FDA user fee date for King's Embeda passes without action
This article was originally published in Scrip
Executive Summary
The US FDA's review ofKing Pharmaceuticals' (formerly Alpharma's) Embeda, a modified-released formulation of morphine coupled with the opioid antagonist naltrexone, has been extended beyond the late December user fee date. "Our discussions with the FDA continue to progress, and we remain confident in the strength of our regulatory submission," King chief science officer Eric Carter said. In November an FDA advisory panel said Embeda provided an incremental improvement over existing controlled-release morphine products because it appeared to be less susceptible to abuse and misuse (Scrip Online, November 17th, 2008). However, the panel called for more data on potential abuse through intravenous injection, snorting and chewing, and a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) is needed for approval. King gained Embeda through its recent acquisition of Alpharma.
You may also be interested in...
Rare Diseases: CBER Looks To ‘Lean Into’ Accelerated Approval, Align More With CDER
US FDA biologics center officials spoke about their efforts to increase collaboration and harmonization with the drugs center, and to internally involve more review disciplines in evaluating biomarker evidence, during a Reagan-Udall Foundation meeting that weighed potential use of accelerated approval for neuronopathic mucopolysaccharidoses disorders.
RWE: Non-Interventional Studies Must Be Able To Distinguish A True Treatment Effect, US FDA Says
Agency describes a host of issues sponsors should consider and address before pursuing observational or case-control studies to support regulatory decision-making on drug efficacy or safety; new draft guidance was issued under the FDA’s Real-World Evidence program.
Eye On ODAC: Former Members, FDA’s Pazdur Talk Pre-Meeting Mindsets, Impact Of Sponsor’s Experts
Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee reps and the Oncology Center of Excellence director go behind the scenes to discuss FDA interactions with panelists, how opinions can change during a meeting, and why the voting question is important.