Changes to an Approved Application

Federal RegisterJul 24, 1997

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Parts 314, 600, 601, 610, and 640

[Docket No. 95N-0329]

RIN 0910-AA57

Changes to an Approved Application

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the

biologics regulations for reporting changes to an approved application

in order to reduce unnecessary reporting burdens on applicants holding

licenses approved by the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research

(CBER) under the Public Health Service Act (the PHS Act) to manufacture

biological products. In addition, FDA is amending the corresponding

drug regulations for submitting supplements and reporting changes to an

application approved under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act

(the act) for specified biotechnology products reviewed in the Center

for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) to harmonize the drugs and

biologics regulations. This final rule is part of FDA's continuing

effort to achieve the objectives of the President's ``Reinventing

Government'' initiatives.

DATES: Effective Date: The regulation is effective October 7, 1997.

Compliance Date: Submit initial annual reports required by

Secs. 314.70(g)(3) and 601.12(d) and (f)(3) within 60 days of the first

anniversary date of the approval of the application of the product

occurring on or after January 20, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven F. Falter, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research

(HFM-630), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, suite

200N, Rockville, MD 20852-1448, 301-594-3074,

or

Yuan Yuan Chiu, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (HFD-800),

Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,

301-443-0260.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In the Federal Register of January 29, 1996 (61 FR 2739), FDA

proposed to amend the biologics regulations in Sec. 601.12 (21 CFR

601.12) for reporting to FDA changes to an approved application in

order to reduce unnecessary reporting burdens on applicants holding

licenses approved by CBER under the PHS Act to manufacture biological

products. Similarly, FDA also proposed to amend the corresponding

regulations applicable to drugs in Sec. 314.70 (21 CFR 314.70) for

reporting changes to an approved application for certain biotechnology

products (identified in the proposed rule as ``well-characterized

biotechnology products'') to reduce unnecessary reporting burdens and

to harmonize the regulations applicable to biotechnology products. FDA

issued the proposed rule as part of its response to several mandates to

reduce the burdens associated with government regulation. These

mandates include, the President's memorandum of March 4, 1995,

announcing the ``Regulatory Reinvention Initiative;'' the President's

memorandum of April 21, 1995, ``Regulatory Reform--Waiver of Penalties

and Reduction of Reports;'' the April 1995 publication, ``Reinventing

Drug and Medical Device Regulations;'' and the November 1995,

Presidential National Performance Review report, ``Reinventing the

Regulation of Drugs Made From Biotechnology.'' Each included elements

intended to reduce regulatory burdens while assuring the continued

safety and effectiveness of regulated products.

This final rule is part of FDA's continuing effort to achieve the

objectives of the President's ``Reinventing Government'' initiative to

harmonize regulations administered by CDER and CBER in FDA, to reduce

unnecessary burdens, and to improve the consistency in the processes

for complying with FDA's regulations without diminishing public health

protection.

II. Proposed Rule

In the proposed rule of January 29, 1996, FDA proposed that for

reporting purposes changes to an approved application be divided into

three categories. In Sec. 601.12(b), FDA proposed for a change that has

a substantial potential to have an adverse effect on the safety,

purity, potency, or effectiveness of the product, that a supplement to

the approved application be submitted and that the product manufactured

after the change not be distributed until the supplement is approved.

In Sec. 601.12(c), FDA proposed for a change that has a moderate

potential to have an adverse effect on the safety, purity, potency, or

effectiveness of the product, that FDA be notified in writing of a

change not less than 30 days before distribution of the product made

using the change. Proposed Sec. 601.12(c)(2) provided that if any

specified information in the notification is missing or if the type of

change requires submission of a supplement and approval by FDA before

implementation, the product may not be distributed until compliance

with the requirements is achieved. In proposed Sec. 601.12(d), changes

that have a minimal potential to have an adverse effect on the safety,

purity, potency, or effectiveness of the product would be reported in

an annual report, submitted each year within 60 days of the anniversary

date of the approval of the application. The information that would be

included in the annual report was specified in proposed

Sec. 601.12(d)(1). In Sec. 601.12(e), FDA proposed regulations similar

to those discussed above applicable to changes in labeling. For

clarity, FDA proposed in 21 CFR 600.3 to add definitions for

``amendment'' and ``supplement'' as the terms apply to license

applications for biological products.

For consistency, FDA also proposed to amend the corresponding

regulations applicable to drugs in Sec. 314.70 for submitting

supplements and reporting changes to an application approved under the

act for certain biotechnology products reviewed in CDER (identified in

the proposed rule as ``well-characterized biotechnology products'').

In the same issue of the Federal Register of January 29, 1996, (61

FR 2748 and 2749), FDA made available and invited public comment on two

draft guidance documents entitled, ``Changes to an Approved Application

for Well-Characterized Therapeutic Recombinant DNA-Derived and

Monoclonal Antibody Biotechnology Products'' and ``Changes to an

Approved Application.'' The draft guidance documents were intended to

assist applicants in determining how they should report changes to an

approved application under the revised regulations. Elsewhere in this

issue of the Federal Register, FDA is announcing the availability of

final guidance documents, revised from those proposed as a result of

public comment, which are intended to aid applicants in complying with

the requirements of this final rule.

In the Federal Register of March 28, 1996 (61 FR 13793), FDA

announced a public meeting, held on April 19, 1996, to discuss and

gather information and views on the proposed rule and draft guidance

documents. A transcript of the public meeting is on file in the public

docket identified in the heading of this

[[Page 39891]]

document at Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), Food and Drug

Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23, Rockville, MD 20857.

III. Highlights and Summary of Changes in the Final Rule

Under the proposed rule, an applicant would be required to report a

change by one of three mechanisms, depending on the potential for the

change to have an adverse effect on the safety, purity, potency, or

effectiveness of the product. Similarly, the final rule will require

reporting of changes under one of three mechanisms, depending on the

potential for the change to have an adverse effect on the ``identity,

strength, quality, purity, or potency of the product, as they may

relate to the safety or effectiveness of the product'' (hereinafter

referred to in the document as ``the safety or effectiveness of the

product'').

The scope of applicability of the changes to Sec. 314.70 is being

revised to identify the specific products, i.e., recombinant

deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-derived protein/polypeptide products and

complexes or conjugates of drugs with monoclonal antibodies regulated

under the act, to which new Sec. 314.70(g) applies. Monoclonal

antibodies for in vivo use complexed or conjugated with

radiopharmaceuticals or toxins would be covered by Sec. 601.12 of the

final rule.

Some changes in each category are identified in the final rule.

Several of these changes differ from those changes identified in the

proposed rule. Some of these changes were previously discussed in the

draft guidance documents as FDA's interpretation of the types of

changes FDA believed would fall into each category. Based on comments

received, they are now included in the final rule to provide added

clarity as to the types of changes which have a substantial, moderate,

or minimal potential to have an adverse effect on the safety or

effectiveness of a product.

The final rule provides for the use of a protocol, sometimes called

a ``comparability protocol,'' which would describe the specific tests

and validation studies and acceptable limits to be achieved to

demonstrate the lack of adverse effect for specified types of changes

on the safety or effectiveness of the product. Upon approval of the

protocol, FDA may determine that certain changes evaluated in

accordance with the protocol may be reported by a less burdensome

means; for example, a change generally requiring preapproval by FDA

could be made and the product distributed 30 days after receipt by FDA

of the supplement reporting the change. For a change normally requiring

a 30-day wait, use of the approved protocol could justify distribution

at the time of receipt of the supplement by FDA. An approved

comparability protocol may also be used, in some cases, to reduce the

reporting category from requiring a 30-day supplement submission to an

annual report submission.

For those changes that have a moderate potential to have an adverse

effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product, the final rule

will require the submission of a supplement subject to FDA approval,

and the product made using the change may be distributed not less than

30 days after receipt of the supplement by FDA; or, in some cases, the

product made using the change may be distributed immediately upon

receipt of the supplement by FDA.

Similar to the proposed rule, changes that have a minimal potential

to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product

will be reported in an annual report, submitted within 60 days of the

first year of date of approval of the application. The final rule also

allows an applicant holding a license under section 351 of the PHS Act

to request FDA approval to submit an annual report on a date other than

the first year so that annual reports for multiple products may be

combined in a single annual report submission.

The requirements for reporting changes to the labeling for

biological products are basically unchanged from the proposed rule. One

clarification is the form to be used for submission of advertisements

and promotional labeling for biological products. Form FDA-2253

(Transmittal of Advertisements and Promotional Labeling for Drugs for

Human Use), the form specified in Sec. 314.81(b)(3) (21 CFR

314.81(b)(3)), is currently under revision by the agency. When final,

it will be used for both drug and biological products for submission of

advertisements and promotional labeling. The final rule now states that

``Form FDA-2567 (Transmittal of Labels and Circulars) or an equivalent

form shall be used.'' In the future, FDA intends that a revised Form

FDA-2253 will be used instead of Form FDA-2567. A future Federal

Register notice will announce the availability of the revised Form FDA-

2253.

