Photo of Dominick DiSabatino

Dominick DiSabatino is a partner on the Life Sciences team in the firm's Washington, D.C. office.

On May 17, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued two important draft guidance documents, which clarify the agency’s approach to requirements and incentives in the realm of pediatric drug development — “Regulatory Considerations Guidance”[1] and “Scientific Considerations Guidance,”[2] respectively. These guidance documents replace FDA’s previous draft guidance on the subject,[3] issued in 2005, and clarify requirements and recommendations for brining pediatric drugs to market. FDA will be accepting public comment on the Regulatory Considerations Guidance and Scientific Considerations Guidance through July 17 of this year.[4]

Continue Reading FDA Clarifies Approach to Pediatric Drug Development

On May 22, 2023, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued an untitled letter to AT Venture Center for Global Techtrepeneurship, LLC dba Regenerelle, LLC (Regenerelle) for marketing human cells, tissues, or cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/Ps) and exosomes without FDA premarket review. The letter described Regenerelle’s marketing of products derived from umbilical cord as “biological solutions” or “biologic products” that are “intended for a ‘range of clinical applications’ and to treat various diseases or conditions, such as lupus, pain, inflammation, and ‘aging-associated diseases.’” This is CBER’s fourth untitled letter this year, illustrating FDA’s focus on this area of enforcement. This stands in contrast to FDA’s work on the CDER side, where the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion has not issued an untitled letter since June 2, 2022.[1]

Continue Reading FDA Cracking Down on Unapproved HCT/Ps with Fourth Untitled Letter of 2023

On April 5, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) announced its decision to withdraw the approval of Makena® hydroxyprogesterone caproate injection (“Makena”) – a drug that was approved in 2011 to reduce the risk of preterm birth in certain pregnant women.[1] The final decision followed a hearing and appeal process that took nearly three years, and cited the failure of post-approval studies to prove the drug’s effectiveness as the reason for the withdrawal.[2] 

Continue Reading Withdrawal of Drug Approval Highlights Risk of Accelerated Approval Pathway

On March 29, 2023, and March 30, 2023, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a series of FAQs[1] and a guidance document[2] clarifying the agency’s intended implementation of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (the “Omnibus”), which amended Section 524B of the Food, Drug & Cosmetics Act (the “FD&C Act”) to require the demonstration of cybersecurity safeguards in pre-market submissions for certain medical devices.[3] 

Continue Reading FDA To Require Demonstration of Cybersecurity Safeguards for Pre-Market Submissions of Certain Medical Devices

On March 1, 2023, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published its first untitled letter of the year to Thomas Advanced Medical LLC (Thomas)[1] for marketing human cells, tissues, or cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/Ps)[2] without FDA premarket review. The letter described Thomas’ marketing of products derived from human umbilical cord, umbilical cord blood and amniotic tissue as “regenerative therapy solutions” or “stem cell derived biological product” to treat various diseases and conditions including cardiac disease, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, lung disease, diabetes and COVID-19.

Continue Reading FDA Issues First Untitled Letter of the Year to HCT/P Manufacturer

On Thursday, February 23, the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services (“OIG”) issued its first Advisory Opinion (“AO”) of the new year – OIG AO No. 23-01 – permitting a drug manufacturer to provide financial assistance for transportation, lodging, meals, and other out-of-pocket expenses to eligible patients receiving the manufacturer’s drug (the “Arrangement”). Overall, OIG concluded that: (1) the risk of fraud and abuse presented by the manufacturer’s Arrangement was sufficiently low under the Federal anti-kickback statute; and (2) the remuneration offered under the Arrangement was not likely to influence a beneficiary to order the manufacturer’s drug (the “Drug”) from a particular provider and therefore did not constitute grounds for the imposition of sanctions under the Beneficiary Inducements CMP. Ultimately, the crux of this decision came down to the unique manufacturing and distribution of the Drug, which (i) is the only available potentially curative treatment for an ultra-rare disorder; (ii) pursuant to its FDA approval, can only be manufactured at a single facility, located on the campus of a treatment center (the “Treatment Center”); (iii) can only be administered within 3 hours after being manufactured; and thus, can only be administered at the single Treatment Center site.

Continue Reading OIG Advisory Opinion Alert: Medical Flights for Patient Access

On January 31, 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a Warning Letter[1] to RightEye, LLC (RightEye), the manufacturer of the RightEye Vision System, for misbranding and adulteration. The RightEye Vision System is a Class II Nystagmograph medical device which is cleared under its 510(k) notification for the following indication: “recording, viewing, and analyzing eye movements in support of identifying visual tracking impairment in human subjects.”[2] 

Continue Reading FDA Issues Warning Letter to RightEye, LLC For Misbranding and Adulteration

The Sheppard Mullin Life Sciences Team decided to take a different approach to our year-end review. We surveyed and considered issues most important to our clients, asking the experts across the various specialties in our Life Sciences Practice the following question: What do life sciences companies need to keep top of mind in 2023?

Continue Reading 2023 Top-of-Mind Issues for Life Sciences Companies

As we take a breather during the holiday whirlwind, we wanted to flag for readers a recent development in advertising and promotion regulation that FDA quietly released nearly a month ago. In a Memorandum issued on October 27 (the “Memorandum”), the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA” or the “Agency”) indicated that it will now permit certain COVID-19 drugs that have been granted Emergency Use Authorization (“EUA”) to make claims of safety and efficacy in print, advertising, and promotional materials, pursuant to certain limitations.

Continue Reading FDA Lightens Promotional Restrictions for Certain COVID-19 Drugs with Emergency Use Authorization

Pharmaceutical manufacturers are challenging the breadth of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) in federal court, arguing that the government is harming the very vulnerable patients it aims to serve by prohibiting cost-sharing subsidies for life-saving oncology drugs. In October, we discussed the Office of Inspector General’s (“OIG”) Advisory Opinion No. 22-19 (the “Advisory Opinion”), which declared that a charitable organization funded by manufacturers would violate the AKS if it offered certain cost-sharing subsidies under Medicare Part D (“Part D”), even if the organization was independently run and patients had equal access to discounts for 90% of drugs on the market. On November 9, 2022, the Pharmaceutical Coalition for Patient Access (“PCPA”), presumably the organization behind the Advisory Opinion, filed a lawsuit against OIG, seeking declaratory judgment that its cost-sharing program is legal under the AKS and that the Advisory Opinion violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and the First Amendment.[1]

Continue Reading Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Ask EDVa to Allow Cost-Sharing Under the AKS

On October 5, 2022, the Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) posted Advisory Opinion No. 22-19 (the “Opinion”), which limits the ability of pharmaceutical manufacturers to offer cost-sharing subsidies to Medicare Part D (“Part D”) beneficiaries via 501(c)(3) charities without running afoul of the Federal Anti-Kickback Statute (the “AKS”).

Continue Reading OIG Limits Pharmaceutical Manufacturers’ Ability to Offer Drug Cost-Sharing Subsidies