FDA Logo--links to FDA home page
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
HHS Log--links to Department of Health and Human Services website

FDA Home Page | Search FDA Site | FDA A-Z Index | Contact FDA


horizontal rule

FY 2007 Performance Report To Congress
for the Office of Combination Products
as required by the Medical Device User Fee
and Modernization Act of 2002

pdf version

Commissioner’s Report

I am pleased to submit the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Annual Report to Congress for the Office of Combination Products (OCP). This report includes the fourth full year of data since OCP was established as mandated by the Medical Device User Fee and Modernization Act of 2002 (MDUFMA), enacted on October 26, 2002.

Combination products are therapeutic and diagnostic products that combine elements of drugs, devices, and/or biological products. FDA is receiving significantly more combination products for review as technological advances continue to merge product types and blur the historical lines of separation between FDA’s medical product centers that is made up of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER), and the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). Because combination products involve components that would normally be regulated under different types of regulatory authorities, and frequently by different FDA Centers, they also raise challenging regulatory, policy, and review management issues. The differences in regulatory pathways for each component can impact the regulatory processes of all aspects of the product life cycle, including preclinical testing, clinical investigation, marketing applications, manufacturing and quality control, adverse event reporting, promotion and advertising, and post-approval modifications.

OCP continues to enhance the transparency and predictability of the combination product lead Center assignment and review process. In this regard, OCP facilitates interactions between industry and FDA to clearly delineate regulatory paths, continues to monitor and adjust processes to ensure timely and effective review, and continues to ensure the consistent and appropriate postmarket regulation of combination products.

Combination products will likely become more complicated as new technologies emerge and existing technologies mature. Therefore, OCP will continue to focus on the most important issues relating to the regulation of combination products. OCP is committed to actively assisting industry and FDA reviewers in understanding this complex regulatory area.

FDA looks forward to ensuring success in meeting the unique challenges in the review and regulation of combination products.

Andrew von Eschenbach, M.D.
Commissioner of Food and Drugs

horizontal rule

Executive Summary

FDA established OCP on December 24, 2002, as required by MDUFMA. The mission of OCP is to ensure the prompt assignment of combination products (drug-device, biologic-device, drug-biologic, or drug-device-biologic products) to FDA Centers, the timely and effective premarket review of such combination products, and consistent and appropriate postmarket regulation of these products.

This document presents OCP’s annual report to Congress. OCP activities for FY 2007 highlighted in this report include the following:

Throughout FY 2007, OCP strived to ensure the prompt assignment of combination products to Centers, the timely and effective premarket review of such products, and the consistent and appropriate postmarket regulation of these products. These activities help provide patient access to innovative technologies and address unmet medical needs through the timely delivery of safe and effective combination products to the public.

horizontal rule

Table of Contents

Introduction

Overview of Combination Products

Mandated Functions of the OCP

OCP Organizational Structure

Report on FY 2007 OCP Activities and Impacts

Overview of Activities and Impact
Prompt Assignment of Combination Products
Timely and Effective Premarket Review
Premarket Review
Consultative/Collaborative Review Process
Consistent and Appropriate Postmarket Regulation
Effective Resolution of Review Disputes
Additional Activities and Impacts

Report on FY 2007 OCP Requirements

Prompt Assignment of Combination Products
Timely and Effective Premarket Review
Effective Resolution of Review Disputes

Appendix

Appendix A: Timely and Effective Premarket Review – Updated FY 2006 Data

horizontal rule

Introduction

On October 26, 2002, Congress enacted MDUFMA. By amending the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), MDUFMA provided FDA with new responsibilities, resources, and challenges. Among other things, MDUFMA required FDA, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment, to establish an office within the Office of the Commissioner “to ensure the prompt assignment of combination products to agency centers, the timely and effective premarket review of such products, and consistent and appropriate postmarket regulation of” combination products. As required by MDUFMA, FDA established OCP within the Office of the Commissioner on December 24, 2002. Information about OCP, including the authorizing text of the MDUFMA amendments, can be found at: http://www.fda.gov/oc/combination.

MDUFMA also requires FDA to submit an annual report to Congress on the activities and impact of OCP. This document fulfills this requirement for FY 2007.