The final rule includes a conforming amendment to Sec. 610.9 (21

CFR 610.9) for biological products subject to licensing, so that

changes to methods and processes equivalent to those specified in the

regulations may be submitted in accordance with Sec. 601.12 in the

final rule. Similarly, FDA is revising Sec. 640.120 (21 CFR 640.120) so

that an exception or alternative to the regulations applicable to

blood, blood components, or blood products may be submitted, for

licensed products, in accordance with Sec. 601.12.

Other minor changes to improve the clarity and consistency of the

regulations are also included throughout the final rule.

IV. Responses to Comments

FDA provided 90 days for the submission of written comments on the

proposed rule. FDA also invited the submission of written comments at

the public meeting of April 19, 1996. To ensure that there was adequate

time for the submission of written comments resulting from the public

meeting, as announced in the notice of the public meeting, FDA extended

the comment period an additional 8 days, providing 98 days for public

comment.

The transcript of the public meeting, written comments to the

proposed rule, and comments submitted at or after the public meeting

are on file in the Dockets Management Branch (address above).

FDA received eleven letters of comment in response to the proposed

rule, including one letter filed in response to one of the guidance

documents but which includes comments pertaining to the proposed rule.

Comments received and FDA's responses to the comments are discussed

below.

1. Two comments on proposed Sec. 314.70(g) recommended that the

term ``well-characterized biotechnology product'' be broadened to

include additional products, consistent with the definition proposed by

the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America.

FDA has determined that it is more appropriate to clearly specify

products covered by the final rule than to use a general term such as

``well-characterized biotechnology products.'' As proposed,

Sec. 314.70(g) would have applied only to those ``well-characterized

biotechnology products'' which are regulated as new drugs, rather than

as biologics. FDA has determined that defining such products is

difficult and no longer uses the term in this or other regulations (see

the final rule, Elimination of Establishment License Application for

Specified Biotechnology and Specified Synthetic Biological Products (61

FR 24227, May 14, 1996), concerning appropriate terminology for these

products). To clarify the regulation, FDA is amending Sec. 314.70(g) in

the final rule to identify the specific products to which paragraph (g)

applies; i.e., recombinant DNA-derived protein/

[[Page 39892]]

polypeptide products or complexes and conjugates of drugs with

monoclonal antibodies (where the primary mode of action is due to the

drug). For all other drug products, including synthetic peptides and

antisense nucleotides, the applicant will continue to report changes as

provided in Sec. 314.70(a) through (f). For monoclonal antibodies

complexed or conjugated with radiopharmaceuticals or toxins, changes to

approved applications will be reported under Sec. 601.12.

2. Three comments requested additional clarification of what

constitutes a ``substantial,'' ``moderate,'' and ``minimal'' potential

to have an adverse effect on the product. The comments stated that

further definition of the risks that are of concern to FDA are

necessary to understand the regulation and that such clarification was

preferable to providing exhaustive lists of examples of changes in

agency guidance.

The regulations in the final rule apply to many types of changes

for a broad spectrum of products, including many biotechnology

products, vaccines, blood and blood components, and other biological

products. The regulations will apply to products that are currently

experimental or in the conceptual stages of development, which may have

special concerns that FDA cannot, at this time, anticipate. The

regulations are written to accommodate the many types of changes for

such a broad range of products.

In addition, there is a need to preserve flexibility in the

regulations to ensure that the least burdensome means for reporting

changes are made available. FDA believes that this flexibility will

ensure the continued improvement of the products involved. For example,

a change that may currently be considered to have a substantial

potential to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of

the product may, at a later date, based on new information or advances

in technology, be determined to have a lesser potential to have an

adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product.

Conversely, a change now considered, for example, to have a moderate

potential to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of

the product may, based on information not available at this time, be

later determined by the agency to have a substantial potential to have

an adverse effect on a product.

FDA agrees there is a need to clarify the regulations to help

identify those changes which have a substantial, moderate, or minimal

potential to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of

the product. In this regard, FDA has included examples of specific

changes in the final rule in order to further clarify the types of

changes that fall into each category and to provide further

predictability about the application of the rule.

Many factors should be considered in determining whether a change

has a substantial, moderate, or minimal potential to have an adverse

effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product. For example, the

level of knowledge about the product and its active components may

affect the ability to assess the effect of a change. The type of change

being made will also contribute to the risk of the change having an

adverse effect. Some manufacturing changes have a greater potential to

cause unwanted or unexpected changes to the product which may be

difficult to assess by merely testing to specifications. The type of

product is also a factor to consider in determining the potential risk

of an adverse effect on the product. Some products can be adversely

affected by small changes which may cause larger effects even though

the changes may seem to be low risk. For example, a change in passage

number for a live virus vaccine could affect the safety of the vaccine

and this type of change may be difficult to assess.

Therefore, defining ``substantial,'' ``moderate,'' and ``minimal''

in the regulations with such specificity that they exhaustively

describe all of the many individual changes that may occur is not

feasible. However, as FDA gains experience in the use of this rule, it

will consider whether to propose additional revisions to further

clarify how to determine the appropriate submission for a change to an

approved application.

At this time, FDA is clarifying the final regulations in several

ways while providing adequate flexibility. The revisions are as

follows:

a. Clarification of wording. FDA is amending the final rule by

specifying a change in quality controls as a type of change within the

scope of reporting provisions of the final rule. Similarly, for

purposes of clarity and consistency, FDA is including in

Sec. 601.12(a), (b)(1), (c)(1), and (d)(1) a change in responsible

personnel as subject to the requirements of the final rule.

``Responsible personnel'' was inadvertently included in only some, but

not all, of the appropriate parts of the proposed rule.

FDA is further amending the final rule to specify that the

mechanism for reporting a change is based on the degree of potential of

the change ``to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength,

quality, purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the

safety or effectiveness of the product.'' ``Identity, strength,

quality, purity, and potency'' are all elements that are assessed in

determining the safety or effectiveness of the product. In addition,

FDA is adding the term ``major changes'' to the headings of

Secs. 314.70(g)(1) and 601.12(b), and ``minor changes'' to the headings

of Secs. 314.70(g)(3) and 601.12(d), in order to further clarify the

types of changes which would fall into each category.

b. Inclusion of examples of changes falling under each reporting

category. In proposed Secs. 314.70(g)(1)(i)(A), (g)(1)(i)(B), and

(g)(1)(i)(C) and 601.12(b)(1)(i), (b)(1)(ii), and (b)(1)(iii), FDA

specifically identified changes that would be among those subject to

supplement submission and approval prior to distribution of the product

made using the change. FDA has reevaluated the proposed regulations and

has determined that, for purposes of clarification, more types of

changes should be specifically identified in the regulations as being

subject to supplement submission and approval prior to distribution of

the product made using the change. Accordingly, the final rule provides

in Secs. 314.70(g)(1)(ii)(A) through (g)(1)(ii)(F) and 601.12(b)(2)(i)

through (b)(2)(vi) more types of changes that FDA has determined are

subject to submission of a supplement and approval by FDA prior to

distribution of the product made using the change.

Similarly, FDA is including examples of changes that have a

moderate potential or a minimal potential to have an adverse effect on

the safety or effectiveness of a product in Secs. 314.70(g)(2)(ii) and

601.12(c)(2), and Secs. 314.70(g)(3)(ii) and 601.12(d)(2),

respectively. These lists are not intended to be all inclusive but are

examples of the types of changes that fall into each category

3. One comment recommended that proposed Sec. 314.70(g) not be

added to part 314 (21 CFR part 314). Instead, the comment suggested

that changes related to any well-characterized biotechnology product,

whether regulated as a drug or as a biologic, should be reported in

accordance with existing Sec. 314.70(a) through (f).

FDA disagrees in part with the comment. FDA agrees that

biotechnology products should be regulated consistently but believes

the regulations in the final rule are necessary to ensure the continued

safety and effectiveness of recombinant DNA-derived protein/polypeptide

products and complexes or conjugates of drugs with monoclonal

antibodies. Products

[[Page 39893]]

manufactured using biotechnology can present somewhat different

scientific issues than products manufactured using more traditional

techniques. In new Secs. 314.70(g) and 601.12, the agency is

promulgating requirements appropriate for this category of product,

whether regulated as a drug or biologic.

4. One comment on proposed Secs. 314.70(g)(3) and 601.12(d)

recommended that the requirements be amended to be consistent with

current Sec. 314.70(d)(1) so that changes made by an applicant to

comply with an official compendium would be among those for which only

notification in an annual report would be necessary.

FDA agrees with the comment and is including this change in

Secs. 314.70(g)(3)(ii) and 601.12(d)(2) of the final rule as one that

may be reported in the annual report.

5. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12 suggested that the term

``effectiveness'' should not be used in reference to blood and plasma

establishments. The comment stated that the effectiveness of a blood

component can be greatly affected by circumstances of its use, which is

entirely out of the control of the manufacturer and that Source Plasma,

being a source material for the manufacture of other products, has no

``effectiveness'' in and of itself.

