Tag: U.S. Food and Drug Administration

  • Court: Triton Can Sell Flavored E-Cigs Pending MDO Review

    Court: Triton Can Sell Flavored E-Cigs Pending MDO Review

    Photo: kwanchaift

    The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Triton Distribution can continue selling its flavored e-cigarettes despite a decision to the contrary by the Food and Drug Administration, reports Reuters.  

    In a unanimous opinion on Oct. 26, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that when the FDA last month denied the Texas company’s application to sell its products, the agency did not adequately consider Triton’s marketing plan to reduce the products’ appeal to youth.

    The court found the FDA pulled a “surprise switcheroo” from earlier guidance stating that manufacturers would not need long-term studies to support e-cigarette applications.

    The FDA initially said in guidance accompanying the deeming rule that it did not expect companies would need long-term studies to support their application. However, in an August announcement that it would deny a first batch of applications, the agency said that manufacturers would likely need studies that followed a cohort of people over time to show that their products’ use in helping adult smokers quit cigarettes outweighed the risk to youth.

    Triton challenged the agency’s decision, saying it had relied on the earlier guidance in its application.

    Multiple companies have challenged their MDOs in recent weeks. In early October, the FDA rescinded MDOs it has issued to Turning Point Brands and Fumizer, placing their products back under review.

    More recently, the FDA issued an administrative stay of its MDO for nontobacco flavored bidi sticks, pending the agency’s review of Bidi Vapor’s request that the MDO be rescinded based on product-specific scientific evidence in its PMTAs.

    According to Filter, Bidi and Gripum too recently received some temporary form of stay, and My Vape Order has demanded a recission due to the fact its PMTA includes some of the same data and studies that also appears in TPB’s applications.

     

  • FDA Rescinds Another Marketing Denial Order

    FDA Rescinds Another Marketing Denial Order

    Credit: AliFuat

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has rescinded another marketing denial order (MDO), placing Fumizer’s flavored vapor products back under review, reports Filter. Fumizer received its MDO in September.

    This rescission comes just weeks after the agency withdrew an MDO issued to Turning Point Brands (TPB).

    In a letter to Fumizer’s, the FDA stated that “upon further review of the administrative record, FDA found relevant information that was not adequately assessed previously.”

    “Specifically,” the letter states, Fumizer’s “application did contain randomized controlled trials comparing tobacco flavored ENDS [electronic nicotine-delivery systems] to flavored ENDS as well as several cross-sectional surveys evaluating patterns of use, likelihood of use and perceptions in current smokers, current ENDS users, former tobacco users and never users, which require further review.”

    The FDA has indicated that it “does not intend to initiate an enforcement action” on Fumizer’s flavored vapor products returning to the market during the new review.

    Many MDO recipients have complained that the FDA has been “shifting its goal posts,” during the review process, demanding certain studies that it did not appear to require before the PMTAs were filed.

    According to industry insiders, the most recent MDO recission demonstrates that TPB’s successful petition for review and motion for a stay wasn’t a one-off, resulting from the legal jurisdiction it was filed in.

    “A rescission in California for Fumizer is evidence of the systemic failure of the agency to ‘adequately assess’ the science and data of a wide range of small- and mid-sized applicants while giving all of their time and attention to the large companies like Juul and Reynolds,” a source told Filter

    Multiple companies have challenges their MDOs. Triton, Bidi and Gripum recently received some temporary form of stay, and My Vape Order has demanded a recission due to the fact its PMTA includes some of the same data and studies that also appears in TPB’s applications.

  • ‘MDO Rescission Not Necessarily a Precedent’

    ‘MDO Rescission Not Necessarily a Precedent’

    Photo: tashatuvango

    Even as consumer activists, vapor manufacturers and tobacco harm reduction advocates have taken heart from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s decision to rescind the marketing denial order (MDO) it had issued to Turning Point Brands (TPB), it is unclear whether that move sets a precedent, writes Alex Norcia in Filter.

    The problem, according to Norcia, is that TPB’s premarket tobacco product application is not publicly available, so that other manufacturers are left to guess how the company managed to get the agency to backtrack.

    At least 27 manufacturers and distributors, including Avail Vapor, Triton Distribution, Gripum LLC and My Vape Order (MVO), have filed petitions asking federal circuit courts to review their MDOs. MVO and Gripum has had their motions to stay the MDO granted by courts. Avail is rumored to have had its MDO rescinded. 

    In his article, Norcia details the travails of MVO, which on Oct. 20 petitioned a federal court of appeals for “an emergency motion for a stay pending a review and for expedited consideration” on the company’s vapor products that have been removed from the market.