Overview of Combination Products

Combination products are increasingly being developed to enhance the safety and effectiveness of conventional medical products. These products are defined by any of the following criteria as in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 3.2(e):

  1. A product comprised of two or more regulated components, i.e., drug/device, biologic/device, drug/biologic, or drug/device/biologic, that is physically, chemically, or otherwise combined or mixed and produced as a single entity;
  2. Two or more separate products packaged together in a single package or as a unit and comprised of drug and device products, device and biological products, or biological and drug products;
  3. A drug, device, or biological product packaged separately that, according to its investigational plan or proposed labeling, is intended for use only with an approved individually specified drug, device, or biological product where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect and where upon approval of the proposed product the labeling of the approved product would need to be changed, e.g., to reflect a change in intended use, dosage form, strength, route of administration, or significant change in dose; or,
  4. Any investigational drug, device, or biological product packaged separately that according to its proposed labeling is for use only with another individually specified investigational drug, device, or biological product where both are required to achieve the intended use, indication, or effect.

Combination products have the potential to provide enhanced therapeutic advantages compared to single entity devices, drugs, and biologics. More and more combination products are incorporating cutting-edge, novel technologies that hold great promise for advancing patient care. Combination products may include drug-delivery systems, gene therapy systems, personalized medicine drug, biological-device combinations, nanotechnology, and other innovative products for diagnostic and therapeutic treatments of cardiovascular, metabolic, oncologic, and other disorders. Some estimates forecast that the combination products market could increase from approximately $6 billion in 2004 to nearly $10 billion by 2009 (“Regulations, Guidances in the Works for Rapidly Advancing Combination Products Sector”; Food and Drug Letter, Issue No. 717, February 11, 2005). Furthermore, some estimate that the total global value of the drug-device combination products market will increase from $5.4 billion in 2004 to $11.5 billion in 2010 (“Drug-Device Combinations”, BCC Research, June 2005).

The number of combination products submitted for review in FY 2007 increased, reaching a
5-year high (see corresponding graph). After decreasing by 14 percent from FY 2005 to FY 2006, the number of combination products submitted for review increased by 42 percent from FY 2006 (235) to FY 2007 (333). All three FDA Centers received increased applications for the review of combination products.

The vertical stacked column graph presents the number of combination product applications submitted to CBER, CDER, and CDRH for FY 2003 through FY 2007. The vertical scale is in increments of 100 with a range from 0 to 400. The horizontal scale is by fiscal year. The graph shows that the number of combination products submitted was at 96 in FY 2003 with 25 for CBER, 31 for CDER, and 40 for CDRH. However, it is footnoted that the numbers do not represent all of FY 2003, and FDA began data collection on April 1, 2003. In FY 2004, the first full year of reporting, the total number of combination product applications submitted was 248 with 36 for CBER, 112 for CDER, and 100 for CDRH. The total number of combination product applications submitted in FY 2005 increased to 273 with 31 for CBER, 139 for CDER, and 103 for CDRH. In FY 2006, the total number of combination product applications submitted decreased to 235 with 35 for CBER, 104 for CDER, and 96 for CDRH. The total number of combination product applications submitted in FY 2007 increased to 333 with 43 for CBER, 142 for CDER, and 148 for CDRH.

More intercenter consults were included in combination product reviews. The number of intercenter consultation requests on combination products increased by 16 percent from FY 2006 (335) to FY 2007 (390), reaching a 5-year high (see graph below). Since combination products involve components (biologics, drugs, and/or devices) that would normally be regulated under different types of regulatory authorities, and frequently by different FDA Centers, they also raise challenging regulatory, policy, and review management issues. The differences in regulatory pathways for each component can impact the regulatory processes of all aspects of the product life cycle, including preclinical testing, clinical investigation, marketing applications, manufacturing and quality control, adverse event reporting, promotion and advertising, and post-approval modifications. In addition, combination products increasingly use state-of-the-art, innovative technologies that challenge existing regulatory and scientific knowledge. More details about intercenter consultation requests are presented in the following sections.