FDA disagrees with the comment. There are many examples of types of

changes in manufacturing a blood or blood component product which may

have an adverse effect on the effectiveness of the product. For

example, any change that may affect the viability of Red Blood Cells,

such as a change in dating period, anticoagulant, or processing

methods, may directly affect the effectiveness of the product and the

impact of the change should be evaluated accordingly. The comment is

correct that Source Plasma is only used in the manufacture of other

products and the ``effectiveness'' of Source Plasma is not by itself a

consideration. However, inclusion of the ``effectiveness'' in the

regulations has no effect upon the burdens associated with the

regulations for Source Plasma or other intermediate products where

effectiveness of the product is not directly a factor. FDA believes it

is unnecessary to clarify further the regulations in this respect.

6. One comment disagreed with the examples of changes given in

proposed Sec. 601.12(b)(1), which would require submission of a

supplement and approval by FDA before distribution of the product made

using the change. The comment stated that most of the examples of

changes should be reported as notifications to FDA rather than

requiring preapproval.

FDA disagrees with the comment. The types of changes identified in

Sec. 601.12(b)(1) of the proposed rule and those in the final rule are

based on FDA's experience of reviewing supplements and are those for

which FDA believes there is a substantial potential to have an adverse

effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product. Listing examples

of the types of changes with such potential provides useful information

to applicants for assessing the appropriate category of reporting.

However, FDA also recognizes there may be instances when the agency

may determine that a reduced reporting category for a specific

manufacturing change is justified for a type of change that is

ordinarily subject to submission of a supplement and approval by FDA

prior to distribution of the product made using the change.

If the agency can be assured that when a manufacturing change is

implemented appropriate procedures have been followed by the applicant

to evaluate the effect of the change on the safety or effectiveness of

the product, FDA believes that in certain cases the potential for an

adverse effect may be lessened.

Generally, when considering a change in the manufacture of a

product, the manufacturer will prepare a protocol, often called a

``comparability protocol,'' identifying and describing the tests to be

performed in evaluating the change and its effect on the product, and

defining the criteria against which the impact of the change will be

evaluated. By providing an opportunity for FDA to review and approve

the comparability protocol before it is used by the applicant to

evaluate a change, FDA can have greater assurance that the change is

being properly evaluated and, therefore, that there is less potential

for the change to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness

of the product.

Accordingly, FDA is adding Secs. 314.70(g)(4) and 601.12(e) in the

final rule to provide that an applicant may submit to FDA as a

supplement a protocol describing the specific tests and validation

studies and acceptable limits to be achieved to demonstrate the lack of

adverse effect for specified types of manufacturing changes on the

safety or effectiveness of the product. Upon approval of the protocol,

FDA may determine that the use of the approved protocol for the

particular change justifies the use of a reduced reporting category for

that change because the use of the protocol reduces the potential risk

of adverse effect.

The guidance documents being made available with this final rule

provide examples of how, consistent with FDA's current interpretation

of the rule, a comparability protocol approved by FDA may be used to

justify a reduction in the reporting category. For example, use of an

approved protocol for a particular change may result in a determination

by FDA that a change usually subject to supplement submission and

approval by FDA prior to distribution of the product made using the

change may be submitted as a change subject to supplement submission at

least 30 days prior to distribution of the product made using the

change. Similarly, FDA is including in Secs. 314.70(g)(2)(v) and

601.12(c)(5) in the final rule that use of a previously approved

protocol is one means by which FDA may determine that a product made

using a specified change may be distributed immediately upon receipt of

the supplement by FDA (see also, FDA's response to comment 10 of this

document for additional discussion of the means for permitting the

immediate distribution of a product made using a change).

However, use of a comparability protocol approved by FDA may not

justify a reduction in the reporting category for every type of change.

Some steps in manufacturing a biological product are so critical to the

safety and effectiveness of the product that a change in that

manufacturing step would always be subject to the submission of a

supplement to FDA and approval by FDA prior to distribution of the

product made using the change.

7. Two comments related to proposed Sec. 601.12(c), which would

provide for notification to FDA of certain changes not less than 30

days before distribution of the product made using the change. The

comments recommended that Sec. 601.12(c) be deleted and that there be

only two tiers of changes: Those requiring submission of a supplement

and preapproval by FDA, and those which may be reported in an annual

report. One of the comments recommended that, when other safety issues

have been addressed, changes which result in a product meeting

currently approved release criteria should be reported in an annual

report. One of the comments noted that, in effect, the submission of a

notification was equivalent in reporting burden to the submission of a

supplement.

FDA disagrees with the comment that there should be only two

categories of changes but recognizes that the regulations should be

revised to allow

[[Page 39894]]

more types of changes to be implemented in 30 days. An important

objective of this rulemaking is to provide for the prompt

implementation of changes while allowing FDA to ensure that the changes

do not have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the

product. As proposed, Secs. 314.70(g)(2) and 601.12(c) would have

provided for the distribution of a product made using certain changes

30 days after notification to FDA but they did not provide for the full

evaluation and approval by FDA of information gathered by the applicant

in validating the change. As a consequence, under the proposed rule,

FDA would have been unable to determine, because of the absence of

data, that many changes could be considered to have a moderate, rather

than a substantial, potential to have an adverse effect on the safety

or effectiveness of the product.

Accordingly, FDA is revising proposed Secs. 314.70(g)(2) and

601.12(c) to require, for changes which have a moderate potential to

have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product,

the submission of a supplement, rather than a notification, 30 days

before distribution of the product made using the change. FDA is taking

this initiative so that significantly more types of changes may be

moved from the prior approval category, thereby allowing distribution

of the product at or near the time of submission.

In this regard, in preparing this final rule, FDA reviewed those

changes that were identified in the proposed rule (and discussed in the

draft guidance documents) as subject to supplement submission and FDA

approval prior to distribution of the product made using the change.

The agency determined that for many of these changes, agency review of

the data is necessary to assess any potential long-term effect on the

continued safety or effectiveness of the product, but that it is

unnecessary to require that FDA approval of the supplement be obtained

before the product made using the change is initially distributed. In

addition, as discussed previously in this document, FDA has decided to

permit the use of a ``comparability protocol'' for certain changes in

lieu of requiring supplement submission and approval prior to

distribution of the particular product made using the change. Thus, as

described in the guidance documents being made available with this

final rule, a change that is usually considered to have a substantial

potential to have an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of

the product may, in certain circumstances, be implemented and the

product distributed not less than 30 days after FDA's receipt of the

supplement or, in some cases, immediately upon submission of the

supplement notifying the agency of the change, provided the change has

been evaluated by the applicant in accordance with an FDA approved

comparability protocol. The supplement is then reviewed by FDA to

assure that there is adequate evidence that the change will

consistently result in a safe and effective product. As provided in

Secs. 314.70(g)(2)(iii) and 601.12(c)(3) of the final rule, the

information to be submitted would be the same type of information as is

required for a supplement subject to approval by FDA prior to

distributing the product made using the change.

In the guidance documents being made available elsewhere in this

issue of the Federal Register, FDA identifies a number of additional

types of changes which, under its current interpretation of the rule,

may be implemented 30 days after receipt by FDA of the supplement, but

for which FDA approval before implementation would have been required

under the proposed rule. In addition, the final rule provides that, for

some other types of changes, implementation can occur immediately upon

submission of the supplement to FDA. The reduction in delays gained by

reducing the number of types of changes subject to supplement

submission and prior approval by FDA before distribution of the product

made using the change, and from the use of comparability protocols, can

only be achieved if FDA has the opportunity to evaluate the information

in the form of a supplement to assure that there is no long-term

potential that the change or many sequential changes made over time may

have an adverse effect on the product.

Potential applicants should be aware that complete review and

approval of a supplement will take longer than 30 days. There may be

instances where FDA determines, after the product made using the change

has been distributed, that the information submitted in the supplement

fails to adequately demonstrate the continued safety or effectiveness

of the product made using the change. In such cases, FDA will make all

possible efforts to resolve problems with the applicant concerning the

supplement submission without requiring removal of the product from the

marketplace. In assessing an applicant's plans to correct a problem,

the agency intends to consider the applicant's reasons for making the

change and the available alternatives to the change. In cases where FDA

determines that there may be a danger to public health due to the

continued marketing of the product, or when FDA determines that the

issues may not otherwise be resolved, the agency may require that the

applicant cease distribution of the product made using the change or

that the product be removed from distribution pending resolution of the

issues related to the change.

8. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(b)(2)(vi)

(Sec. 601.12(b)(3)(vi) in the final rule) recommended that an applicant

have the option of providing a detailed summary of the validation

protocol and data, and the agency could request copies of the entire

protocol and all data, if needed.

FDA disagrees with the comment. FDA believes that submission of the

complete validation protocol and data is necessary to assure that FDA

may fully evaluate any variability in test results that might not be

apparent in a summary of test results. The agency has frequently

encountered instances in which the average of the test results was

within acceptable limits but variability in test results indicated a

problem with the reproducibility of the test or demonstrated

variability in product quality. In order to understand the implications

of any such variability, it is necessary to review all data and the

complete validation protocol specifying the test methodology used.

9. One comment recommended that only one supplement to a product

license application should be necessary to implement a change by all

facilities under a single establishment license.