    Lawyers for MVO revealed that their client had shared studies and data with TPB and other companies, essentially arguing that the company did not receive the same treatment as TPB, even though the applications contain some of the same information.

  • Yach: Vuse Approval a Positive for Tobacco Harm Reduction

    Yach: Vuse Approval a Positive for Tobacco Harm Reduction

    Derek Yach

    More governments need to follow the science.

    By Derek Yach

    The evidence is in. For the first time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized the marketing of an e-cigarette in the country because it determined the help it offers adult smokers outweighs the attraction such products may hold for youth.

    The decision to allow the sale of British American Tobacco’s Vuse Solo closed electronic nicotine-delivery system, along with three tobacco-flavored cartridges, marks the third time in less than two years that the agency, despite vociferous, emotion-driven opposition from politicians and interest groups, has used peer-reviewed scientific evidence to approve tobacco harm reduction (THR) products.

    With this latest move, the FDA has signaled a distinct turn in the oft-contentious debate surrounding e-cigarettes, in which opponents claim little is known about what toxic chemicals they contain and that the tobacco industry has a terrible track record when it comes to being forthcoming about its products.

    That was not the case here, indicated Mitch Zeller, the director of the agency’s Center for Tobacco Products. “Today’s authorizations are an important step toward ensuring all new tobacco products undergo the FDA’s robust scientific premarket evaluation,” he said in a statement. “The manufacturer’s data demonstrates its tobacco-flavored products could benefit adult smokers who switch to these products—either completely or with a significant reduction in cigarette consumption—by reducing their exposure to harmful chemicals.”

    We have said it before, and we’ll continue to say it again (and again and again) in the face of all this misinformed vitriol and distrust: THR products are effective tools to help smokers lessen their risk of developing diseases such as lung cancer and COPD. So says one study after the next, including a recent measured, sober look at the risks and benefits of e-cigarettes that is signed by no less than 15 former presidents of the Society for Research into Nicotine and Tobacco, a leading international proponent of evidence-based science.

    The key word here is “evidence.” Although e-cigarettes are not risk-free, they have been found to be up to 95 percent less harmful than combustible cigarettes because they contain no tar and significantly fewer chemicals that make up the toxic stew of smoke in combustible cigarettes.

    Evidence, carefully compiled, weighed and debated, is how the FDA reached its earlier decisions to provisionally authorize the sale of Swedish Match’s snus and Philip Morris International’s IQOS heat-not-burn sticks as modified-risk tobacco products (MRTPs), subject to regular review. And “evidence” is how it made its first decision to approve the marketing of Vuse.

    It reached its decision through dispassionate, rigorous diligence—a risk-proportionate, microscopic gauging of the potential harm e-cigarettes pose for young people versus their potential therapeutic uses for adults who smoke combustible cigarettes and would like a less damaging alternative. Indeed, the FDA’s approval process is so thorough, it is accepted as the international gold standard for vaccines, pharmaceuticals and medical devices. As Adam I. Muchmore, a Pennsylvania State University law professor, explained last month [August] in an interview with Newsweek about the wait for Covid-19 vaccine approval, “There are a lot of ‘i’s’ to be dotted and ‘t’s’ to be crossed, and these are not simple bureaucratic requirements. Both producing this data, and reviewing it, requires the work of multiple experts in a wide range of scientific fields.”

    We hope the FDA will continue to use scientific evidence to approve the sale of menthol-flavored e-cigarettes so that combustible menthol cigarette users, among them the majority of African-American smokers, also have the opportunity to reduce their health risk. And we hope it will consider that nicotine-replacement therapy gums and sprays are already marketed in menthol and other flavors, all to help smokers quit.

    One does not need to look far to see the effects of FDA decisions: Following its full approval last August of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine, a “tidal wave” of people were expected to line up for their jabs, spurred by employers and businesses that have been waiting for the green light and at least some doubters who needed more reassurance it is safe.

    And the National Institutes of Health’s Anthony Fauci aptly summed up the FDA’s influence in a comment earlier this year about its approval for Aimmune Therapeutics’ Palforzia, the first drug to treat peanut allergy for children. “Science is showing us the path to a future in which new therapeutic options may provide both solutions as well as peace of mind that individuals with food allergies and their families deserve,” he said.

    Those words could well apply to the field of THR too, although the FDA’s policy of placing the onus solely on individual companies to prove they contribute to public health (to wit, the 2.3 million pages of evidence PMI submitted on behalf of its IQOS application) has already left some smaller, streamlined companies out in the cold.

