200+ followers. WOWWWWWW…

followed- 200

Hello Everyone,

Today we have the pleasure of celebrating the fact that we have reached the milestone of 200+ followers on WordPress. Since we started this blog, we have had such a great time connecting with everyone.  we never expected to actually to connect with other people in the blogging community.

we are so incredibly thankful for each and every one of you who follows and comments on my blog posts. Please know that!

we would continue our blogging in these areas FDA Regulation, Medical Devices, Drugs and Biologics, Healthcare Compliance, Biotechnology, Clinical Research, Laboratory Compliance, Quality Management ,HIPAA Compliance ,OSHA Compliance, Risk Management, Trade and Logistics Compliance ,Banking and Financial Services, Auditing/Accounting & Tax, Packaging and Labeling, SOX Compliance, Environmental Compliance, Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet, Geology and Mining, Human Resources Compliance, Food Safety Compliance and etc.

Get more articlehttps://www.globalcompliancepanel.com/freeresources/resource-directory

Please follow us on

Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/TrainingsAtGlobalCompliancePanel

Twitter – https://twitter.com/gcpanel

LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/company/10519587/admin/updates/

The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 – a brief understanding

The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 - a brief understanding 3

The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 is a landmark Act passed by the American Congress. A landmark legislation in that it instilled and reinforced the concept of free global trade; the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 removed the need for American pharma companies to obtain FDA approvals for the products that they export to select markets. Following the passage of the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act, American companies need to only get approval of the respective countries regulatory authorities.

One of the highlights of the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 is that it was one of the very few Acts that were put into effect almost immediately after being passed into law. This perhaps reflected the immediacy of the benefit the Act wanted to bestow on American companies.

The overriding highlight of this legislation is that it almost totally obviated the need for FDA approval for products that were being exported to a few select countries. American pharmaceutical companies saw this as a great concession that they got to export their products, as it completely helped them bypass the tedious FDA approval process.

The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 allowed the following categories of non-FDA regulated products to be exported to any country of the world:

The Listed Countries

 

The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 - a brief understanding 1Subject to marketing approval by the respective regulatory bodies of the 25 developed nations; American companies can market their products to what the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 considers “Listed Countries”:

  • Australia
  • Canada
  • Israel
  • Japan
  • New Zealand
  • South Africa
  • Switzerland, and
  • The European Economic Area

Requirements of the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996The FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996 prescribes vastly liberalized general requirements which pharma companies need to adhere to in order to be able to export non-FDA approved medical products to the Listed Countries. The following core components have been greatly relaxed or exempted for export approval:

Requirement from receiving countriesFinally, the FDA Export Reform and Enhancement Act of 1996, upon the insistence of the Listed Countries, ruled that manufacturers who wanted to benefit from this legislation had to obtain clearance from the FDA that there were no regulatory or legal actions pending on these companies.

 

Click to Continue Reading

Effective Complaint Handling Guidelines serve as a basis for improvements in medical devices

Effective Complaint Handling Guidelines serve as a basis for improvements in medical devices1Far from being frowned upon, complaints should serve as an opportunity for medical device manufacturers to understand the customer’s expectations better and lead to improvements in the product quality.

The FDA describes a complaint as “any written, electronic, or oral communication that alleges deficiencies related to the identity, quality, durability, reliability, safety, effectiveness, or performance of a device after it is released for distribution”.

FDA’s complaint handling guidelines are critical for ensuring that an organization maintains safety with regard to the medical devices they manufacture. Errors in medical devices can result in complaints, and improper handling of complaints can lead to problems for the patient, ranging from injury to fatality.

It is to prevent these problems that the FDA has issued complaint handling guidelines. FDA’s thinking is based on the reasoning that a complaint may be an indicator of serious safety, but implementing effective complaint handling guidelines can greatly mollify the gravity of the issue. It is also the first step to initiating new product development, which in turn has the potential to greatly reduce risks associated with noncompliance.

Regulations in place

Provisions relating to effective complaint handling provisions are contained in FDA 21 CFR Part 820 and GxP regulations.

Firstly, these complaint handling guidelines require medical device manufacturers to maintain complaint files. Manufacturers have to make this the first step towards establishing a sustainable complaint management system.

Secondly, Section 198 of Part 820 warrants the following:

effectiveComplaintHandlingGuidelinesThirdly, FDA 21 CFR Part 820 requires the manufacturer to establish and maintain procedures for the receipt, review, and evaluation of complaints.

