[Federal Register: June 23, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 120)]

[Proposed Rules]               

[Page 33781-33783]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr23jn97-19]



=======================================================================

-----------------------------------------------------------------------



DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES



Food and Drug Administration



21 CFR Chapter I



[Docket No. 97N-0217]



 

Request for Comments on Development of Options to Encourage 

Animal Drug Approvals for Minor Species and for Minor Uses



AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.



ACTION: Request for comments.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



SUMMARY:  The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting comments 

and suggestions relating to legislative and regulatory options to 

facilitate the approval of new animal



[[Page 33782]]



drugs intended for use in minor species or intended for minor uses. The 

agency is seeking comments and suggestions to assist its Center for 

Veterinary Medicine (CVM) in fulfilling its responsibility under the 

Animal Drug Availability Act of 1996 (the ADAA) to issue a report 

setting forth legislative and regulatory options to facilitate 

approvals of new animal drugs that fall into these two categories. 

Facilitating approvals for minor uses and minor species will bring 

about an increase in approvals of new animal drugs intended for these 

uses, which would be desirable to address the scarcity of approved, 

legally marketed new animal drugs intended for minor species or minor 

uses.

DATES: Written comments by September 8, 1997.



ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to the Dockets Management Branch 

(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23, 

Rockville, MD 20857.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  George A. (Bert) Mitchell, Center for 

Veterinary Medicine (HFV-6), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 

Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-594-1761.



SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:



I. Background



    ``Minor use'' of new animal drugs is defined in the Code of Federal 

Regulations at Sec. 514.1(d)(1)(i) (21 CFR 514.1(d)(1)(i)) as ``the use 

of: (a) New animal drugs in minor animal species, or (b) new animal 

drugs in any animal species for the control of a disease that (1) 

occurs infrequently or (2) occurs in limited geographic areas.''

    ``Minor species'' are defined at Sec. 514.1(d)(1)(ii) as ``animals 

other than cattle, horses, swine, chickens, turkeys, dogs, and cats. 

Sheep are a minor species with respect to effectiveness and animal 

safety data collection requirements; sheep are a major species with 

respect to human safety data collection requirements arising from the 

possible presence of drug residues in food.''

    Because the markets are small for approved new animal drugs 

intended for minor species or for minor uses, there are often 

insufficient economic incentives to motivate sponsors to develop the 

data necessary to support approvals. Consequently, manufacturers have 

not, in many cases, been willing to fund research to obtain these data. 

Accordingly, only small numbers of new animal drugs intended for minor 

species or for minor uses have been approved and are legally marketed.

    Because of the limited availability of approved new animal drugs 

intended for use in minor species or for minor uses, veterinarians, 

animal owners, and livestock producers have limited options for 

treatment of sick animals. In many cases, the available choices are to 

leave a sick animal untreated or to treat the animal with an unapproved 

drug. Even though it might appear that the absence of drug treatment 

would be safe for both the public and the environment, in the absence 

of approved therapies, there are increased public health hazards 

associated with the failure to treat sick animals. For example, the 

transmission of zoonotic disease is a significant public health risk 

associated with leaving animals untreated, as is the reduced 

wholesomeness of food associated with higher morbidity and mortality 

resulting from failure to treat. The shedding of disease-producing 

organisms by untreated animals into the environment also increases 

health risks to other animals and to humans.

    Although FDA has attempted to encourage the submission of approvals 

for minor species and uses in various ways, the agency's efforts to 

promote such approvals have thus far met with only limited success.

    In addition, FDA recently issued final regulations implementing the 

Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (the AMDUCA) (Pub. 

L. 103-396). The AMDUCA and the implementing regulations allow 

veterinarians, if they follow the conditions set forth in the 

regulations, to prescribe approved drugs for extralabel therapeutic use 

in animals. While the AMDUCA does give veterinarians more legal 

treatment options, the AMDUCA will not, and was not intended to, 

facilitate the approval of new animal drugs for minor species or minor 

uses.