    That said,  governments in lower and middle income countries (LMICs), where the vast majority of the world’s 1.14 billion smokers live, would do well to study all three of the FDA decisions regarding THR products as they work to strengthen their own national research and regulatory capabilities and to take note of the careful steps the agency continues to take as it examines the applications of other companies that manufacture e-cigarettes, including Juul.

    These governments and their public health authorities need to review the statistics from places such as the United Kingdom, which has supported e-cigarette use as an effective way to lessen health risks and even quit combustible smoking altogether. Or, conversely, they could take two minutes and 42 seconds to watch a graphic Public Health England demonstration of the viscous, oozing, sticky dark brown residue left in the lungs from the smoke from 16 packages of cigarettes over the period of one month compared to the barely discernible trace of vapor left by the equivalent number of e-cigarettes over the same period.

    Right now, a huge gap exists between research output in tobacco control by a few developed countries and LMICs, and when it comes to reduced-risk products, the gap is even greater, a reflection of both the lack of support for homegrown scientific research and a concomitant reliance on advanced industrialized countries for regulatory scientific advice and support. The Foundation is committed to playing its role in closing this gap to allow LMICs to have the scientists able to fully inform their policymakers about the potential benefits of THR.

    There appears to be no interest in tobacco harm reduction as a principle or a tendency to unquestioningly accept the warnings by bodies such as the World Health Organization, which itself is mired in a past overtaken by technological advancements and sounds like the proverbial Greek chorus as it points to the lack of long-term testing and the perils such products pose to youth.

    The most extreme example of this governmental attitude is in India, where, despite 1.3 million people dying each year from tobacco-related diseases, e-cigarettes were banned in haste by the government, which was urged to do so by The Union, a Bloomberg-funded NGO based in Paris that recommends such extreme measures for LMICs on the supposed grounds that youth in these countries are particularly vulnerable. In turn, this has led to a burgeoning black market that prices these products out of reach of many of the disadvantaged communities who could use them most.

    The fact is, the most favored tobacco control measure in India is tax increases, which only serves to exacerbate the difference between the rich and the poor, for the latter group must turn to cheaper, even more dangerous products such as bidis, thin cigarettes composed of unprocessed tobacco that are hand-rolled in leaves and contain higher concentrations of nicotine, tar and carbon monoxide than conventional cigarettes sold in the United States.

    In Indonesia, where more than a quarter of the population smokes, including 19.4 percent of young people between the ages of 13 to 15, the local—and significantly cheaper—cigarette of choice is the unfiltered kretek, made from a blend of tobacco, cloves and other additives. Yet, there is little government oversight, with children even exposed to lengthy tobacco advertisements before blockbuster Hollywood films.

    Still, the WHO refuses to apply the consequences of harm reduction always being part of the definition of tobacco control in the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. A good start would be for the WHO to consider recent peer-reviewed research by leading scientists that underpins the FDA submission and not reject it simply because it has been funded by the tobacco industry. In its Report on the Global Tobacco Epidemic—2021, it does not waver from its position, stating that new and emerging products simply chart a “new threat to tobacco control.”

    “As they emerge and rapidly evolve, these products can be difficult to characterize and therefore bring with them many regulatory challenges,” it states. “At the same time, the tobacco and related industries behind these newer products pedal misinformation campaigns, marketing them as ‘clean,’ ‘smoke-free’ or ‘safer,’ and claim they are effective cessation aids. By doing so, these industries attempt to appear part of the solution to the tobacco epidemic as opposed to instigators and perpetrators of the epidemic.”

    How disheartening! Yes, the tobacco industry has acted unconscionably in the past, lying about the toxicity of cigarettes and shamelessly professing its primordial dedication to the health and welfare of smokers. But, to paraphrase the old saying, change—real change—starts from within. We are seeing signs of that in the tobacco industry, with the results recognized by the FDA, leading health experts and authorities in countries such as the U.K.  

    It is time for all of us to move on—together.

    To stop treating all nicotine products as the same.

    To acknowledge that we all have a stake in people’s health and well-being and in a healthy future for our children, their children and for generations to come.

    And to start saving up to 4 million lives a year in the interim as the battle—our battle—continues to eradicate combustible tobacco for good.

    Derek Yach is the president of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World.
  • U.S. FDA Issues Two Final Rules for PMTAs and SEs

    U.S. FDA Issues Two Final Rules for PMTAs and SEs

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued two final rules for the premarket review of new tobacco products. These foundational rules provide additional information on the requirements for the content, format and review of premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) and substantial equivalence (SE) reports—two of the most commonly used pathways through which a manufacturer can seek marketing authorization for a new tobacco product from the FDA.