What should records of investigation contain?

Records of investigation should contain the following:

  • Identifiers related to the device and reported event
  • If Medical Device Reporting is made, it should investigate the following:
    • Whether there were any specifications the device failed to meet
    • Whether it was for treatment or for diagnosis that the device was being used
    • In what way the device was related to the reported event, if applicable

Click to Continue Reading

Aspects of Regulatory History in the US

The beginnings of all that the USFDA regulates can be traced right to the early decades of the founding of the nation. In a sense, the FDA, even if came to be called by that formal name much later; embodies the discipline and value set that the new created nation sought to represent. Regulation of all aspects of American life was deeply ingrained very early in the nation’s history, and the FDA was one of prime institutions that played a part in making this happen.

How has the FDA evolved and shaped up over the years? What are the important milestones of this history? This makes interesting reading, because the USFDA has had the kind of history whose colorfulness is matched by few other regulatory agencies around the world.

aspectsOfRegulatoryHistoryAn indication of the extent to which the FDA attaches importance to ensuring the wellbeing of the American people can be gauged from the fact that the food and other products that this agency regulates account for a fifth of the total money that the nation’s consumers spend. Just its budget – well over four billion in 2014 – is a good indicator to the way in which the FDA has spread its influence in the various spheres of American life. It regulates almost all food items with the exception of meat and poultry.

This situation has not been reached accidentally or overnight. The FDA has by and large kept pace with the developments in the areas it regulates. This was largely true till the advent of very recent technology-led areas such as biotechnology and the social media, where too, the FDA has been trying to put its best foot forward.

The start of formal regulation 
aspectsOfRegulatoryHistoryA look at the history of the FDA points to the year 1848 as the start of the first formal aspects of regulatory history. That was the year in which Lewis Caleb Beck took his appointment with the Patent Office. His mandate was to chemically analyze agricultural products. This is considered as the first task that was aimed at regulating a product that people consumed. This function rolled over to the Department of Agriculture, which was created in 1862.

The Act of 1906The next step in solidifying the regulatory aspects of life in the US was taken in 1906, with the promulgation of the Pure Food and Drugs Act in 1906. Stretching to some two decades of wrangling between the American Congress and the food industry to formulate, the Act of 1906 sought to prohibit adulterated and misbranded food and drugs from interstate commerce.

The 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic ActThe next major milestone in the aspects of regulatory history in the US took place in 1938. The 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act prescribed and detailed the legal requirements for products the FDA – which this Act created – regulated. In this Act, one can trace the earliest tidings of a major activity that the FDA has been carrying out since then: Prescribing the requirements for ensuring quality by prohibiting false claims by manufacturers and advertisers.

aspectsOfRegulatoryHistoryPresident Franklin D. Roosevelt signing the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Over time, the 1938 Act expanded to include more areas such as cosmetics, devices and veterinary medicines, thus strengthening the foundation for regulation and making it more expansive. Since the passage of the 1938 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; two major events happened on the regulatory scene. The outbreak of tetanus and diphtheria diseases in the 1960’s compelled the FDA to take a more proactive approach to vaccinations.

Another major, earthshaking event was the tragedy that thalidomide unleashed on Europe in the 1960’s, which stunted the growth of hundreds of children, which was mainly due to regulatory lapse. This did not happen in the US, mainly because of the efforts and diligence shown by Frances Kelsey, in her role as FDA reviewer. Frances plainly refused to approve thalidomide because she was not convinced about its safety, an act which made her a cult figure in FDA and American and Canadian medicinal history till her death in 2015.

aspectsOfRegulatoryHistory

Aspects of regulatory history in the US in the 1990’sFollowing the 1960’s, the next major milestone in the aspects of regulatory history in the US happened in 1990, when the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act was passed. This law was important because it changed the American perspective of labeling of products in the food and pharmaceutical industries. The Nutrition Labeling and Education Act requires manufacturers to provide nutritional information about products on their labels, with the caveat that false labeling information will lead to consequences.

 

click to continue reading

Good Documentation Practice Guideline is simple: just write

Good Documentation Practices are the soul of many regulated industries. The FDA, like all other regulatory agencies, makes GDP a central element of its regulations, and bases it on the principle of evidence. For the FDA and other regulatory agencies across the world, what is not documented is nonexistent.

