Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
While the FDA has had a long-standing policy of permitting drug, biologics, and medical device companies to respond to unsolicited requests for information about off-label use of their products, there has been significant discussion over what constitutes “unsolicited” in this context. On July 5, 2011, seven medical products companies filed a “citizen petition” with the FDA, asking for clarification of several issues, including: 1) responses to unsolicited requests; 2) the meaning of scientific exchange; 3) the appropriate interactions with formulary committees, payors, and similar entities; and 4) the dissemination of third-party clinical practice guidelines. Although the Citizen Petition is pending, on Dec. 23, 2011, the FDA issued a draft guidance that addresses the first issue in the Petition. In the draft guidance titled “Responding to Unsolicited Requests for Off-Label Information About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices,” the FDA describes how drug, biologics, and medical device manufacturers should respond to unsolicited requests for off-label information, including ' for the first time ' communications via the Internet and social media. (“Draft Guidance” is the FDA's proposed approach to compliance with a legal or regulatory requirement. When finalized, the draft guidance will represent the FDA's current thinking on this topic. Neither a draft nor final guidance creates or confers any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind the FDA or the public. A person can use an alternative approach if the approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.)
Overview of the Draft Guidance
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.