©2007 Ethis Communications, Inc. The Ocular Surface ISSN: 1542-0124. Novack G. Notification vs approval. 2007;5(3):255-258. hen a pharmaceutical firm wants to begin evaluating their compound in humans in the US, they are required to file an Investigational New Drug (IND) Application (21 CFR 312.1) with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The IND is technically a request for an exemption from US law prohibiting interstate shipment of investigational drugs and assurance that the FDA will not stop (does not reject as unsafe) the initial clinical trial described in the IND. The sponsoring firm provides information on the preclinical biology of the compound (pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and toxicology), pharmaceutics and manufacturing, and the planned clinical study. Also included is the name and qualifications of the proposed clinical investigator(s). The application must have sufficient safety information at exaggerated doses to allow estimation of the potential benefit-risk ratio. The application is submitted using FDA Form 1571 (http://www.fda.gov/opacom/morechoices/fdaforms). The content of an IND is detailed in 21 CFR 312.23. An interesting, and I believe unique, aspect of the US IND process is that this is a notification (ie, unless we hear from you in 30 days, we will start our clinical study) rather than an approval (ie, we will start the studies after you authorize it; 21 CFR 312.40). This is the difference between the teenager saying “I’m taking the car, bye” and “May I take the car?” With respect to medical devices, the situation has some parallels and some differences from pharmaceuticals. Sponsoring firms wishing to evaluate an investigational medical device in humans in the U.S. must submit an investigational device exemption (IDE), which includes manufacturing and preclinical information on the device. There is also a 30-day review period from the FDA. However, in this case, the sponsor must wait for written approval from the FDA (21 CFR 812.42). Thus, the device review system is an approval, not a notification. There are other categories where only a notification, rather than a prior approval, is required by the FDA. These apply to changes to the formulation or manufacturing process for an approved drug. For some “moderate changes,” the manufacturer may identify these issues as either “Changes Being Effected in 30 Days” (21 CFR 314.70(c)(3)) or “Changes Being Effected” (21 CFR 314.70(c)(7)). In the first case, the FDA has 30 days to contact the sponsor to disallow the change. In the second case, if the FDA disapproves the supplemental application, it may order the manufacturer to cease distribution of the drug product made with the manufacturing change. For some “minor changes,” the manufacturer may make the change and notify the FDA in its next annual report (21 CRF 314.70). Going back to the IND process, as a resident of California, a geographically large state with pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities and experienced clinical investigators, what if I don’t want to technically ship the investigational drug across state lines? Do I still have to file an IND with the FDA? The answer is yes — the California equivalent of the FDA, the Food and Drug Branch (www.dhs.ca.gov/fdb/) will defer an applicant to the federal process. Also of note is that the firm does not have to show that the compound is effective in animal models (eg, this compound cures keratoconjunctivitis in animals), but rather to provide a rationale for the planned human investigation (eg, this compound releases mucin from the conjunctiva, and release of mucin may improve keratoconjunctivitis sicca). Thus, at least for the US, the FDA does not “approve” INDs — they just don’t reject them. In general, the situation is similar in developed nations around the world with respect to the need for application to the regulatory authorities in order to conduct human studies of investigational pharmaceuticals.
Read full abstract