This rulemaking does not address the overall licensing policies of

the agency. In a related initiative, FDA is reviewing licensing

policies and regulations. FDA will consider the comment in its general

review of licensing policies and intends to publish additional

documents in the Federal Register regarding licensing policies.

10. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(c) suggested that the

requirement for notification to FDA not less than 30 days prior to

distributing the product be expanded to include a subcategory for

permitting the notification of FDA concurrent with the distribution of

the product made using the change.

FDA agrees with the comment. FDA believes 30 days is often

necessary to assure that the supplement is complete and that the change

qualifies for the moderate potential category. However, in other cases,

such as when the change has been evaluated in accordance with an

approved comparability protocol, or

[[Page 39895]]

where a change is one which in the agency's experience has always been

reported by applicants in the correct category, and with the proper

documentation, a change may be implemented immediately upon submission

of the supplement. Accordingly, FDA is adding Secs. 314.70(g)(2)(v) and

601.12(c)(5) in the final rule to provide that FDA may, for certain

changes otherwise requiring submission of a supplement at least 30 days

prior to distribution of the product made using the change, permit the

distribution of the product to begin immediately upon receipt of the

supplement by the agency. Such types of changes may be made in

connection with approved comparability protocols or may be discussed in

guidance documents.

11. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(c) noted that the proposed

rule did not specify the manner by which FDA would notify an applicant

of its determination of whether the notification was accepted or if

additional information was needed. The comment recommended that FDA

establish a maximum time period, such as 21 days, after which the

applicant can be assured that no request for significant information is

forthcoming, thus allowing the applicant to begin marketing the product

30 days after submission with confidence that FDA has no objection.

As discussed earlier in this document, the final rule has replaced

the ``notification'' with a supplement which may be implemented in 30

days. During the 30-day period from the date of receipt of a

supplement, FDA will perform a preliminary review of the supplement to

determine whether it is complete and whether the type of change

qualifies under Secs. 314.70(g)(2)(iv) or 601.12(c)(4) for distribution

of the product made using the change 30 days after receipt of the

supplement. The means of notifying the applicant of whether the

supplement has been accepted as a ``30-day supplement'' depends on the

individual circumstances surrounding the supplement. FDA recognizes

that when there are problems with the supplement that may delay product

distribution, the applicant should be notified as quickly as possible.

Official notification will be by letter. To notify the applicant that

the supplement has been received, FDA will send an acknowledgment

letter assigning a reference number to the supplement.

Although FDA intends to perform this preliminary review as

expeditiously as possible, there may be some cases where the entire 30-

day period is necessary to determine if the supplement is complete and

qualifies for implementation 30 days after submission. It is the

responsibility of the applicant to determine whether it should prepare

to release the product 30 days after submission of the supplement,

recognizing that the release may be delayed because of deficiencies in

the supplement, or make other arrangements to better accommodate such a

possibility.

12. In the preamble to the proposed rule, FDA requested comments as

to whether the information to be included in an annual report under

existing Sec. 314.81(b)(2), currently applicable to nonbiological new

drugs, should be applied to licensed biological products. One comment

expressed the opinion that the information required under

Sec. 314.81(b)(2) is more onerous than the proposed requirements in

Sec. 601.12(d) and should not be applied. Another comment stated that

the information required by Sec. 314.81(b)(2) has little relevance to

blood and plasma establishments.

FDA requested comment to determine if applicants who manufacture

both drugs and biological products preferred that the required content

of the annual reports for drugs and biologics be identical. Only two

comments were received in response to the agency request and both

opposed complete harmonization. The agency is committed to harmonizing

reporting requirements for drugs and biologics as much as possible and

will continue to evaluate the need for identical content in annual

reports. However, based on comments received, FDA has determined that

it would be appropriate to harmonize the requirements for the annual

report as they relate only to manufacturing changes at this time. The

final rule at Sec. 314.70(g)(3) references the annual report

requirements for drugs approved under a new drug application (NDA) for

products subject to Sec. 314.70(g). For biological products, the

language in Sec. 601.12(d)(2)(i) through (d)(2)(vii) will require the

same type and amount of information for manufacturing changes as is

required under Sec. 314.81(b)(iv)(b). This harmonizes the reporting

requirements as they relate to postapproval changes for drugs and

biologics without adding, for biological products, the additional

requirements for other information required in an annual report for a

drug approved under an NDA. The full description of the changes would

include pertinent data from studies and tests performed to evaluate the

effect of the change on the safety and effectiveness of the product.

This differs from the proposed rule and is now appropriate because more

changes that previously required submission of a supplement to FDA

under the proposed rule will now require only the submission of an

annual report. These data will allow the agency to help assess the

impact of numerous changes that may occur to a product over time.

13. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(d) asked whether the annual

report should include a description of all changes or only those not

otherwise reported to FDA under the proposed regulations.

The annual report should include information concerning only those

changes that have not previously been reported to FDA in a supplement.

FDA recognizes the need to avoid redundant reporting of changes.

Some products, particularly blood and blood components, are closely

related and a single change may affect multiple products. Under the

proposed rule, a minor change, which has a minimal potential to have an

adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product, would be

reported in the annual report for each affected product on or about the

first anniversary date of the approval of the application for the

product. In Sec. 601.12(d)(1) of the final rule, FDA is adding a

provision to permit an applicant to request an alternative date for

submission of an annual report so that multiple reports may be combined

into a single combined annual report submission.

14. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(d) asked for a

clarification as to whether the annual report should include facility

changes of the type previously contained in an establishment license

application but for which FDA no longer requires submission in an

application for a specified biotechnology product (see the final rule

published in the Federal Register of May 14, 1996 (61 FR 24227)).

If the change relates to a matter which, under current procedures,

would not be described in an original application and its supplements,

reporting of the change is not required.

15. Two comments on proposed Sec. 601.12(e) (Sec. 601.12(f) in the

final rule) recommended that Sec. 601.12(e)(4) be replaced by a cross-

reference to Sec. 314.70 so that all changes to advertising and

promotional labeling for drug and biological products would be covered

by one set of regulations. One additional comment recommended that

proposed Sec. 601.12(e) cross-reference Sec. 314.70 for labeling

changes and recommended that proposed Sec. 601.12(e)(4) regarding

advertisements and promotional

[[Page 39896]]

labeling replace existing Sec. 601.45 (21 CFR 601.45).

Section 601.45 applies only to promotional materials relating to

biological products intended for serious or life-threatening illness

being considered for accelerated approval. FDA believes these

requirements continue to be necessary for biological products being

considered for accelerated approval.

FDA considered consolidating the requirements for advertising and

labeling for drugs and biologics under one set of regulations but

decided that the regulations are more useful if all requirements

applicable to the reporting of changes to a license of a biological

product are directly or indirectly included in one separate set of

regulations. Advertisements and promotional labeling for both licensed

biological products and drug products with approved NDA must be

reported in accordance with the same requirements of Sec. 314.81(b)(3),

except that, as discussed previously in this document, different forms

will be used until the final revised harmonized form is available.

16. One comment on proposed Sec. 601.12(e)(2)(i)(D)

(Sec. 601.12(f)(2)(i)(D) in the final rule), noted that to submit a

labeling change to ``delete false, misleading, or unsupported

indications for use or claims for effectiveness'' would be equivalent

to acknowledging that the product has been misbranded. The comment

asked for examples of when there might be circumstances when FDA would

have previously approved a label that so misbranded the product.

Although this type of labeling change is infrequent, it has

occurred in the past. For example, analyses of the results of

postapproval studies may show that information included in the approved

labeling is false or unsupported. Occasionally, an applicant may

discover after approval of the product that data obtained from the

clinical or laboratory studies sponsored by the applicant contained

false information or, upon reevaluation, does not support claims made

in the labeling. Also, the applicant may determine that persons using

the product are making incorrect inferences from wording in the

labeling and wording changes are necessary to ensure that the product

is not used inappropriately. Changes made in the above instances would

be reported in accordance with Sec. 601.12(f)(2)(i)(D).

17. One comment recommended the deletion of Sec. 610.9 because it

is redundant with provisions in the proposed rule.

FDA disagrees with the comment but believes that the relationship

among Sec. 610.9, a similar regulation in Sec. 640.120, and the

regulations in the final rule should be clarified. Section 610.9

provides procedures for a manufacturer of a biological product to

modify a particular test method or manufacturing process, which is

specified in the biologics regulations upon demonstrating to FDA that

the modification will provide assurances of the effects on the safety

and effectiveness of the biological product equal to or greater than

the test method or process specified in the regulations. Section

640.120 provides procedures for licensed and unlicensed manufacturers

of blood, blood components, and blood products to obtain FDA approval

for an exception or alternative to any requirement in part 640 (21 CFR

part 640), subchapter F. Sections 610.9 and 640.120 are intended to

provide flexibility for an applicant to obtain FDA approval of a change

to a test method, manufacturing process, or other requirement from that

specified in the regulations.

