, I have prepared a listing of all of the approvals. This year, I have made the listing more useful – the table is now sortable and now contains a hyperlink to both the […]
Read More

Suit to challenge use of REMS to block generics and 505(b)(2)

Innovators have used REMS to block generic and 505(b)(2) developers from gaining access to the reference listed drugs (RLD), effectively blocking their development.  The 2012 Congress failed to pass legislation to force innovators to provide access to the RLD’s.  FDA believes it has no authority to assist.  In fact, FDA refuses to reveal if the […]
Read More

Orphan Designation without Exclusivity: Court asked to decide

Yesterday, Depomed filed suit against the FDA requesting the Court to order FDA to grant their product Gralise (gabapentin) 7 years of exclusivity since it was granted Orphan status; upon approval, Gralise was granted 3 years of exclusivity. Depomed licensed the product to Solvay which became Abbott via acquisition.  Thus the majority of NDA-related regulatory […]
Read More

K-V Pharma bankrupt – Claims FDA Doesn’t Back Makena

K-V Pharmaceuticals filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. After years of GMP issues narrowed the product offering to just one product, Makena (17-hydoxyprogesterone caproate), poor sales of the product couldn’t sustain the company. In this blog I have discussed the filing and approval of Makena, a product for pre-term labor.  Prior to this approval, the product had been available […]
Read More

Generic of 505(b)(2)

There are not many instances of a generic version of a reference drug approved via the 505(b)(2) pathway.  Last Friday, FDA approved Watson’s generic of Teva’s Plan B One-Step [progestin].  Watson will call its version Next Choice One Dose. For history and industry buffs, Plan B was originally developed under the Duramed brand Barr Pharmaceuticals, […]
Read More

REMS in Congress

I’m not into politics, but maybe some of my readers are and wish to contact their representative in the U.S. House of Representatives to share your thoughts on a pending issue. With the introduction of REMS, innovator companies have used the restricted distribution feature to prevent other pharmaceutical companies from obtaining drug supplies that can […]
Read More

ViroPharma loses exclusivity appeal

As I wrote last week, on 4/9/12 the FDA denied ViroPharma’s request for 3-year exclusivity for its antibiotic Vancocin and approved three generics.  ViroPharma immediately sued the heads of FDA and HHS and their Agencies.  In a U.S. District Court decision, the judge denied ViroPharma’s motions to grant a  preliminary injunction to require that FDA withdraw the ANDA […]
Read More

ViroPharma denied request for 3-year exclusivity

ViroPharma has pulled out all stops to prevent generic copies of its off-patent Vancocin® capsule (vancomycin hydrochloride) including the use of the Citizen Petition process.  Recently, FDA denied most of the requests  in their Citizen Petition and simultaneously approved generics from 3 companies.  ViroPharma immediately responded by filing a suit against the FDA. A reading of the […]
Read More

Drug Development Planned Like the Titanic

How many drug development companies leave it up to the CRO or CMO to design or execute their studies or formulation/manufacturing without oversight?   Like those who boarded the Titantic 100 years ago, they seem to trust the mantra that their contractor’s work is unsinkable.  MAP Pharmaceuticals seemed to do just that – the approval of their […]
Read More

NIH Head Urges Repositioning/Repurposing

In a speech at yesterday’s 2012 TEDMED conference, the head of the NIH, Dr. Francis Collins, said  that there is a big gap between basic research and drugs for patients.  To bridge this gap he suggested ‘some of those old drugs could be re-purposed — or taught new tricks’ – hey, that’s our tag line! […]
Read More

Generic vs. 505(b)(2) Failure-to-Warn Liability

A recent editorial (may need subscription) in the New York Times opined that a recent Supreme Court decision – a “bizarre outcome” – “makes it virtually impossible to sue generic manufacturers for failing to provide adequate warning of a prescription drug’s dangers.”   The court case the Times is referring to is Pliva Inc. v. Mensing .   In […]
Read More

2011 505(b)(2) Approvals Now Exceed 505(b)(1) NDA Approvals

What a year for 505(b)(2) drug development!  In 2011 FDA approved 44 505(b)(2) NDA submissions.  Various authors have reported that FDA approved 34 or 35 drugs in 2011 (505(b)(1) NDA + BLA).  I had speculated a couple of years ago that perhaps 80% of new drugs approved  in 2012 would be 505(b)(2)’s, based on botha  […]
Read More

What is an Approved DESI Product?