The vertical stacked column graph presents the number of intercenter consultation requests to CBER, CDER, and CDRH for FY 2003 through FY 2007. The vertical scale is in increments of 100 with a range from 0 to 400. The horizontal scale is by fiscal year. The graph shows that the number of intercenter consultation requests was 98 in FY 2003 with 25 for CBER, 21 for CDER, and 52 for CDRH. However, it is footnoted that the numbers do not represent all of FY 2003, and FDA began data collection on April 1, 2003. In FY 2004, the first full year of reporting, the total number of intercenter consultation requests was 210 with 20 for CBER, 59 for CDER, and 131 for CDRH. The total number of intercenter consultation requests in FY 2005 increased to 275 with 45 for CBER, 36 for CDER, and 194 for CDRH. In FY 2006, the total number of intercenter consultation requests increased again to 335 with 40 for CBER, 64 for CDER, and 231 for CDRH. The total number of intercenter consultation requests in FY 2007 increased once again to 390 with 42 for CBER, 89 for CDER, and 259 for CDRH.

The number of combination product assignment requests issued in FY 2007 increased, reaching a 5-year high (see corresponding graph). The number of assignment requests issued increased by 23 percent from FY 2006 (26) to FY 2007 (32). Increases occurred for assignment requests issued to both the CDER and CDRH in FY 2007 while assignment requests issued to CBER decreased. More details about assignment requests are presented in the following sections.

The vertical stacked column graph presents the number of combination product assignment requests to CBER, CDER, and CDRH for FY 2003 through FY 2007. The vertical scale is in increments of 10 with a range from 0 to 40. The horizontal scale is by fiscal year. The graph shows that the total number of assignment requests was 10 in FY 2003 with 2 for CBER, 3 for CDER, and 5 for CDRH. However, it is footnoted that the numbers do not represent all of FY 2003, and FDA began data collection on April 1, 2003. In FY 2004, the first full year of reporting, the total number of assignment requests was 26 with 3 for CBER, 6 for CDER, and 17 for CDRH. The total number of assignment requests in FY 2005 decreased to 20 with 5 for CBER, 5 for CDER, and 10 for CDRH. In FY 2006, the total number of assignment requests increased back to the FY 2004 level at 26 with 7 for CBER, 5 for CDER, and 14 for CDRH. The total number of assignment requests increased again in FY 2007 to 32 with 3 for CBER, 10 for CDER, and 19 for CDRH.

Mandated Functions of OCP

FDA established OCP within the Office of the Commissioner’s Office of International Activities and Strategic Initiatives on December 24, 2002. MDUFMA established broad responsibilities for OCP that cover the regulatory life cycle of drug-device, drug-biologic, and device-biologic combination products, and include product jurisdiction decisions and specific premarket review and postmarket processes. However, the primary responsibilities for scientific review and regulation of combination products remain in one of three product Centers – CBER, CDER, or CDRH – to which they are assigned by OCP. Specifically, the statute (503(g)(4)(B-F)) requires OCP to:

  1. Promptly assign a Center with primary jurisdiction for a combination product.
  2. Ensure the timely and effective premarket review of combination products by overseeing the timeliness of and coordinating reviews involving more than one Center.
  3. Ensure the consistency and appropriateness of postmarket regulation of combination products.
  4. Resolve disputes regarding the timeliness of premarket review of combination products.
  5. Review and update agreements, guidance documents or practices specific to the assignment of combination products.

OCP also serves as a focal point for addressing combination product issues raised by FDA reviewers and industry, and works with the Centers to develop guidance and/or regulations to clarify the regulation of combination products.

In addition, the Office of the Commissioner consolidated the product jurisdiction program in June 2003, giving OCP responsibility for FDA action on all RFDs submitted by industry in accordance with 21 CFR Part 3. This includes requests for classification and assignment of a particular product as a biological product, device, or drug, as well as requests for assignment of combination products.

OCP Organizational Structure

OCP experienced several significant staffing changes during FY 2007. Two key staff members resigned from government service and one new staff member joined OCP. The OCP Director departed in March 2007 and an Acting Director served for the remainder of the fiscal year (April 2007 through September 2007). The second departure was the Product Classification Officer in September 2007. A Scientific Reviewer joined OCP in March 2007. As of September 30, 2007, OCP was staffed by six permanent full-time positions. These positions include the Associate Director, a Product Assignment Officer, a Senior Advisor, two Scientific Reviewers, and a Program Support Specialist. Staffing plans include the immediate recruitment of a permanent Office Director. Also, FDA intends to provide for a projected total staffing size of 11 positions to meet the statutory responsibilities. The office is located at: 15800 Crabbs Branch Way, Suite 200, HFG-3, Rockville, MD 20855, (301) 427-1934, fax (301) 427-1935, email: combination@fda.gov.