Section 601.12 of the final rule provides for the reporting of

changes, including those for which approval under Secs. 610.9 or

640.120 is required. In some cases, a change requiring approval under

Secs. 610.9 or 640.120 may be eligible for distribution 30 days after

FDA's receipt of the supplement requesting approval of the change.

Accordingly, FDA is amending Secs. 610.9 and 640.120 in the final rule

to clarify that FDA may permit changes submitted under Sec. 610.9 or

changes submitted by licensed establishments under Sec. 640.120 to be

distributed as provided in Secs. 601.12(b) and (c) of the final rule.

FDA is also taking this opportunity to amend Sec. 610.9 to clarify

that a request for approval of an equivalent method or process can be

submitted either as part of the original application (or as an

amendment to the original, pending application) or as a supplement to

the approved application. Section 610.9 previously specified that the

request should be submitted as a license supplement.

18. One comment urged that CBER continue to be directly involved in

inspections of well-characterized biotechnology products so that the

agency may provide proper scientific review and oversight of those

changes not reported before product distribution.

FDA agrees that appropriate scientific oversight should be given to

help assure the continued safety and effectiveness of the products,

particularly when there is a significant change in a method of

manufacture. The agency will consider the comment when reviewing its

overall inspectional policies.

19. One comment recommended that the review and regulation of all

well-characterized biotechnology products be consolidated into one

office serving both CDER and CBER.

This comment is outside the scope of this final rule. FDA is not

considering such a reorganization at this time.

20. One comment recommended deletion of parts 610 through 680 (21

CFR parts 610 through 680) because these requirements are more

appropriately addressed in approved marketing applications, compendia,

and guidance documents.

In the Federal Register of August 1, 1996 (61 FR 40153), FDA issued

a final rule removing the regulations in parts 620, 630, and 650 in

their entirety and removing sections of parts 610, 640, 660, and 680.

The remaining regulations continue to be under review within the agency

and FDA intends to pursue additional rulemaking at a later date

proposing to retain, revise, or remove many of the remaining

regulations.

21. One comment from a licensed blood establishment recommended

that a product license application supplement not be required for a

change relating to a device which has received 510(k) clearance from

FDA. The comment noted that the applicant should be permitted to

implement the change with concurrent notification.

FDA disagrees with the comment. On occasion, a licensed blood

establishment may change the type of equipment used in the collection

or processing of blood and blood components. For example, a blood

establishment may decide to change from using manual pheresis equipment

for the collection of Source Plasma or other blood components to

automated equipment which has already been cleared for such use as a

medical device, either with an approved premarket approval application

or cleared as substantially equivalent under section 510(k) of the act

(21 U.S.C. 360(k)). The purpose of the supplement to the product

license application is to assure that the use of the equipment has been

properly validated at the blood establishment, that the persons using

the equipment have been properly trained, and that appropriate standard

operating procedures are in place to assure the safety of the donors

from whom the blood components will be collected. FDA believes that a

change from manual to automated pheresis equipment that is not properly

implemented may have a substantial potential to have an adverse effect

on the health of the donors as well as on

[[Page 39897]]

the safety and effectiveness of the products being collected. For this

reason, FDA believes that a supplement submission to convert from

manual to automated pheresis equipment should be subject to approval by

FDA before the change is implemented. FDA notes that for certain other

types of similar changes, such as changing from one type of automated

equipment to another, there is less potential for an adverse effect and

the product made using the change may be distributed 30 days after

receipt by FDA of the supplement reporting the change.

22. One comment recommended that FDA not set specific requirements

for submission of changes to a pending application. This flexibility

could help expedite the approval of life-saving products, such as a new

treatment for cancer.

Former Sec. 601.12 applied both to changes to an approved

application and to changes to a pending application. In the preamble to

the proposed rule (61 FR 2739 at 2742), FDA announced its intention to

consider whether it is appropriate to issue specific requirements for

submitting amendments to pending license applications as part of its

review of licensing requirements. The review of licensing requirements

continues; however, FDA recognizes that its regulations and policies

must provide adequate flexibility to accommodate the wide variety of

products which are subject to licensure.

The agency has already taken a number of steps to ensure the

expeditious review and approval of important new drugs and biologics,

including a commitment under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act of 1992

(Pub. L. 102-571) to endeavor to complete the review of applications

for ``breakthrough'' drugs and biologics within certain specified

timeframes. Efforts to improve the system for the review and approval

of important new drugs and biological products are continuing.

23. One comment requested that FDA discontinue its policy of

requiring submission of plateletpheresis products for quality control

testing as a prerequisite for license approval for such products.

The comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, which deals

with the procedures for the reporting of changes to a license

application. FDA notes, however, that for the present time, the agency

plans to continue its practice of performing quality control testing as

part of its review of a license application relating to a

plateletpheresis product. Plateletpheresis is a sophisticated process,

requiring considerable expertise to perform properly. In recent quality

control testing, performed in 1996, FDA found that 26 of 279 samples

submitted did not meet appropriate specifications. Results from

additional samples indicated problems with pheresis procedures. See

Sec. 640.25(b) for additional standards regarding quality control

testing. Because of this relatively high rate of failure, FDA believes

that continued quality control testing by the agency is necessary to

assure the continued safety and effectiveness of plateletpheresis

products.

24. One comment recommended that FDA provide an applicant with a

specific, detailed, written explanation for finding a license ``not

approvable'' and that compliance deficiencies unrelated to the change

specified in the application should not justify a ``not approvable''

decision.

The comment is beyond the scope of this rulemaking, which deals

with the procedures for the reporting of changes. The entire licensing

process, including the review and approval of license supplements,

continues to be under review within FDA. This comment will be

considered by the agency as part of its review of the licensing

process.

25. One comment recommended that the final rule be made effective

immediately upon its publication to provide immediate relief from

excess reporting burdens.

FDA agrees the final rule should be implemented as soon as

possible. Additional information regarding effective dates and other

implementation issues is presented at the end of this preamble.

26. One comment on the ``Analysis of Impacts'' section of the

preamble of the proposed rule noted that the analysis did not specify

how many establishments were involved and whether the proposed

regulations would truly result in a paperwork reduction. The comment

requested that FDA describe more clearly the expected reduction in

paperwork burdens.

The ``Analysis of Impacts'' sections of the proposed and final

rules are based on an evaluation of those supplements submitted to FDA

under the previous regulations during a specified time period. All

applicants holding licenses for biological products or an NDA for those

biotechnology products affected by Sec. 314.70(g) are potential

respondents. The analysis is based on the number of supplements

submitted in the recent past which would, under the final rule, be

subject to each form of reporting to FDA. From the burden hours

associated with each of the possible means of reporting to FDA,

assuming the types of changes occurring under the final rule are

comparable to those which were evaluated, the estimated change in costs

to the applicant can be readily calculated.

FDA notes that the decrease in paperwork is only part of the relief

from regulatory burdens achieved by the final rule. Under the new

regulations many changes may be implemented more expeditiously and the

product marketed more quickly. FDA believes this ability to readily

market a product made with improved technology or improved labeling

will be of considerable economic benefit to the applicant and the

public. Because these benefits are indirect benefits, FDA does not have

the information necessary to quantify the economic benefits associated

with such timely marketing of products.

V. Effective Dates and Other Implementation Issues

The final rule is effective October 7, 1997. On or after that date,

FDA will accept supplements submitted in accordance with the final

rule. For supplements which have already been submitted to FDA and

which are pending approval, the applicant should notify FDA as to

whether it believes: (1) The supplement continues to be subject to

approval by FDA before implementation of the change; (2) the change may

be implemented but is subject to FDA approval as a supplement; or (3)

the supplement should be withdrawn because review of the change as a

supplement is no longer necessary and the change may be implemented and

reported in an annual report. FDA will inform the applicant within 30

days of its receipt of this notification if it is not in agreement with

the applicant's assessment.

FDA is requesting the submission of the initial annual report

required by Secs. 314.70(g)(3) and 601.12(d) and (f)(3) within 60 days

of the first anniversary date of the approval of the application of the

product occurring on or after January 20, 1998. For products with an

earlier anniversary date, the annual report shall be submitted within

60 days of the next anniversary date and should report all applicable

changes occurring since the time of issuance of the final rule.

VI. Analysis of Impacts

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility

Act

FDA has examined the impact of the final rule under Executive Order

12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612). Executive

Order 12866

[[Page 39898]]

directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available

regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select

regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential

economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other

advantages; distributive impact; and equity). The agency believes that

this final rule is consistent with the regulatory philosophy and

principles identified in the Executive Order. In addition, the final

rule is a significant regulatory action as defined by the Executive

Order and is subject to review under the Executive Order because it

deals with a novel policy issue.

In accordance with the principles of Executive Order 12866, the

overall result of the final rule will be a substantial reduction in

burdens on applicants seeking approval of a product subject to this

rule. FDA anticipates that the final rule will facilitate an

applicant's ability to market a product improved by a change in

manufacturing or labeling without unnecessary delays while reducing the

overall paperwork burden associated with reporting such a change to

FDA. In addition, FDA anticipates that the final rule may encourage

applicants to improve their licensed products, product labeling, and

methods of manufacture.