II. The ADAA



     On October 9, 1996, the President signed the ADAA (Pub. L. 104-

250) into law. The primary purpose of the ADAA is to facilitate the 

approval and marketing of new animal drugs and medicated feeds by 

building ``needed flexibility'' into the animal drug review processes 

``to enable more efficient approval and more expeditious marketing of 

safe and effective animal drugs'' (H. Rept. 104-823 at 8).

    Section 2(f) of the ADAA directs the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services (the Secretary) to consider legislative and regulatory options 

for facilitating approval under section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, 

and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C. 360b) of new animal drugs 

intended for use in minor species or for minor uses. The ADAA further 

requires the Secretary to announce proposals for legislative or 

regulatory change to the approval process for new animal drugs intended 

for use in minor species or for minor uses within 18 months after the 

date of enactment (i.e., no later than April 9, 1998).

    CVM plans to publish a notice of availability in the Federal 

Register and solicit comments on a revised guidance entitled ``Minor 

Use Guidance Document: A Guide to the Approval of Animal Drugs for 

Minor Uses and for Minor Species.'' CVM intends this revised guidance 

will be published as a Level 1 guidance document to facilitate the 

submission of new animal drug applications for drugs intended for minor 

uses and for minor species by clarifying how the agency believes that 

new animal drug approvals for minor species and for minor uses can be 

achieved, even as FDA develops the proposals required under the ADAA.

    This notice requests comments from animal drug manufacturers, users 

of animal drugs, and interested groups and individuals so that the 

agency can fulfill this statutory mandate of the ADAA.



III. Agency Request for Comments



    FDA is in the process of developing legislative and regulatory 

options for encouraging approvals of new animal drugs for use in minor 

species and for minor uses. As part of this process, the agency 

believes that it would be helpful to obtain comments and additional 

information on particular issues, as well as additional suggestions of 

legislative or regulatory options. FDA would find especially helpful 

comments that address target animal safety, food safety, effectiveness, 

labeling, manufacturing, environmental impact, and other concerns 

related to the agency's statutory responsibilities.

    Accordingly, FDA is specifically requesting comments and 

information on the questions and subjects below. This list is not all-

inclusive, however, and is not intended to limit the range of options 

available for public comment. The agency asks that comments be as 

detailed as possible, with explanations and information to assist FDA 

in evaluating whether the approaches will effectuate the purposes of 

the ADAA: That products be safe and effective, accurately labeled, 

consistently produced, and, most critically, whether the result will be 

larger numbers of approved new animal drugs for use in minor species or 

for minor uses.

    FDA does not intend anyone to read this list as any indication of 

the agency's position on a particular approach or a determination that 

the agency has the resources to implement such an approach.



[[Page 33783]]



A. Scope



    The agency seeks comments on the criteria found at Sec. 514.1(d)(1) 

for the determination of a minor species or a minor use.



B. Creating Additional Statutory Authority



    Should there be different standards for target animal safety and 

effectiveness of new animal drugs intended for use in minor species or 

for minor uses? Should there be different standards for human food 

safety for new animal drugs intended for minor species and for minor 

uses? If so, what should those standards be? Should the standards be 

the same for all minor species or uses? Why? Should products be labeled 

to reflect the use of different standards? If not, why not? If the act 

were amended to permit FDA to approve new animal drugs for a minor 

species or minor use under different standards, how would appropriate 

doses be determined and how would residue depletion and withdrawal 

times for food animals be determined?

    On the human drug side, certain critical drugs for life-threatening 

and serious diseases are approved though an accelerated approval 

process in which followup studies are required to confirm approval (see 

21 CFR part 314, subpart H). Similarly, section 522 of the act (21 

U.S.C. 360l) requires and authorizes the agency to require postmarket 

surveillance of certain devices to protect the public health or provide 

safety and effectiveness data. Would sponsors and users accept 

conditional approvals and postmarket surveillance as a tradeoff for 

requiring less in the way of premarket target animal safety and 

effectiveness studies for new animal drugs for minor species or minor 

uses? Should a drug approved under such a mechanism bear labeling that 

reflects its conditional status?