Report on FY 2007 OCP Activities and Impacts

This section reports the activities and impacts of OCP in the assignment of combination products and in coordinating the review and regulation of combination products for FY 2007. Additionally, this section provides a performance assessment for combination product applications acted on in FY 2007. Consistent with the mandated functions of OCP, data highlighted in the following section include:

Unless otherwise noted, all performance data in this section are as of September 30, 2007.

Overview of Activities and Impacts

OCP reports specific activities and impacts in this section. Much of the workload data were obtained through the use of an internal database for documenting OCP’s activities and e-mail records. The following summary illustrates the scope and breadth of OCP activities throughout the past fiscal year.

Prompt Assignment of Combination Products

MDUFMA requires OCP to promptly assign to a Center primary jurisdiction for a combination product and to review and update agreements, guidance documents, or practices specific to the assignment of combination products. OCP is required to assign premarket review responsibility for combination products based on the product's primary mode of action (PMOA).2 By submitting an RFD, a company may obtain a formal FDA determination of a combination product’s PMOA and of assignment of the lead Center for the product’s premarket review and regulation.3 FDA will make its jurisdictional determination within 60 days of filing the RFD, or the sponsor’s recommendation of the Center with primary jurisdiction will become the assigned Center.4 In addition, companies and Centers often informally request assistance from OCP in working out difficult jurisdictional issues not raised in an RFD submission.

OCP FY 2007 activities and impacts related to the assignment of combination products are as follows:

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

MDUFMA requires OCP to ensure the timely and effective premarket review of combination products by overseeing the timeliness of reviews and coordinating reviews involving more than one Center. On July 31, 2002, FDA issued an internal document to provide the policies and procedures for FDA staff to follow when requesting, receiving, handling, processing, and tracking formal consultative and collaborative reviews of combination products, devices, drugs, and biologics. The objectives of this document are to improve intercenter communication on combination products, as well as the timeliness and administrative consistency in the conduct of intercenter consultative and collaborative reviews. This document was formally incorporated into the FDA Staff Manual Guide, Agency Program Procedures, Volume IV in July 2005, and is available on the OCP Web site at: www.fda.gov/oc/combination/consultative.html.

Premarket Review

OCP FY 2007 activities and impacts related to premarket review are as follows:

Consultative/Collaborative Review Process

OCP FY 2007 activities and impacts related to the consultative/collaborative review process are as follows:

Consistent and Appropriate Postmarket Regulation

MDUFMA requires OCP to ensure the consistency and appropriateness of postmarket regulation of combination products. OCP FY 2007 activities and impacts related to the consistency of postmarketing regulation are as follows:

Effective Resolution of Review Disputes

MDUFMA requires OCP to resolve disputes regarding the timeliness of the premarket review of a combination product. OCP FY 2007 activities and impacts related to the effective resolution of review disputes are as follows:

Additional Activities and Impacts

Additional OCP activities and impacts in FY 2007 are as follows:

Internal presentations focused on raising awareness of combination product issues, including the intercenter consultation process; the identification and categorization of combination product applications; jurisdiction issues; impact of developing new technologies; cGMP for combination products; and adverse event issues relating to combination products. OCP posts many of its presentations on the OCP Web site at: www.fda.gov/oc/combination/presentations/default.htm.

Report on FY 2007 OCP Requirements

MDUFMA requires OCP to provide an annual performance assessment for combination product applications. This section provides performance information for FY 2007 and updates the FY 2006 performance information in the subsection for “Timely and Effective Premarket Review” for reporting the timeliness in days of the reviews of combination products. Consistent with the mandated functions of the OCP, data highlighted in this section include:

Unless otherwise noted, all performance information in this section is as of September 30, 2007.

Prompt Assignment of Combination Products

Requirement: Report the Timeliness in Days of the Assignment of Combination Products

FDA is to assign premarket review responsibility for combination products based on the product's PMOA. By submitting an RFD, a company may obtain a formal FDA determination of a combination product’s PMOA and assignment of the lead Center for the product’s premarket review and regulation. OCP must make its jurisdictional determination within 60 days of filing the RFD, or the sponsor’s recommendation of the Center with primary jurisdiction will become the assigned Center.