Good Documentation Practices are essential for a number of disciplines. The soul of documentation is, naturally, the written word. What happens when something that happened is not actually written down? It is a work of no practical use, because apart from those that carried out the particular undocumented task; no one else is aware of it. And even when the people who did that task or were witness to it are prone to have their own interpretation and perception of what was done. This is why proof in the form of writing is the most important element of Good Documentation Practices.

goodDocumentationPracticesGuidelines

What to write, and how toGDP should not only be about just writing down; it is about what to write and also, how, meaning, in what manner. If there has been an intervention in any method of manufacture or any other activity in the regulated industries; the change should be noted down in the proper format as prescribed by the FDA. This enables everyone concerned, from the people in the organization to the auditors to the regulatory agencies, to clearly identify what action was carried out, by whom and when. This further leads to a discovery of the impact of the actions. This is the key to determining the effectiveness of the application of the GDP principles in the particular case.

goodDocumentationPracticesGuidelinesThis is why the FDA has very clear-cut requirements and expectations of GDP from the industries it regulates. These clearly explain the method by which to document the said document, the ways of doing it, and what actions to take when the need arises.

Quality Assurance is unthinkable without the application of GDP principles. The main reason for establishing GDP is ensure that the documentation does the following to the record in question:

goodDocumentationPracticesGuidelines
What needs to be documented?Another major element of GDP is to determine what is to be documented. The FDA and other regulatory agencies require the principles of Good Documentation Practices to be applied across a number of activities at different stages. These include:

goodDocumentationPracticesGuidelines

The EMA’s requirements
goodDocumentationPracticesGuidelinesThe EMA also has clear-cut guidelines on Good Documentation Practices. Some of its core requirements relate to

  • Specifications
  • All aspects of the manufacturing including the product’s formulae, the way in which the processing was done, the methods of its packaging, and the extent to which its testing instructions are written down
  • SOPs
  • Protocols
  • Technical agreements

Further, most regulatory agencies have their own requirements with regard to the styling, ways by which the amendments, if any, need to be jotted down, the type of ink to be used, the way in which the review, if any, needs to be entered, and who should put signatures and where, so on. Manufacturers who fall under the purview of respective regulatory agencies need to adhere to these.

And, for other reasons, as wellImplementing Good Documentation Practices is a great idea to have for meeting regulatory requirements, because companies that do not meet these requirements are in a spot of bother about a number of issues. However, in addition to this, there is also the need for maintaining GDP for business reasons, as well. A business that complies with the requirements set out by the FDA or other regulatory agencies in relation to Good laboratory practices, the CFR regulations such as 21 CFR Parts that apply to various industries, and also as required as part of national and global agencies; earns a good name in the market and is considered a reliable company.

 

click to continue reading

FDA Warning Letters – an understanding

As the primary regulator of the biological, healthcare, life sciences and other related industries; the FDA has power and authority over how its work is carried out. FDA Warning Letters are among the primary mediums through which it enforces its authority.

The FDA issues a Warning Letter to a company when it determines, following its inspection of a facility from an industry that it regulates, that the facility is violating some or other terms of the provisions of the FDA Act. The FDA Act is a legislation that gives the FDA the authority to carry out its inspections.

fdaWarningLettersThe issuance of an FDA Warning Letter is an indication that the facility is practicing some degree of nonconformity. A Warning Letter is among the FDA’s strongest tools of ensuring voluntary compliance from organizations with the provisions of the FDA Act.

The FDA publishes on its website any deviances of regulatory significance that it discovers from a facility during its investigations. In its viewpoint, a deviation of regulatory significance is one that leads to enforcement actions if the facility fails to carry out corrective action of whatever violations the FDA has documented.

Types of Warning Letters from the FDATo enable the public and concerned parties to view the Warning Letters it issues from time to time; the FDA has classified these on its website in the following manner:

fdaWarningLettersA General Warning Letter is one that is issued to a company in whose activities the FDA notes significant variations from the principles laid out in the FDA Act. The Warning Letter carries a description of the variation or violation that the manufacturer has been practicing, along with a description of what actions needs to be taken to correct it.

Tobacco Retailer Warning Letters are those that are issued to manufacturers of products made out tobacco, such as cigarettes, smokeless cigarettes and related ones, who are found to be violating the provisions of the FDA’s Tobacco Control Act and with provisions of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1140 (21 C.F.R. Part 1140).