Unless the head of the agency certifies that the rule does not

impose a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities,

the Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze regulatory

options that would minimize any significant economic impact of a rule

on small entities. The final rule will reduce the overall burdens

associated with reporting changes in manufacturing and labeling of

licensed biological products. It also provides increased flexibility

for applicants in selecting the means of reporting manufacturing

changes by providing for the use of a comparability protocol through

which the agency may determine that the change has a decreased

potential for an adverse effect on the safety and effectiveness of the

product when compared with the potential generally associated with that

type of change. In many cases under the final rule, an applicant will

be able to market a product made using a change in manufacturing more

rapidly than previously permitted under the regulations.

Because, as stated above, the overall result of the final rule will

be a substantial reduction in the regulatory and reporting burdens, the

Commissioner of Food and Drugs certifies that the final rule will not

have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Therefore, under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, no further

analysis is required.

Although no further analysis is required, in developing this final

rule, the agency did consider the impact of the rule on small entities.

The agency also considered various regulatory options to maximize the

net benefits of the rule to small entities without compromising the

agency's ability to assure the continued safety and effectiveness of

the products to which the rule applies. The following analysis briefly

examines the potential impact of the final rule on small businesses.

1. The Need for the Regulation

The purpose of the final rule is to amend the regulations for

reporting to FDA changes to an approved application for a biological

product in order to reduce unnecessary reporting burdens on applicants

holding approved licenses to manufacture biological products and on

applicants with an approved NDA for specified biotechnology products.

FDA issued the proposed rule as part of its response to several

mandates to reduce the burdens associated with government regulation,

while assuring the continued safety and effectiveness of regulated

products.

The final rule takes into account comments submitted to the Dockets

Management Branch, and discussions and information obtained through

public participation in the public meeting held on April 19, 1996, to

discuss and gather information and views on the proposed rule and two

draft guidance documents. The objective of the final rule is to

harmonize regulations administered by CDER and CBER in FDA, to reduce

unnecessary burdens, and improve the consistency in the processes for

complying with FDA's regulations without diminishing public health

protection.

As stated previously, FDA held an open public meeting during the

comment period to facilitate public comment on this rule. FDA is

announcing the availability of final guidance documents, revised from

those proposed as a result of public comment, which are intended to aid

applicants in complying with the requirements of this final rule.

2. Description of Requirements

Any applicant holding an approved marketing application for a

licensed biological product or specified biotechnology product will be

required to report a change in the approved manufacturing process or in

labeling by the appropriate procedure described in this final rule. The

rule applies both to small and large for-profit business entities, and

to small and large nonprofit organizations.

The agency believes the regulation is flexible and is consistent

with contemporary standards. Because this final rule represents a

decrease in reporting burdens and other economic burdens previously

applicable to the same products, FDA believes that firms should have no

problem with complying with these regulations. No particular

professional skills are needed to assemble the information to be

reported to FDA.

3. Types and Number of Firms Affected

Approximately 400 firms are affected by this final rule.

Approximately half, primarily establishments with licenses for blood

and blood component products, are nonprofit institutions. The remainder

are large for-profit businesses.

4. Alternatives

A number of alternatives were considered in preparing this final

rule. Each alternative was evaluated as to its adequacy in providing in

a timely way the information needed for FDA to assure the continued

safety and effectiveness of the affected products, and evaluated with

regard to burdens related to paperwork and the applicant's ability to

market a product made with a changed manufacturing process or

distributed with revised labeling. The agency decided not to provide

different reporting requirements for small businesses because such an

alternative would threaten the continued safety and effectiveness of

products marketed by small businesses. For all applicants, regardless

of size, the agency believes it has selected the reporting alternatives

which impose the minimum burdens upon the applicants while assuring the

continued safety and effectiveness of the affected products.

5. Response to Comments

Only one comment was received concerning the Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis provided in the proposed rule. The comment asked for further

clarification regarding the projected reduction in burdens associated

with the revised regulations. Most of the reduction in paperwork

burdens, now projected as a 10 percent reduction, is associated with

the fact that some changes which previously were subject to submission

of a supplement and approval by FDA prior to distribution of the

product made using the change may now be reported in an annual report

[[Page 39899]]

with a significant reduction in the information that is to be

submitted. Considerable reduction in economic burdens is expected to

result from the flexibility included in the final rule to permit the

distribution of a product made using a change by the most timely means

possible while assuring the continued safety and effectiveness of the

product. Because FDA has no data to relate time saved in marketing a

product with the resulting economic benefit, FDA cannot offer a

monetary estimate of the savings at this time.

B. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

This final rule contains information collection provisions that are

subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The title,

description, and respondent description of the information collection

provisions are shown below with an estimate of the annual reporting

burden. Included in the estimate is the time for reviewing

instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing

and reviewing the collection of information.

Title: 21 CFR 601.12--Changes to an Approved Application and 21 CFR

314.70(g)--Exception.

Description: This final rule revises the requirements for

respondents to report to FDA changes in the product, labeling,

production process, equipment, quality controls facilities, or

responsible personnel established in an approved application for a

biological product or for a specified biotechnology product. The

respondent will report a change to FDA in one of the three following

ways depending on the potential for the change to have an adverse

effect on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or potency of the

product as they may relate to the safety or effectiveness of the

product: (1) Changes that have a significant potential to have an

adverse effect on the product will be submitted in a supplement

requiring prior approval by FDA before distribution of the product made

using the change; (2) changes that have a moderate potential to have an

adverse effect on the product will be submitted to FDA in a supplement

not less than 30 days prior to distribution of the product made using

the change unless FDA permits distribution upon its receipt of the

supplement; and (3) changes that have a minimal potential to have an

adverse effect on the product will be submitted by the respondent in an

annual report.

Labeling changes for a biological product will also be submitted in

one of the following ways: (1) A supplement requiring FDA approval

prior to distribution of product with the revised labeling; (2) a

supplement requiring FDA approval but permitting the distribution of

the product with the accompanying revised labeling at the time the

supplement is submitted; or (3) submission of final printed labeling in

an annual report. Promotional labeling and advertising will be

submitted in accordance with Sec. 314.81(b)(3)(i). Labeling changes for

biotechnology products regulated under the act but not under the PHS

Act are not addressed in Sec. 314.70(g) and will not be affected by

this final rule. The agency is developing technology to permit the

submission of the information required by this rule electronically. The

agency anticipates that the use of electronic media will substantially

further reduce the paperwork burden associated with these reporting

requirements.

Description of Respondents: All manufacturers and applicants

holding a biological license approved under section 351 of the PHS Act,

and all manufacturers and applicants of specified biotechnology

products holding an approved NDA.

Burden estimate: As mentioned in the proposed rule, FDA estimates

that 20 percent of all reports required under these final regulations

will be prepared by contractors. The burden hours for affected industry

in the chart below therefore reflect a 20 percent reduction. It is

estimated that a contractor will charge $40 per hour for the service of

preparing these reports. The 20 percent burden hours multiplied by $40

per hour are reflected in the table, under the column labeled

``Operating and Maintenance Costs.''

The burden estimate for this final rule differs from the estimate

given for the proposed rule (see 61 FR 2739 at 2745) in two important

respects. First, FDA has revised Secs. 314.70(g)(2) and 601.12(c) in

the final rule to require submission of a supplement rather than a

notification for changes that have a moderate potential to have an

adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product. This

revision will result in an estimated 10 additional burden hours per

submission (50 for a supplement versus 40 for a notification). Second,

substantially more supplements concerning changes in manufacturing and

labeling for biological products are being submitted than during the

time period used to prepare the estimate in the proposed rule (an

estimated 2,300 submissions in 1996 versus 1,550 submissions in 1994).

Although this increase results from increased industry activity, not

from any modification to the proposed rule, the burden estimate has

been adjusted to reflect the increase.

Estimated Annual Reporting Burden

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

Number of

21 CFR Section Number of Hours Per Number of Responses Per Total Operating and Total Hours Per

Respondents Response Responses Respondent Maintenance Costs Regulation

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

601.12(b) 391 80 900 2.3 $576,000 57,600

601.12(c) 391 50 720 1.8 $288,000 28,800

601.12(d) 391 10 120 0.3 $9,600 960

601.12(f)(1) 391 40 200 0.51 $64,000 6,400

601.12(f)(2) 391 20 20 0.05 $3,200 320

601.12(f)(3) 391 10 220 0.56 $17,600 1,760

601.12(f)(4) 391 10 110 0.28 $8,800 880

314.70(g)(1) 4 80 50 12.5 $32,000 3,200

314.70(g)(2) 2 50 3 1.5 $1,200 120

314.70(g)(3) 6 10 20 3.33 $1,600 160

TOTALS $1,002,000 $100,200

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

There are no capital costs associated with this collection of information.

As required by section 3506(c)(2)(B) of the Paperwork Reduction Act

of 1995 (the PRA), FDA provided an opportunity for public comment on

the information collection provisions of the proposed rule. All

comments received

[[Page 39900]]

agreed that FDA's proposal to modify the requirements for reporting

changes to approved applications would reduce the burden to industry

without diminishing public health protection. Even with the increase in

burden in the final rule as compared with the proposed rule, FDA

estimates that the modified reporting requirements will achieve a net

burden reduction of approximately 10,000 hours per year.