Requirement
Type

Requirement
Time Frame

Request for Designation

60 calendar days

Workload

Combination Product Assignment Requests:

Four requests for assignment of a combination product were carried over from FY 2006 (pending and not overdue as of October 1, 2006). An additional 36 assignment requests for combination products were filed during FY 2007. Of the 40 potential assignment requests in FY 2007, 32 were issued with 3 to CBER, 10 to CDER, and 19 to CDRH (see table to the right). The remaining eight requests for combination products were pending and not overdue as of September 30, 2007.

Primary Center

Number of Product Assignments

CBER

3

CDER

10

CDRH

19

Pending

8

Total Requested

40

Prompt Assignment of Combination Products

Performance

All (32 of 32) product assignments were issued within the 60-day time frame, with a median assignment time of 32 days (see table below).5 Of the 32 assignments issued, 26 combination products were determined to be drug-device combinations, 3 were device-biologic combinations, 1 was a drug-biologic combination, and 2 were drug-device-biologic combinations.

Combination Product Requests for Assignment:

Total Requests for Assignment
Submitted*

Product
Assignments
Issued†

Product
Assignments Pending
(Not Overdue)‡

Product
Assignments Pending (Overdue)

Product Assignments
(Percent) Within
60 days

Median
Product
Assignment
Time
(Days)

Range of Product Assignment Time
(Days)

40

32

8

0

100%

32

12 to 60

* Includes four RFDs that were pending at the beginning of the period.
† Does not include four requests for reconsideration for combination products that were issued within the 15-day time frame provided by 21 CFR 3.8.
‡ Does not include one request for reconsideration received at the end of FY 2007 that was pending and not overdue as of September 30, 2007.

More detailed FY 2007 RFD performance information, including OCP’s review of RFDs for non-combination products, is available at the OCP Internet site: http://www.fda.gov/oc/combination/fy07rfd.html.

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

Requirement – Report the Number and Types of Combination Products under Review

FDA is to report the number and types of combination products under review. The following information refers to FDA performance presented in this subsection.

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

The table below reflects 333 original applications for NDAs, BLAs, PMAs, 510(k)s, investigational new drugs (INDs), investigational device exemptions (IDEs), and humanitarian use exemptions (HDEs) initially classified into one of nine categories of combination products under review in FY 2007.6

Number and Types of Combination Products:

Application Type

Combination Product Category

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Totals

Original NDAs

4

8

--

--

--

--

--

2

--

14

Original BLAs

--

--

3

--

--

--

--

--

--

3

Original PMAs

--

--

--

4

--

--

--

--

--

4

Original 510(k)s

5

2

2

72

6

1

3

5

13

109

Original INDs

2

63

18

7

7

10

10

45

4

166

Original IDEs

2

--

1

12

10

--

7

2

2

36

Original HDEs

--

--

--

--

1

--

--

--

--

1

Totals

13

73

24

95

24

11

20

54

19

333

APPLICATION KEY:
NDAs = New Drug Applications
BLAs = Biologics License Applications
PMAs = Premarket Approval Applications
510(k)s = Premarket Notifications
INDs = Investigational New Drug Applications
IDEs = Investigational Device Exemptions
HDEs = Humanitarian Device Exemptions

COMBINATION PRODUCT KEY:
1 = convenience kit or co-package
2 = prefilled drug delivery device/system
3 = prefilled biologic delivery device/system
4 = device coated/impregnated/otherwise combined with drug
5 = device coated or otherwise combined with biologic
6 = drug/biologic combination
7 = separate products requiring mutually conforming labeling
8 = possible combination based on mutually conforming labeling of separate products
9 = other type of combination product

Workload

Of the 333 original combination product applications, 43 applications were classified as CBER-led combination products; 142 applications were classified as CDER-led combination products; and 148 applications were classified as CDRH-led combination products.

The vertical column graph presents the number of combination product applications submitted to CBER, CDER, and CDRH for FY 2007. The vertical scale is in increments of 50 with a range from 0 to 200. The horizontal scale is by FDA Center. The graph shows that the number of combination products submitted in FY 2007 was at 43 for CBER, 142 for CDER, and 148 for CDRH.

