Last week, the FDA announced that it will withdraw a direct final rule that proposed to amend general biologics regulations related to time of inspection requirements and to remove some duties of inspector requirements. In its statement withdrawing the rule, the FDA indicated that it had received significant adverse comments related to its proposal.
Last week, the FDA announced that it will withdraw a direct final rule that proposed to amend general biologics regulations related to time of inspection requirements and to remove some duties of inspector requirements. In its statement withdrawing the rule, the FDA indicated that it had received significant adverse comments related to its proposal. The agency did not respond to questions from The Center for Biosimilars® about the nature of the adverse comment or comments that led to withdrawal of the rule.
The FDA had made the decision to issue the rule directly because the agency had believed it included “only noncontroversial amendments,” and the FDA anticipated no significant adverse comments that would affect its plan. The rule was intended to remove what it referred to as “outdated requirements” and to help eliminate inconsistencies and duplicative processes.
“These existing codified requirements are unnecessary because they are duplicative of statutory requirements that apply to biological product inspections under section 704 of the [Food, Drugs, & Cosmetics Act] FD&C Act. Specifically, the inspection requirements in section 704 of the FD&C Act encompass all requirements outlined in §600.22. Thus, we are removing §600.22(a) through (h),” said the agency of its rule.
In the past, the FDA required biennial inspections of drug and biological manufacturing facilities. However, when the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (FDASIA) was introduced in 2012, the biennial inspection requirement was replaced with a risk-based schedule requirement for inspecting manufacturing plants.
“While this means the inspection frequency for some establishments will be reduced, for some facilities it may increase. We’ll continue to inspect facilities at the same standards and enforce the laws and regulations on manufacturing that help protect patients,” stated FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb of the rule.
Escaping the Void: All Things Biosimilars With Craig & G
May 4th 2025To close out the Festival of Biologics, Craig Burton and Giuseppe Randazzo from the Association for Accessible Medicines and the Biosimilars Council tackle the current biosimilar landscape and how the industry can emerge from the "biosimilar void."
Eye on Pharma: Interchangeability Labels and Expanded Biosimilar Partnerships
May 29th 2025The FDA designates 2 biosimilars as interchangeable, enhancing access to treatments for inflammatory diseases and multiple sclerosis, while 2 other companies expand their biosimilar partnership to include more products.
Will the FTC Be More PBM-Friendly Under a Second Trump Administration?
February 23rd 2025On this episode of Not So Different, we explore the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) second interim report on pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) with Joe Wisniewski from Turquoise Health, discussing key issues like preferential reimbursement, drug pricing transparency, biosimilars, shifting regulations, and how a second Trump administration could reshape PBM practices.
What Stands in the Way of Biosimilar Use Across MENA Countries?
May 21st 2025Despite the clear promise of cost savings and expanded access, the path to integrating generics and biosimilars across the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region is tangled in a web of distrust, inconsistent policies, and deep-rooted cultural preferences for branded drugs.