    Should the act be amended to allow FDA to accept foreign reviews or 

approvals of new animal drugs for minor species or for minor uses? How 

should Congress or FDA determine whether the reviews or approvals of a 

particular country or countries are acceptable as a basis for approval 

of uses for minor species or for minor uses.

    Should the current statutory standard for new animal drug approval 

for drugs intended for minor species or minor uses or any alternative 

standard be implemented through a primary review process external to 

the agency? If so, how might this process be administered? Who should 

pay for the external reviews?

    Could determinations of animal safety and effectiveness by expert 

panels or compendia be used to support drug approvals for minor species 

and minor uses? If so, what information would serve as the basis for 

such determinations? Should the determinations of these panels or other 

information be used to issue monographs or similar standards? Who would 

draft monographs or similar standards and why?



C. Administrative and Regulatory Changes



    Should there be different standards for manufacturing of drugs for 

minor species or minor uses? If so, what should those standards be? 

Should products be labeled to reflect the use of different 

manufacturing standards?

    Would a strategy similar to that used by the agency to facilitate 

drug approvals for some aquatic species be successful if extended to 

other minor species? That strategy includes coordination of 

investigational new animal drug (INAD) information collected or 

generated by end users. It also includes a centrally-organized and CVM-

operated field education program directed at end users as potential 

INAD sponsors. In which species/uses would such an approach work or not 

work? Why?



D. Creating Incentives



    Would economic incentives, such as tax breaks, grants, and periods 

of market or label exclusivity, encourage the pursuit of approvals or 

supplemental approvals for labeling modifications for minor species or 

minor uses? If so, what kinds of incentives would be most effective? 

Would different kinds of incentives be appropriate for different 

classes of new animal drugs, such as drugs for hobbyist-owned tropical 

fish as contrasted with production drugs for fish intended for human 

consumption?

    What incentives would encourage sponsors to pursue approval of a 

drug for a minor species or for a minor use using data in public master 

files (PMF's)? Are there concerns about data in PMF's that make new 

animal drug sponsors reluctant to rely on such data? What are those 

concerns? How could they be addressed?

    If producer groups or other organizations were willing to conduct 

or otherwise fund studies to demonstrate safety and efficacy for new 

animal drug approvals for minor species or minor uses, would sponsors 

be willing to use the data from the studies to support approvals and 

new or revised labeling? If not, why not?

    Should a program similar to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 

National Research Support Program #7 (NRSP-7), which currently funds 

studies for minor use therapeutic uses for food- and fiber-producing 

animals, be developed for wildlife and zoo animals and/or for 

production uses? Should the NRSP-7 program be expanded to cover such 

uses?

    Could and should philanthropic, public interest, or other not-for-

profit organizations be encouraged to fund research for the development 

of new animal drugs intended for use in minor species or for minor 

uses? If so, how, and by whom?

    Are there mechanisms other than the new animal drug approval 

process and extralabel uses of animal and human drugs under the AMDUCA 

that could enhance drug availability for minor species and for minor 

uses?



E. Extending Existing Legal Authority



    Would legislation be desirable to extend the AMDUCA to permit 

extralabel use of: (1) Medicated feeds or (2) reproductive hormones and 

implants? What are the pros and cons of approval versus extralabel use 

under the AMDUCA?



IV. Comments



    Interested persons may, on or before September 8, 1997, submit to 

the Dockets Management Branch (address above) written comments 

regarding this document. Two copies of any comments are to be 

submitted, except that individuals may submit one copy. Comments are to 

be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading 

of this document. Received comments may be seen in the office above 

between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.



    Dated: June 12, 1997.

William K. Hubbard,

Associate Commissioner for Policy Coordination.

[FR Doc. 97-16340 Filed 6-18-97; 1:40 pm]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-F