    According to the agency, the finalization of these rules helps ensure that all future submissions contain the basic information needed to determine whether the new tobacco products meet the relevant premarket requirements to efficiently and effectively implement the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. It also formalizes the general procedures the FDA follows when evaluating PMTAs, including application acceptance, application filing and inspections. 

    It also outlines, among other things, requirements for submitting application amendments, the time for review, withdrawal of applications, postmarket reporting requirements for applicants that receive marketing granted orders, the FDA’s communications with an applicant and the FDA’s disclosure procedures and electronic submission requirements. It also allows for a supplemental PMTA as opposed to a new submission in cases such as authorization for a modified version of a tobacco product for which they have already received a PMTA marketing granted order.

    “These final rules are important components of the FDA’s comprehensive approach to tobacco product regulation, which includes premarket application review, science-based use of the product standard authority and prioritized compliance and enforcement actions,” said acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock, in a statement. “The FDA is committed to protecting Americans from tobacco-related disease and death by ensuring that new tobacco products undergo appropriate regulatory review to determine if they meet the public health standards set by law. If new tobacco products do not meet the standards for these pathways, they cannot be marketed or sold in the United States.”

    “Conducting review of new tobacco products before they can be legally marketed is a critical responsibility of the FDA,” said Mitch Zeller, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “These final rules will provide greater clarity and efficiency in review of new tobacco products by describing information that any company must provide if they seek to market a new tobacco product in this country.”

    On Jan. 19, 2021, the PMTA and SE final rules were displayed in the Federal Register but did not publish. On Jan. 20, 2021, a memo from the White House Chief of Staff ordered the withdrawal of any rules that did not publish in the Federal Register by noon on that day. Therefore, these final rules were withdrawn at that time. The rules displaying today reflect clarifying changes made from the previous versions, but no significant substantive changes. Both final rules will publish on Oct. 5 and are effective Nov. 4. Beginning on the effective date, applications submitted through these pathways must meet the requirements described in these final rules.

  • FDA Urged to Deny Applications for All Flavored E-Cigarettes

    FDA Urged to Deny Applications for All Flavored E-Cigarettes

    Photo: Boki

    Seven leading public health, medical and parent organizations are urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to expedite decisions on remaining marketing applications for e-cigarettes and promptly deny applications for all flavored e-cigarettes, including menthol-flavored products.

    The organizations say they are concerned about these products’ appeal to youth and adverse impact on public health.

    In a letter to Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock, the groups also urged the FDA to prioritize enforcement against unauthorized flavored e-cigarettes with the largest market shares and products with the highest prevalence of youth use.

    The groups sending the letter are the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Parents Against Vaping e-cigarettes and Truth Initiative.

    Since Sept. 9, the FDA has denied marketing applications for more than 1,167,000 products, but it has yet to issue decisions on e-cigarette brands with the highest market shares, such as Juul, Vuse, NJOY and Blu, which make up over 78 percent of the market, according to Nielsen data.

    The health groups expressed particular concern that the FDA is still considering whether to authorize any menthol-flavored e-cigarettes and urged the FDA not to do so given the clear evidence that menthol is a flavor that appeals to and is widely used by kids.

    “Contrary to the FDA’s August 26 statement that menthol e-cigarette products raise ‘unique considerations’ for purposes of FDA review, we do not believe there is anything ‘unique’ about menthol flavoring that would justify issuance of a marketing order,” the groups wrote in their letter. “Indeed, there is no question that when FDA decided to prioritize enforcement against cartridge-based e-cigarettes in flavors other than menthol and tobacco, youth shifted to using menthol-flavored products.”

  • FDA Issues More Marketing Denial Orders for E-Liquids

    FDA Issues More Marketing Denial Orders for E-Liquids

    Photo: Jhvephotos | Dreamstime.com

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued additional marketing denial orders (MDOs) for electronic nicotine-delivery system (ENDS) products.

    As of Sept. 23, the agency has issued 323 MDOs accounting for more than 1,167,000 flavored ENDS.

    The list of MDOs is available here.

    The FDA issued the first MDOs in August.

    Products subject to an MDO for a premarket application may not be introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce. If the product is already on the market, the product must be removed from the market or risk enforcement.

    Companies receiving these MDOs may have submitted premarket applications for other products (such as ENDS devices, tobacco-flavored ENDS or menthol-flavored ENDS), and those products, if still pending, remain under review at FDA.