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

Requirement – Report the Timeliness in Days of the Reviews of Combination Products

FDA is required under MDUFMA to report the timeliness in days of the reviews of combination products. The table below summarizes the review type and review performance target for original NDAs, BLAs, PMAs, and 510(k)s. PDUFA and MDUFMA established review performance goals for many types of drug, device, and biological product premarket applications. These goals reflect current expectations about the portion of premarket applications that will be reviewed within a specified time frame. Performance goals apply to only a portion of all applications of a certain type, and they do not require that every application be reviewed in accordance with the applicable time frame.

User Fee Act

Original Application Type

Review Type

Review Within

Performance Level

FY 2006

FY 2007

PDUFA

NDAs

Priority

6 months

90%

90%

Standard

10 months

90%

90%

BLAs

Priority

6 months

90%

90%

Standard

10 months

90%

90%

MDUFMA

Expedited PMAs

MDUFMA decision

300 days

80%

90%

PMAs

MDUFMA decision

320 days

80%

90%

510(k)s

SE or NSE decision

90 days

75%

80%

BLAs

Priority

6 months

75%

90%

Standard

10 months

75%

90%

FDA review performance information, with respect to premarket review, for CBER, CDER, and CDRH are based on a fiscal year receipt cohort. This methodology calculates performance information for applications for the fiscal year FDA received them, regardless of when FDA acted on or approved the submissions. This section updates FDA’s review performance on the FY 2006 combination product application submissions and presents FDA’s review performance on the FY 2007 combination product application submissions through September 30, 2007.

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

Performance – CBER-led or CDER-led Combination Products

FY 2006 Submissions

FDA reviewed and acted on 14 of 15 submissions identified as CBER-led or CDER-led combination products (see table below). These actions included 1 priority and 12 standard NDA combination product submissions and 1 priority BLA combination product submission. One standard BLA combination product submission was under review, with a decision pending.

PDUFA Original Application Type

Review
Type

Review Within

Reviewed and
Acted On

Number on Time

Median or Actual Review Time
(Days)

Range of Review Time
(Days)

Min

Max

NDAs

Priority

6 months

1

1

179

179

179

Standard

10 months

12

12

302

298

304

BLAs

Priority

6 months

1

1

183

183

183

Standard

10 months

0

--

--

--

--

FY 2007 Submissions

As of September 30, 2007, FDA reviewed and acted on 5 of 17 submissions identified as CBER-led or CDER-led combination products (see table below). These actions included two priority and three standard NDA combination product submissions. Additional NDA and BLA combination product submissions were under review, with decisions pending. FDA will update the FY 2007 Submissions table in the FY 2008 OCP Performance Report.

PDUFA Original Application Type

Review
Type

Review Within

Reviewed and
Acted On

Number on Time

Median or Actual Review Time
(Days)

Range of Review Time
(Days)

Min

Max

NDAs

Priority

6 months

2

2

181

180

182

Standard

10 months

3

3

303

265

304

BLAs

Priority

6 months

0

--

--

--

--

Standard

10 months

0

--

--

--

--

Timely and Effective Premarket Review

Performance – CBER-led or CDRH-led Combination Products

FY 2006 Submissions

FDA reached decisions on 72 of 73 submissions identified as CBER-led or CDRH-led combination products (see table below). These decisions included 1 original PMA and 71 510(k)s combination product submissions. One PMA combination product submission was under review, with a decision pending.

MDUFMA Original Application Type

Review
Type

Review Within

Decisions Reached

Number on Time

Median or Actual Review Time
(Days)

Range of Review Time
(Days)

Min

Max

Expedited PMAs

FDA decision

300 days

0

--

--

--

--

PMAs

FDA decision

320 days

1

1

192

192

192

510(k)s

SE or NSE decision

90 days

71

58

61

10

166

BLAs

Priority

6 months

0

--

--

--

--

Standard

10 months

0

--

--

--

--

FY 2007 Submissions

As of September 30, 2007, FDA reached decisions on 61 of 110 submissions identified as CBER-led or CDRH-led combination products (see table below). All decisions made were on 510(k) combination product submissions, which have shorter review times. Additional PMA and 510(k) combination product submissions were under review, with decisions pending. FDA will update the FY 2007 Submissions table in the FY 2008 OCP Performance Report.