I am hesitant to contribute more information about so-called DESI drugs at the risk of further confusion.  My goal is always to provide clarity, so here goes. Fundamental to any discussion about DESI products is the definition of a drug product.  Let’s just focus on one part of the definition – the labeling.  A drug […]
Read More

Stability Changes coming to ANDAs

This post comes from D.C. where I am attending the GPhA Fall Technical Conference.  We just completed a presentation by FDA’s Glen Smith.  He  detailed the proposed new stability requirements for ANDA drug products.  It is essentially the adoption of ICH Q1A.  For readers of this blog, we know that 505(b(2) NDA’s must have 12 months […]
Read More

Don’t launch unapproved products after 9/19/2011

I had a call from a client who wondered if he could launch a new ‘DESI’ product. He had just read the FDA’s recent announcement that it would take immediate enforcement action on any unapproved drug introduced into the market after September 19, 2011. So, the question he asked was, is his “DESI” drug an […]
Read More

AB Rated 505(b)(2)’s

Can you have an “AB” rated 505(b)(2)?  Yes, as well as other Therapeutic Equivalent (TE) codes that are most often associated with the TE codes for generics in the Orange Book. Several years ago when I was speaking about the potential products that qualified under 505(b)(2) I had a line in a PowerPoint slide for […]
Read More

2012 PDUFA User Fees

The 2012 PDUFA User Fees have been announced in the Federal Register.  In summary, the fees are: Applications: Full – requiring clinical data (e.g., Phase 2 or 3):  $1,841,500 Not requiring clinical data                                 :         920,750 Supplements requiring clinical data                  :         920,750 Establishment fee: $520,100 Product: $98,970 For those doing the math, the cost […]
Read More

Whew! Supreme Court rules generic labels must track RLD

A lot of generic companies are breathing easier today. As we discussed in this blog before, two district courts ruled that generic companies must comply with state laws and add warnings to the label even if it differs from that of the brand product (the Reference Listed Drug – RLD). The cases went to the […]
Read More

Patent Cliff Causes Pfizer Cuts

Yesterday (08Jun11) The Wall Street Journal reported  (subscription may be required) that Pfizer will cut an additional $1 Billion – mostly in administrative costs.  These cuts come after cuts to sales and R&D. What’s driving all of these cuts is two-fold:  loss of sales of their products to generics and failure to obtain approval for […]
Read More

Why generic companies might like 505(b)(2)

How would you like to spend a couple of hundred thousands of dollars (or equivalent local currency) and countless months getting FDA approval and patent expiration and then face 14 competitors?  What’s the ROI for that? June 1, 2011 Donepezil Hydrochloride Tablets, Matrix Laboratories Ltd., Approval Donepezil Hydrochloride Tablets, Cipla Ltd., Approval Donepezil Hydrochloride Tablets, Wockhardt […]
Read More

Ophthalmics: 21 CFR 314 94(a)(9)(iv) no longer applies

Who would have guessed that 21 CFR 314.94(a)(9)(iv) no longer applies to ophthalmics?  You wouldn’t generally have expected it to just be cancelled – normally FDA must go through notice and comment, but apparently the FDA can make a regulation disappear by decree. 21 CFR 314(a)(9)(iv) states: (iv)Inactive ingredient changes permitted in drug products intended […]
Read More

KV’s Makena: Part 3: Use of Public Information for 505(b)(2) approvals

In previous postings (Intro, Part 1, Part 2), I provided background on KV’s Makena (17a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate injection aka 17P). The development and regulatory history contains many lessons. In this posting I’d like to examine the use of public information to substitute for sponsors’ studies. By definition, the 505(b)(2) application must contain information to which the […]
Read More

KV’s Makena Part 2: Accelerated Approval Subpart H

In a previous posting, I provided background on KV’s Makena (17a-hydroprogesterone caproate injection aka 17P). The development and regulatory history contains many lessons. In this posting I’d like to examine the accelerated approval process. Makena was approved under 505(b)(2) as seen from the approval letter (at this writing the approval documents are not posted at […]
Read More

KV’s Makena® Part 1: 505(b)(1) or 505(b)2)?

In a previous posting, I provided background on KV’s Makena (17?-hydroprogesterone caproate injection aka 17P). The development and regulatory history contains many lessons. In this posting I’d like to examine the choice of regulatory route. Makena was approved under 505(b)(2) as seen from the approval letter (at this writing the approval documents are not posted […]
Read More

KV’s Makena®: A trove of 505(b)(2) Lessons

On February 3, 2011 Hologic, Inc. (subsequently sold assets to KV Pharmaceuticals) received 505(b)(2) approval of Makena®, its 17?-hydroxyprogesterone caproate injection (17P) to reduce the risk of preterm birth in women with a singleton pregnancy who have a history of singleton spontaneous preterm birth. The subsequent announcement that the price would be set at $1500 […]
Read More

What is the Pediatric Drug Development Approach for Rare Diseases and Orphan Drugs?

As part of the PDUFA V reauthorization discussions, the FDA and industry are talking about better approaches to rare disease drug development and orphan drugs. Public interests and Congress have mandated that FDA develop new guidances on the required studies needed for NDA approval. In these discussions, participants refer to the “pediatric drug development approach” […]
Read More