As required by section 3507(d)(1)(A) of the PRA, FDA submitted the

information collection provisions of the proposed rule to OMB. Although

these provisions were approved, FDA has submitted the information

collection provisions of the final rule to OMB for review because of

the revised requirement to submit a supplement rather than a

notification for changes that have a moderate potential to have an

adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the product. Prior to

the effective date of this final rule, FDA will publish a notice in the

Federal Register of OMB's decision to approve, modify, or disapprove

the information collection provisions in the final rule. An agency may

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number.

C. Environmental Impact

The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.24(a)(8) that this action

is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a

significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an

environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is

required.

List of Subjects

21 CFR Part 314

Administrative practice and procedure, Confidential business

information, Drugs, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 600

Biologics, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 601

Administrative practice and procedure, Biologics, Confidential

business information.

21 CFR Part 610

Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

21 CFR Part 640

Blood, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the

Public Health Service Act, and under the authority delegated to the

Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 314, 600, 601, 610 and 640

are amended as follows:

PART 314--APPLICATIONS FOR FDA APPROVAL TO MARKET A NEW DRUG OR AN

ANTIBIOTIC DRUG

1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 314 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 505, 506, 507, 701,

704, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321,

331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356, 357, 371, 374, 379e).

2. Section 314.70 is amended by adding a new paragraph (g) to read

as follows:

Sec. 314.70 Supplements and other changes to an approved application.

* * * * *

(g) Exception. An applicant proposing to make a change of a type

described in paragraphs (a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (c)(1), (c)(3), (d)(1),

and (d)(4) through (d)(9) of this section affecting a recombinant DNA-

derived protein/polypeptide product or a complex or conjugate of a drug

with a monoclonal antibody regulated under the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act shall comply with the following:

(1) Changes requiring supplement submission and approval prior to

distribution of the product made using the change (major changes). (i)

A supplement shall be submitted for any change in the product,

production process, quality controls, equipment, or facilities that has

a substantial potential to have an adverse effect on the identity,

strength, quality, purity, or potency of the product as they may relate

to the safety or effectiveness of the product.

(ii) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(A) Changes in the qualitative or quantitative formulation or other

specifications as provided in the approved application or in the

regulations;

(B) Changes requiring completion of an appropriate human study to

demonstrate the equivalence of the identity, strength, quality, purity,

or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product;

(C) Changes in the virus or adventitious agent removal or

inactivation method(s);

(D) Changes in the source material or cell line;

(E) Establishment of a new master cell bank or seed; and

(F) Changes which may affect product sterility assurance, such as

changes in product or component sterilization method(s) or an addition,

deletion, or substitution of steps in an aseptic processing operation.

(iii) The applicant must obtain approval of the supplement from FDA

prior to distribution of the product made using the change. Except for

submissions under paragraph (g)(4) of this section, the following shall

be contained in the supplement:

(A) A detailed description of the proposed change;

(B) The product(s) involved;

(C) The manufacturing site(s) or area(s) affected;

(D) A description of the methods used and studies performed to

evaluate the effect of the change on the identity, strength, quality,

purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product;

(E) The data derived from such studies;

(F) Relevant validation protocols and data; and

(G) A reference list of relevant standard operating procedures

(SOP's).

(2) Changes requiring supplement submission at least 30 days prior

to distribution of the product made using the change. (i) A supplement

shall be submitted for any change in the product, production process,

quality controls, equipment, or facilities that has a moderate

potential to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality,

purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product. The supplement shall be labeled

``Supplement--Changes Being Effected in 30 Days'' or, if applicable

under paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section, ``Supplement--Changes Being

Effected.''

(ii) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(A) Change in the site of testing from one facility to another;

(B) An increase or decrease in production scale during finishing

steps that involves new or different equipment; and

(C) Replacement of equipment with that of similar, but not

identical, design and operating principle that does not affect the

process methodology or process operating parameters.

(iii) Pending approval of the supplement by FDA, and except as

provided in paragraph (g)(2)(v) of this section, distribution of the

product made using the change may begin not less than 30 days after

receipt of the supplement by FDA. The information listed in paragraph

(g)(1)(iii)(A) through

[[Page 39901]]

(g)(1)(iii)(G) of this section shall be contained in the supplement.

(iv) If within 30 days following FDA's receipt of the supplement,

FDA informs the applicant that either:

(A) The change requires approval prior to distribution of the

product in accordance with paragraph (g)(1) of this section; or

(B) Any of the information required under paragraph (g)(2)(iii) of

this section is missing; the applicant shall not distribute the product

made using the change until FDA determines that compliance with this

section is achieved.

(v) In certain circumstances, FDA may determine that, based on

experience with a particular type of change, the supplement for such

change is usually complete and provides the proper information, and on

particular assurances that the proposed change has been appropriately

submitted, the product made using the change may be distributed

immediately upon receipt of the supplement by FDA. These circumstances

may include substantial similarity with a type of change regularly

involving a ``Supplement--Changes Being Effected'' supplement, or a

situation in which the applicant presents evidence that the proposed

change has been validated in accordance with an approved protocol for

such change under paragraph (g)(4) of this section.

(3) Changes to be described in an annual report (minor changes).

(i) Changes in the product, production process, quality controls,

equipment, or facilities that have a minimal potential to have an

adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or potency

of the product as they may relate to the safety or effectiveness of the

product shall be documented by the applicant in the next annual report

in accordance with Sec. 314.81(b)(2)(iv).

(ii) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(A) Any change made to comply with an official compendium that is

consistent with FDA requirements;

(B) The deletion of an ingredient intended only to affect the color

of the product;

(C) An extension of an expiration date based upon full shelf life

data obtained from a protocol approved in the application;

(D) A change within the container and closure system for solid

dosage forms, based upon a showing of equivalency to the approved

system under a protocol approved in the application or published in an

official compendium;

(E) A change in the size of a container for a solid dosage form,

without a change from one container and closure system to another;

(F) The addition by embossing, debossing, or engraving of a code

imprint to a solid dosage form drug product other than a modified

release dosage form, or a minor change in an existing code imprint; and

(G) The addition or deletion of an alternate analytical method.

(4) An applicant may submit one or more protocols describing the

specific tests and validation studies and acceptable limits to be

achieved to demonstrate the lack of adverse effect for specified types

of manufacturing changes on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or

potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product. Any such protocols, or change to a

protocol, shall be submitted as a supplement requiring approval from

FDA prior to distribution of the product which, if approved, may

justify a reduced reporting category for the particular change because

the use of the protocol for that type of change reduces the potential

risk of an adverse effect.

* * * * *

PART 600--BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS: GENERAL

3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 600 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 519, 701, 704, of

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352,

353, 355, 360, 360i, 371, 374); secs. 215, 351, 352, 353, 361, 2125

of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,

264, 300aa-25).

4. Section 600.3 is amended by adding new paragraphs (ff) and (gg)

to read as follows:

Sec. 600.3 Definitions.

* * * * *

(ff) Amendment is the submission of information to a pending

license application or supplement, to revise or modify the application

as originally submitted.

(gg) Supplement is a request to the Director, Center for Biologics

Evaluation and Research, to approve a change in an approved license

application.

PART 601--LICENSING

5. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 601 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 513-516, 518-520,

701, 704, 721, 801, of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21

U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c-360f, 360h-360j, 371, 374,

379e, 381); secs. 215, 301, 351, 352, of the Public Health Service

Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 262, 263); secs. 2-12 of the Fair Packaging

and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 1451-1461).

6. Section 601.12 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 601.12 Changes to an approved application.

(a) General. As provided by this section, an applicant shall inform

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) about each change in the product,

production process, quality controls, equipment, facilities,

responsible personnel, or labeling, established in the approved license

application(s). Before distributing a product made using a change, an

applicant shall demonstrate through appropriate validation and/or other

clinical and/or non-clinical laboratory studies, the lack of adverse

effect of the change on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or

potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product.

(b) Changes requiring supplement submission and approval prior to

distribution of the product made using the change (major changes). (1)

A supplement shall be submitted for any change in the product,

production process, quality controls, equipment, facilities, or

responsible personnel that has a substantial potential to have an

adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or potency

of the product as they may relate to the safety or effectiveness of the

product.

(2) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(i) Changes in the qualitative or quantitative formulation or other

specifications as provided in the approved application or in the

regulations;

(ii) Changes requiring completion of an appropriate human study to

demonstrate the equivalence of the identity, strength, quality, purity,

or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product;

(iii) Changes in the virus or adventitious agent removal or

inactivation method(s);

(iv) Changes in the source material or cell line;

(v) Establishment of a new master cell bank or seed; and

(vi) Changes which may affect product sterility assurance, such as

changes in product or component sterilization method(s), or an

addition, deletion, or substitution of steps in an aseptic processing

operation.