MDUFMA Original Application Type

Review
Type

Review Within

Decisions Reached

Number on Time

Median or Actual Review Time (Days)

Range of Review Time
(Days)

Min

Max

Expedited PMAs

FDA decision

300 days

0

--

--

--

--

PMAs

FDA decision

320 days

0

--

--

--

--

510(k)s

SE or NSE decision

90 days

61

51

62

2

160

BLAs

Priority

6 months

0

--

--

--

--

Standard

10 months

0

--

--

--

--


Timely and Effective Premarket Review

Requirement – Report the Number of Premarket Reviews of Combination Products that Involved a Consulting Center

FDA is to report the number of premarket reviews of combination products that involved a consulting Center. The table below reflects the Intercenter Requests for Consultative or Collaborative Review forms received and monitored by OCP during FY 2007.7

Consulting Center

Number of Consults

CBER

CDER

CDRH

Primary Assigned Center

CBER

--

9

33

42

CDER

2

--

87

89

CDRH

2

257

--

259

Totals

4

266

120

390

As the primary assigned Center, CBER requested 42 intercenter consultations (9 consultations with CDER and 33 consultations with CDRH); CDER requested 89 intercenter consultations (2 with CBER and 87 with CDRH); and CDRH requested 259 intercenter consultations (2 with CBER and 257 with CDER).

Effective Resolution of Review Disputes

Requirement – Report the Timeliness in Days of Dispute Resolutions Regarding Combination Products

FDA is to report the timeliness in days of dispute resolutions regarding combination products. No formal requests to resolve a dispute regarding the timeliness of a combination product review were received during FY 2007. This was the fifth straight year no formal requests were received. The “Activities and Impacts for FY 2007, Premarket Review” section of this report provides examples of informal facilitation and resolution of issues related to premarket review. Informal activities help prevent the need for formal dispute resolution.

horizontal rule

APPENDIX A: Timely and Effective Premarket Review – Updated FY 2006 Data

The table below reflects 235 original applications for NDAs, BLAs, PMAs, 510(k)s, INDs, IDEs, and HDEs initially classified into one of nine categories of combination products under review in FY 2006.

Number and Types of Combination Products

Application Type

Combination Product Category

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Totals

Original NDAs

1

12

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

13

Original BLAs

1

--

1

--

--

--

--

--

--

2

Original PMAs

--

--

--

2

--

--

--

--

--

2

Original 510(k)s

2

--

--

55

5

--

1

1

7

71

Original INDs

--

57

17

3

8

14

3

17

4

123

Original IDEs

1

--

--

8

10

--

3

--

1

23

Original HDEs

--

--

--

1

--

--

--

--

--

1

Totals

5

69

18

69

23

14

7

18

12

235


APPLICATION KEY:
NDAs = New Drug Applications
BLAs = Biologics License Applications
PMAs = Premarket Approval Applications
510(k)s = Premarket Notifications
INDs = Investigational New Drug Applications
IDEs = Investigational Device Exemptions
HDEs = Humanitarian Device Exemptions


COMBINATION PRODUCT KEY:

1 = convenience kit or co-package
2 = prefilled drug delivery device/system
3 = prefilled biologic delivery device/system
4 = device coated/impregnated/otherwise combined with drug
5 = device coated or otherwise combined with biologic
6 = drug/biologic combination
7 = separate products requiring mutually conforming labeling
8 = possible combination based on mutually conforming labeling of separate products
9 = other type of combination product

 

Of the 235 original combination product applications, CBER received and categorized as combination products 35 applications; CDER received and categorized as combination products 104 applications; and CDRH categorized 96 applications, which were reviewed and acted on as of September 30, 2007.

horizontal rule

FOOTNOTES

1 These activities are in addition to a wide range of OCP activities associated with its review of and response to RFD.

22 This is in accordance with section 503(g)(1) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 353(g)(1).

33 The RFD process, including the information required in a RFD submission, is outlined in 21 CFR Part 3.

4This is by operation of section 563 of the Act (21 U.S.C. 360bbb-2).

5Assignment time is equal to the number of days from filing of the RFD to the issuance of the assignment letter.

6The “Number and Types of Combination Products” categorized for FY 2006 is updated in Appendix A.

7Some applications were associated with multiple consulting requests. Additionally, because these consulting requests are associated with any combination product under review for which consultative or collaborative review is needed, regardless of the date of FDA receipt of the application, the number of requests is not directly comparable to the number of combination product applications received during
FY 2007, as reported in the previous section.

horizontal rule