In the midst of continued enforcement regarding coronavirus marketing, FDA sent a warning letter to NeuroXPF concerning advertising for its CBD products alleging that they can boost immune systems to help consumers avoid contracting the virus. Citing the need to take “urgent measures to protect consumers” in the midst of the coronavirus outbreak, FDA advised
FDA’s recently released Supplemental Draft Guidance entitled “Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration: Guidance for Industry” serves as a substantial supplement to the lengthy Revised Draft Guidance that FDA issued in March 2019 which shares the same title. Once finalized, these guidance documents will together serve to help covered companies comply with…
On March 5, 2019, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. and FDA/CFSAN Director, Susan Mayne, Ph.D., released new independent test results confirming asbestos contamination in certain cosmetic products sold by Claire’s and Justice retailers. The agency also issued a safety alert warning consumers not to use the cosmetic products sold by Claire’s that had tested positive…
On June 20, 2018, the FDA released draft guidance regarding the FDA’s Mitigation Strategies to Protect Food Against Intentional Adulteration Rule (IA Rule). This is the first of three installments of guidance the FDA plans to release related to the IA Rule.
The new guidance covers the development of a food defense plan, which includes the following:
- Vulnerability assessment: an assessment that identifies vulnerabilities in a facility’s food manufacturing processes and provides actionable process steps, which are places in the process where a facility can implement mitigation strategies to minimize or prevent the vulnerability;
- Mitigation strategies: strategies that significantly minimize or prevent significant vulnerabilities at actionable process steps;
- Food defense monitoring procedures: procedures, including the frequency with which they are to be performed, for monitoring mitigation strategies to assess whether mitigation strategies are operating as intended;
- Food defense corrective action procedures: actions taken if the mitigation strategies are improperly implemented based on the nature of the actionable process step and the mitigation strategy; and
- Food defense verification procedures: verification activities to ensure that monitoring is being conducted and appropriate decisions about corrective actions are being made.
This guidance covers the vulnerability assessment, mitigation strategies, and food defense monitoring procedures. Remaining FDA guidance will cover food defense corrective actions, food defense verification, reanalysis, and recordkeeping.…
Both the USDA and the FDA recently released updates to food labeling regulations that will significantly affect food manufacturers. On Friday, May 4, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) of the USDA proposed a rule regarding the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard providing labeling requirements for disclosing whether a food product has been bioengineered.
Last week, FDA released a document outlining its policy priorities for the coming year. “Healthy Innovation, Safer Families: FDA’s 2018 Strategic Roadmap” addresses continued focus on digital health, among other priorities, as one way that the agency seeks to further its public health mission and foster innovation that benefits consumers and patients. Consistent with this focus, the agency also announced a public workshop on January 30-31, 2018, to discuss the status of its Software Pre-Cert Program, which we wrote about here.
These announcements follow a consistent drumbeat of digital health focus from FDA during 2017, including release of two draft and one final guidance documents that are intended to implement the objectives of the 21st Century Cures Act. These include the following:
- The Clinical and Patient Decision Support Software (CDS) Draft Guidance. As explained by FDA, this guidance “is intended to make clear what types of CDS would no longer be defined as a medical device, and thus would not be regulated by the agency. For example, generally, CDS that allows for the provider to independently review the basis for the recommendations are excluded from the FDA’s regulation… However, the FDA will continue to enforce oversight of software programs that are intended to process or analyze medical images, signals from in vitro diagnostic devices or patterns acquired from a processor like an electrocardiogram that use analytical functionalities to make treatment recommendations, as these remain medical devices under the Cures Act.” The comment period is open until Tuesday, February 6, 2018.
- The Changes to Existing Medical Software Policies Resulting from Section 3060 of the 21st Century Cures Act Draft Guidance. This draft guidance updates the agency’s thinking relative to exercise of jurisdiction or enforcement discretion over low risk mobile and digital health products, as previously addressed in FDA’s Mobile Medical Application and General Wellness guidance. The deadline for public comments is Tuesday, February 6, 2018.
- The Software As A Medical Device (SaMD): Clinical Evaluation Final Guidance. This finalizes draft guidance issued in 2016 and attempts to further global regulatory harmonization efforts by establishing common principles for regulators to use in evaluating the safety, effectiveness and performance of SaMD.