(3) The applicant must obtain approval of the supplement from FDA

prior to distribution of the product made using the change. Except for

[[Page 39902]]

submissions under paragraph (e) of this section, the following shall be

contained in the supplement:

(i) A detailed description of the proposed change;

(ii) The product(s) involved;

(iii) The manufacturing site(s) or area(s) affected;

(iv) A description of the methods used and studies performed to

evaluate the effect of the change on the identity, strength, quality,

purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product;

(v) The data derived from such studies;

(vi) Relevant validation protocols and data; and

(vii) A reference list of relevant standard operating procedures

(SOP's).

(c) Changes requiring supplement submission at least 30 days prior

to distribution of the product made using the change. (1) A supplement

shall be submitted for any change in the product, production process,

quality controls, equipment, facilities, or responsible personnel that

has a moderate potential to have an adverse effect on the identity,

strength, quality, purity, or potency of the product as they may relate

to the safety or effectiveness of the product. The supplement shall be

labeled ``Supplement--Changes Being Effected in 30 Days'' or, if

applicable under paragraph (c)(5) of this section, ``Supplement--

Changes Being Effected.''

(2) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(i) Change in the site of testing from one facility to another;

(ii) An increase or decrease in production scale during finishing

steps that involves new or different equipment; and

(iii) Replacement of equipment with that of similar, but not

identical, design and operating principle that does not affect the

process methodology or process operating parameters.

(3) Pending approval of the supplement by FDA, and except as

provided in paragraph (c)(5) of this section, distribution of the

product made using the change may begin not less than 30 days after

receipt of the supplement by FDA. The information listed in paragraph

(b)(3)(i) through (b)(3)(vii) of this section shall be contained in the

supplement.

(4) If within 30 days following FDA's receipt of the supplement,

FDA informs the applicant that either:

(i) The change requires approval prior to distribution of the

product in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section; or

(ii) Any of the information required under paragraph (c)(3) of this

section is missing; the applicant shall not distribute the product made

using the change until FDA determines that compliance with this section

is achieved.

(5) In certain circumstances, FDA may determine that, based on

experience with a particular type of change, the supplement for such

change is usually complete and provides the proper information, and on

particular assurances that the proposed change has been appropriately

submitted, the product made using the change may be distributed

immediately upon receipt of the supplement by FDA. These circumstances

may include substantial similarity with a type of change regularly

involving a ``Supplement--Changes Being Effected'' supplement or a

situation in which the applicant presents evidence that the proposed

change has been validated in accordance with an approved protocol for

such change under paragraph (e) of this section.

(d) Changes to be described in an annual report (minor changes).

(1) Changes in the product, production process, quality controls,

equipment, facilities, or responsible personnel that have a minimal

potential to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality,

purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product shall be documented by the applicant in an

annual report submitted each year within 60 days of the anniversary

date of approval of the application. The Director, Center for Biologics

Evaluation and Research, may approve a written request for an

alternative date to combine annual reports for multiple approved

applications into a single annual report submission.

(2) These changes include, but are not limited to:

(i) Any change made to comply with an official compendium that is

consistent with FDA requirements;

(ii) The deletion of an ingredient intended only to affect the

color of the product except that a change intended only to affect Blood

Grouping Reagents requires supplement submission and approval prior to

distribution of the product made using the change in accordance with

the requirements set forth in paragraph (b) of this section;

(iii) An extension of an expiration date based upon full shelf-life

data obtained from a protocol approved in the application;

(iv) A change within the container and closure system for solid

dosage forms, based upon a showing of equivalency to the approved

system under a protocol approved in the application or published in an

official compendium;

(v) A change in the size of a container for a solid dosage form,

without a change from one container and closure system to another;

(vi) The addition by embossing, debossing, or engraving of a code

imprint to a solid dosage form biological product other than a modified

release dosage form, or a minor change in an existing code imprint; and

(vii) The addition or deletion of an alternate analytical method.

(3) The following information for each change shall be contained in

the annual report:

(i) A list of all products involved; and

(ii) A full description of the manufacturing and controls changes

including: the manufacturing site(s) or area(s) involved; the date the

change was made; a cross-reference to relevant validation protocols

and/or SOP's; and relevant data from studies and tests performed to

evaluate the effect of the change on the identity, strength, quality,

purity, or potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product.

(4) The applicant shall submit the report to the FDA office

responsible for reviewing the application. The report shall include all

the information required under this paragraph for each change made

during the annual reporting interval which ends on the anniversary date

in the order in which they were implemented.

(e) An applicant may submit one or more protocols describing the

specific tests and validation studies and acceptable limits to be

achieved to demonstrate the lack of adverse effect for specified types

of manufacturing changes on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or

potency of the product as they may relate to the safety or

effectiveness of the product. Any such protocols, or change to a

protocol, shall be submitted as a supplement requiring approval from

FDA prior to distribution of the product which, if approved, may

justify a reduced reporting category for the particular change because

the use of the protocol for that type of change reduces the potential

risk of an adverse effect.

(f) Labeling changes. (1) Labeling changes requiring supplement

submission--FDA approval must be obtained before distribution of the

product with the labeling change. Except as described in paragraphs

(f)(2) and (f)(3) of this section, an applicant shall submit a

supplement describing a proposed change in the package insert, package

label, or container label, and include the information necessary to

[[Page 39903]]

support the proposed change. The supplement shall clearly highlight the

proposed change in the labeling. The applicant shall obtain approval

from FDA prior to distribution of the product with the labeling change.

(2) Labeling changes requiring supplement submission--product with

a labeling change that may be distributed before FDA approval. (i) An

applicant shall submit, at the time such change is made, a supplement

for any change in the package insert, package label, or container label

to accomplish any of the following:

(A) To add or strengthen a contraindication, warning, precaution,

or adverse reaction;

(B) To add or strengthen a statement about abuse, dependence,

psychological effect, or overdosage;

(C) To add or strengthen an instruction about dosage and

administration that is intended to increase the safety of the use of

the product; and

(D) To delete false, misleading, or unsupported indications for use

or claims for effectiveness.

(ii) Pending approval of the supplement by FDA, the applicant may

distribute a product with a package insert, package label, or container

label bearing such change at the time the supplement is submitted. The

supplement shall clearly identify the change being made and include

necessary supporting data. The supplement and its mailing cover shall

be plainly marked: ``Special Labeling Supplement--Changes Being

Effected.''

(3) Labeling changes requiring submission in an annual report. (i)

An applicant shall submit any final printed package insert, package

label, or container label incorporating the following changes in an

annual report submitted to FDA each year as provided in paragraph

(d)(1) of this section:

(A) Editorial or similar minor changes; and

(B) A change in the information on how the product is supplied that

does not involve a change in the dosage strength or dosage form.

(ii) The applicant may distribute a product with a package insert,

package label, or container label bearing such change at the time the

change is made.

(4) Advertisements and promotional labeling. Advertisements and

promotional labeling shall be submitted to the Center for Biologics

Evaluation and Research in accordance with the requirements set forth

in Sec. 314.81(b)(3)(i) of this chapter, except that Form FDA-2567

(Transmittal of Labels and Circulars) or an equivalent form shall be

used.

(g) Failure to comply. In addition to other remedies available in

law and regulations, in the event of repeated failure of the applicant

to comply with this section, FDA may require that the applicant submit

a supplement for any proposed change and obtain approval of the

supplement by FDA prior to distribution of the product made using the

change.

(h) Administrative review. Under Sec. 10.75 of this chapter, an

applicant may request internal FDA review of FDA employee decisions

under this section.

PART 610--GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS

7. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 610 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 701 of the

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,

355, 360, 371); secs. 215, 351, 352, 353, 361 of the Public Health

Service Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264).

8. Section 610.9 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 610.9 Equivalent methods and processes.

Modification of any particular test method or manufacturing process

or the conditions under which it is conducted as required in this part

or in the additional standards for specific biological products in

parts 620 through 680 of this chapter shall be permitted only under the

following conditions:

(a) The applicant presents evidence, in the form of a license

application, or a supplement to the application submitted in accordance

with Sec. 601.12(b) or (c), demonstrating that the modification will

provide assurances of the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of

the biological product equal to or greater than the assurances provided

by the method or process specified in the general standards or

additional standards for the biological product; and

(b) Approval of the modification is received in writing from the

Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug

Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-1448.

PART 640--ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR HUMAN BLOOD AND BLOOD PRODUCTS

9. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 640 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: Secs. 201, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 701 of the

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,

355, 360, 371); secs. 215, 351, 352, 353, 361 of the Public Health

Service Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264).

10. Section 640.120 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as

follows:

Sec. 640.120 Alternative procedures.

(a) The Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, may

approve an exception or alternative to any requirement in subchapter F

of chapter I of title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations regarding

blood, blood components, or blood products. Requests for such

exceptions or alternatives shall ordinarily be in writing. Licensed

establishments shall submit such requests in accordance with

Sec. 601.12 of this chapter. However, in limited circumstances, such

requests may be made orally and permission may be given orally by the

Director. Oral requests and approvals must be promptly followed by

written requests and written approvals.

* * * * *

Dated: May 27, 1997.

William B.Schultz,

Deputy Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 97-19427 Filed 7-23-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-F

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.