Industry To Supreme Court: Investors Don't Need To See All Adverse Event Reports
This article was originally published in The Pink Sheet Daily
Executive Summary
In an amicus brief filed in the case of Matrixx v. Siracusano, regarding patients who reported losing their sense of smell after taking Zicam, AdvaMed argues companies could end up reporting individual adverse events if the Court doesn't reverse a 2009 appeals court decision.
You may also be interested in...
FDA's Proposed eMDR Rule Aims To Improve Post-Market Surveillance
A PROPOSED RULE MANDATING ELECTRONIC MEDICAL DEVICE REPORTING will help FDA spot post-market device problems more quickly, agency officials say. Although electronic adverse event reporting has been available since 2006, voluntary participation by manufacturers has been low, says Howard Press, who helped author the proposed regulation. Firms need "to see the handwriting on the wall," he says. "The program is going to become mandatory, so it will be easier [for companies] to implement it now rather than later." Manufacturers will have one year to comply with the eMDR rule once it becomes law, and FDA is predicting that the program will save the agency and manufacturers money. Meanwhile, the total number of adverse events reported to FDA under the MDR program decreased in 2008. Also in this issue, Jonathan Sackner-Bernstein, associate director of CDRH's post-market operations, provides an update on the agency's post-market initiative and matrix team
Cancer-Genomics Firm Quanticel Debuts With Close Ties To Celgene, And An Exit In Mind
Celgene will get exclusive use of Quanticel's single-cell genomic analysis to tweak its clinical pipeline, and it also has exclusive options to acquire the venture-backed start-up.
One Trial Plus Supportive Evidence Is Enough For Hospital-, Ventilator-Acquired Pneumonia Indication, Panel Says
Anti-Infective Drugs Advisory Committee members viewed one-trial as practical means of gaining efficacy data.