Supplement AER guidance questioned
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive SummaryFDA should define more clearly elements of its serious adverse event report guidance for dietary supplements, a food and drug attorney says. A. Wes Siegner, of Hyman, Phelps & McNamara in Washington, tells FDA his client Nutraceutical Corp. is concerned about the agency's recommendation that a person responsible for submitting AERs use "diligent efforts" to obtain data from a patient or reporter. Siegner's Nov. 23 1letter says, "If FDA intends to equate 'diligent efforts' with the use of health care practitioners or other methods to elicit the minimum data elements, FDA should" state its expectations. Siegner also takes issue with the agency's definitions of "identifiable patient," "initial reporter" and "serious" AERs in the June 2009 2guidance (3"The Tan Sheet" July 20, 2009)
You may also be interested in...
Attorneys say Sarepta did not have an obligation to report its appeal, particularly since winning a formal dispute filing with the US FDA is a long shot.
Sarepta’s Vyondys: Renal Toxicity Concerns That Delayed Approval Get Enhanced Postmarketing Scrutiny, Label Warning
Sarepta must perform enhanced pharmacovigilance for serious renal toxicity events and rhabdomyolysis with the Duchenne muscular dystrophy drug, which carries a label warning for renal toxicity. Approval letter includes 2024 target completion date for ESSENCE confirmatory trial.