  • FDA Seeks Nominations for Scientific Advisory Committee

    FDA Seeks Nominations for Scientific Advisory Committee

    Photo: Bill Gallery

    The Food and Drug Administration Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) is requesting nominations for individuals to serve as members on the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC). Nominees may be self-nominated or nominated by an organization.

    Nominations received on or before Nov. 8, 2021, will be given first consideration. Nominations received after Nov. 8, 2021, will be considered as later vacancies occur.

    TPSAC advises CTP in its responsibilities related to the regulation of tobacco products. The committee reviews and evaluates safety, dependence, and health issues relating to tobacco products and provides appropriate advice, information, and recommendations to the FDA commissioner.

    The committee shall consist of 12 members including the chair. Members and the chair are selected by the commissioner or designee from among individuals knowledgeable in the fields of medicine, medical ethics, science, or technology involving the manufacture, evaluation, or use of tobacco products. 

    Members will be invited to serve for overlapping terms of up to four years. 

    More information on the nomination process TPSAC members is available at the Federal Register notice

  • Bidi Vapor to Market Menthol Sticks Despite MDO

    Bidi Vapor to Market Menthol Sticks Despite MDO

    Bidi Vapor will continue to manufacture and market its Artic (menthol) Bidi Stick in the United States despite receiving a marketing denial order (MDO) for the product, according to a trading update issued by Kaival Brands Innovations Group, the exclusive distributor of Bidi Vapor products.

    As of Sept. 10, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued MDOs for some 992,000 electronic nicotine delivery system products from 168 companies. Bidi Vapor received an MDO for its non-tobacco flavored Bidi Sticks, including its Artic (menthol) Bidi Stick.

    The company, however, insists the FDA mischaracterized the Artic (menthol) Bidi Stick as flavored. Because its Arctic Bidi Stick is menthol, Bidi Vapor believes that this product is not subject to the MDO.

    “This position is aligned with the FDA’s public statements and press releases stating that tobacco and menthol ENDS are not deemed flavored products subject to the MDOs,” the company wrote in a press note. “Accordingly, along with the Classic (tobacco) Bid Stick, Bidi intends to continue to manufacture and market its Arctic (menthol) Bidi Stick for distribution by us.”

    The company, which has historically derived nearly all its revenues from sales of flavored Bidi Sticks, appears willing to accept the risk of enforcement.

    “If the FDA disagrees with Bidi Vapor’s position, issues a warning letter, or takes other action against Bidi Vapor resulting in us not being able to distribute the menthol (Arctic) Bidi Stick in the United States, or consumers do not purchase the tobacco (Classic) or menthol (Arctic) Bidi Sticks, our revenues and, thereby our financial results and condition, would be materially adversely affected, Kaival Innovations Group wrote in its news release.  

    For the three and nine months ended July 31, 2021, Arctic (menthol) Bidi Stick constituted approximately 15.2 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively, of the company’s total Bidi Sticks sales.

  • States Urged to Act in Absence of FDA Action on Majors

    States Urged to Act in Absence of FDA Action on Majors

    Photo: steheap

    The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids (CTFK) is urging U.S. states and cities to step up their efforts to eliminate all flavored nicotine products, including e-cigarettes, in the wake of the Food and Drug Administration’s failure to rule on the premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) of market leaders Juul, Vuse, NJOY, Blu, and Logic by yesterday’s deadline.

    On Sept. 9, the FDA announced it had denied market access to nearly 1 million electronic nicotine delivery devices owned primarily by smaller vapor companies. At the same time, the agency indicated it would require more time to process the remaining PMTAs, including those submitted by Juul Labs, BAT, NJOY, Imperial Brands and Japan Tobacco International, which account for the lion’s share of U.S. e-cigarette sales. Juul alone has a U.S. market share of more than 40 percent.

    “The FDA will leave our kids at risk unless it acts quickly on the remaining applications, including for products like Juul that have driven the youth e-cigarette epidemic, and eliminates all flavored e-cigarettes, including menthol-flavored products that are widely used by kids,” wrote CTFK President Matthew L. Myers in a statement. “Every day these products remain on the market, our kids remain in jeopardy.”

    The FDA’s failure to act on the market leaders is remarkable given that the agency had previously indicated it would prioritize those brands while processing marketing applications. Decisions on the bestselling brands would likely have the greatest impact on public health, the agency explained in earlier communications. The failure also raises legal questions, considering that the Sept. 9 deadline was ordered by a court following litigation from public health groups, including the CTFK.

    The CTFK indicated if the FDA does not decide on major application soon it would return to court to have the court enforce its order requiring the FDA to begin removing unauthorized products.