* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute
Discovery and development of non-nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors wikipedia , lookup
Neuropsychopharmacology wikipedia , lookup
Epinephrine autoinjector wikipedia , lookup
Neuropharmacology wikipedia , lookup
Pharmacognosy wikipedia , lookup
Drug design wikipedia , lookup
Orphan drug wikipedia , lookup
Pharmacokinetics wikipedia , lookup
Drug interaction wikipedia , lookup
Compounding wikipedia , lookup
Drug discovery wikipedia , lookup
Pharmaceutical marketing wikipedia , lookup
Prescription costs wikipedia , lookup
New England Compounding Center meningitis outbreak wikipedia , lookup
Pharmacogenomics wikipedia , lookup
List of off-label promotion pharmaceutical settlements wikipedia , lookup
-=. Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute Richard L. Gelb Center for Pharmaceutical Research and Development 5 Research Parkway P.O. Box 5!00 Wplli g rd, CT ()$492- $0 \ {) 4!? !% id -9 w :10 February 8, 1999 Food and Drug Administration Dockets Management Branch Room 1061, HFA-305 5630 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20852 Dockets Management Branch Administrator: Re: Docket Number 98 N-0339 Background At the January, 1999 NCCLS Subcommittee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (SAT) meeting, the November 6, 1998 letter written by John V. Bergen, Ph.D. (Executive Director of the NCCLS) to the FDA was shared with members of the Subcommittee. This letter stated that as a stakeholder, the NCCLS could help the FDA by setting breakpoints and quality control ranges of antimicrobial drugs, thereby saving FDA resources. F. Alan Andersen (President Elect of the NCCLS) presented the NCCLS stakeholder position. Representatives from the FDA and the pharmaceutical industry expressed viewpoints that differed from those expressed in the letter. This discussion concluded with acknowledgment that there was no industry input in the formation of the NCCLS letter. Given that the NCCLS organization has a tripartite relationship with industry groups, government (FDA and CDC) and health professionals, the pharmaceutical industry was encouraged to make member-company views known to the FDA on the NCCLS proposal. Bristol-Myers Squibb views on the FDA vs. NCCLS role in setting breakpoints for antimicrobial agents We believe that the FDA is the more appropriate organization for setting breakpoints for antimicrobial agents, Our reasons are expressed as follow, contrasting the approach of the FDA with that of the NCCLS (italicized): ● The FDA is a non-partisan organization, thus ensuring a more level playing field for establishing breakpoints. Though the /VCCLS tries to be n o n partisan, funded studies conducted in the laboratories of NCCLS voting members could lead to bias. ● The interactions between the FDA and the drug sponsor are valued by the industry. These interactions are documented with a paper trail and occur in sufficient frequency to allow for a rapid drug approval process. Questions fv44f’337 @ A Bristol-Myers Squibb Company from one side to the other are prepared in advance prior to an agreed upon meeting time; this allows for an adequate duration for the preparation of a response. The AfCCLS SAT group meets only twice a year. Whi/e the recent trend in drug development is to compress ihe development time, the infrequency of SAT group meetings can slow down the approva/ process. It is not uncommon to postpone breakpoint decisions by the SAT group to a subsequent meeting when the drug sponsor lacks ready answers to one of the group’s questions. In general, minutes of the SAT meetings are not sufficiently detailed, making it difficult at times to recreate how a particular decision was made. Thus, there are inconsistencies in decision making among drugs and on different days. ● Moreover, the confidentiality of the NDA and the proprietary nature of the drug compound are important to the sponsor who has invested much time and monies in its discovery and development. Review of the NDA by the FDA maintains this confidentiality. The NCCLS SAT group includes voting members from other pharmaceutical companies and investigators funded by Thorough NDA review by this group will breach the the industry. confidentiality of this process. ● The NDA document comprises multi-volumes and considerable detail. At the FDA, reviewers with different expertise are assigned respective sections of the NDA to review. This review process takes several months. Due to the time constraints at the NCCLS SAT meetings, presentations for breakpoint requests by the drug sponsor are generally 30 to 45 minutes /ong. The manufacturer must disti// the data and present them in a digestible manner. Thus the “NDA review” by the NCCLS is by no means as thorough as that performed by the FDA. While the views expressed above are those of the Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, they appear to be the same as those expressed by our industry colleagues at the January, 1999 NCCLS meeting. In conclusion, we feel that the FDA should maintain its responsibilities for establishing the information to be included in the drug label, including setting breakpoints for antimicrobial drugs. Sincerely submitted, wi.dMQ=+c- H~gh M. Mcllhenny, Ph. D., -r Worldwide Regulatory Affairs . . .—.— ———— ——— —— -— —— —— —— ..— —— —— __ . . / ‘1’143 — . Recipient’s Copy w, o~~o L ,- ,. /m-P’T .-. _J,lp8ny A d d r e s s ?2 city ❑ ❑ To Your lnternel Billing ‘. D,&Tt:::To~ )!r#la:: oier 150KI.s kec”ndb”s(”assday,+ ❑ ~;jt~Ex::::rvar Freight -- ICallfor dellvew schedule See back for detailed de$f.r,pt,ons of freight serv!ces.) m ‘ackaging JIl&,,lu,lnJ~ CIEI’ , ❑ %% ❑ !; W$49.+, Fieferencelnfor~etion 0020 -4300009”s000544 ‘ . ,’ State CT ZIP ‘m’ b’”::%$y’ed’ ---n&m Does this shipment contain dangerous goods?’ lDNo ~Yes yjw:;,,, .— ❑ Yesy#,, -. 1 Recipients Neme Phone ( ) “ $ U payment sill ~$$j,,. to ton 1 WII be b,lledl P ❑ Compeny Address [To HOLD’ city — w~te - edEx 2Day Freight U DeptlFfOOr/SuiteiROOm MALuJw=i-u.ul ❑ :&#:iMTFreight P bJgY F? F=R~Afl CH L,”,, Rate,;? av,,l,ble Mtn,m”m charge One Ex [ess Freight Sarvice Piwk.ges 719 , F,dEx Recipient ❑ Third Pamy ❑ ❑ R’&lRIMlo. Credit Card ❑ ~~k ~ IE.tW FdEXACCOUnt NO or Cred,t card No. belml ~ 1 — ROCKY.T.LI .I? Total Packages State- ZIP~K’3 For HOLO at FedEx Location check here For WEEKEND Deliverv check here ~fl~&%%oM Total Weight Total Declared Value” Total Charges $ .DO $ . When declmng ,.81., h,gh, r than S103 P,, $h,@menl, “o” Pa” a“ edd,t(on,l charge See SERVICE Credm ~ard Ah. CONDITIONS, DECLARED VALUE, AND LIM!TOF UABILllY swuoo for further mfommm I I I III IIII I II I II lJD75i375ti .—— _ ——— ——z 077 ——— Yms!gnmre wfhome$ Federal Expmsm delnmrlh,ssh$pment wthout oblmniog a shgnatumand agreesm mdernmfy and hold hsmlsss Federal ExPressfm m“res” N,ng cImm Questions? &ii l“800”Go”%dEx’ {800)463-3339 m WCS. 0698 R,, Del, 3/98 P,!t kl 53023 C1994 W FedEx PRIWEO N U S A 19 —.—— . —.—— —— —— .