Drug Marketing and Advertising Warning Letters (and Untitled Letters to Pharmaceutical Companies) are those Warning Letters that the FDA website sorts out by month and consist only of Division of Drug Marketing and Communications and Drug Warning Letters. This kind of Warning Letter is issued to sellers of prescription drugs online when they are found to violate terms set out by the FDA.

Warning Letter closeout program
fdaWarningLettersWhen the FDA issues a Warning Letter to a facility that comes under the various classifications; it follows up with it from time to time to ensure that the suggestions it advises are carried out. When the facility has carried out the necessary corrective actions; the FDA issues the Warning Letter Closeout, which closes the matter associated with the Warning Letter until the next FDA inspection.

Methods of issuing Warning LettersIt is only when it discovers violations that the FDA issues Warning Letters. It is through inspections that it discovers violations, from which Warning Letters follow. However, the FDA can also issue Warning Letters to facilities about which its receives complaints of wrongdoing from state personnel.

An FDA Warning Letter is not an enforcement action
fdaWarningLettersIn the perspective of the FDA; a Warning Letter is of an informal and advisory nature. An FDA Warning Letter is a description of the violation observed at a facility; but this in itself does not make the FDA take enforcement action. Rather, through a Warning Letter, the FDA advices the organization on what steps it has to take in order to rectify and correct the reasons for which the Warning Letter was issued. An FDA Warning Letter offers the organization enough opportunity to take corrective action that is of a voluntary and appropriate.

 

click to continue reading

Tougher FDA import rules are aimed at putting strict controls on imports

Tougher FDA import rules are aimed at putting strict controls on imports 3

Import rules are very rigid and strict in the US, because products of any type and variety can enter the US. The US being the world’s largest consumer economy; manufacturers and marketers from around the world vie for a chunk of this market. The FDA, being the agency that regulates a myriad of products, has rules for imports to the US, which have been toughened of late.

The total number of lines imported to the US more than doubled from 2006, when it was at 15 million lines, to over 35 million in 2016 (The FDA considers a distinct product within a shipment as a line). The FDA’s vigil on products that enter the US and by consumed by Americans is quite understandable: in the fiscal year 2016; among all the imported lines that entered the US; about half consisted of medical devices, and about a third, of foods, both of which are very crucial to human health.

Rules relating to import of drugs
tougherImportRulesForFdaAnother core component of US imports is drugs, which is also extremely crucial to humans. The FDA has very stringent rules for the import of drugs. it does not consider the regulatory approval of any other regulatory agency as acceptable in the US. It considers only regulation of drugs by it as the criterion for accepting imports of drug products. In some cases, however, it relaxes these rules, subject to the condition that the stock of the drug may only be shipped for three months of treatment at a time:

tougherImportRulesForFdaThe FDA has now collaborated with the Customs and Border Patrol Service (CBP), putting even tougher import rules in place. The FDA has not only got tougher in its import rules; it has become even more sophisticated in tracking and detecting importers who violate its rules. New rules require importers to submit many kinds of information and to adhere to set procedures laid out by the government in this regard.

Strict when it comes to penal actions, tooWith the FDA tightening its grip on imports; a foreign manufacturer whose products come under an FDA Import Alert is up against a hill when it comes to importing its products into the U.S. The FDA and the CBP can delay, detain or refuse its shipment or detain a shipment of a company that violates these rules.

The consequences of having a shipment detained 
tougherImportRulesForFdaThe consequences of having a shipment detained by the FDA can bring its adverse consequences:

  • Tougher FDA import rules arm the FDA with the power to begin a potentially long drawn out and expensive legal process
  • It will have very little time to respond to queries from the FDA or the CBP. Not responding in time invites further penalties
  • A fine that is three times the value of the goods contained in the shipment may be imposed
  • At times, their product can be seized ty the government and destroyed
  • If a violating importer receives a release but cannot locate the product that has been sold, it should bring the products back to the port of entry and face adverse legal steps

A few remedial measures 
tougherImportRulesForFdaThe only real antidote to avert profound consequences of the FDA’s tougher import rules is to be aware of the rules in their entirety. A company that has a sound understanding of the legal and prior notice information requirements has a safe passage compared to a company that doesn’t.

tougherImportRulesForFda