HBW Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

FDA Estimates Dollar Costs For Adverse Event Labeling But Doubts Persist

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

FDA's estimate of nearly $44 million for the dietary supplement industry to revise labels to comply with the adverse event reporting law may understate the actual burden by leaving out some key costs

You may also be interested in...



Final AER Guidance Requires Full Address, Recommends Prefatory Language

In its final adverse event reports labeling guidance documents released Sept. 1, FDA does not budge on defining "domestic address" as a full mailing address, or on recommending labels include statements directing consumers how to submit AERs

FDA Lacks Legal Sway To Enforce AER Label Revisions – Attorney

There is little chance FDA will aggressively enforce changes to dietary supplement and OTC drug labels recommended in the adverse event report labeling guidance, a food and drug attorney says

NPA expects AER cost estimates

The Natural Products Association alerts dietary supplement firms to prepare to submit comments on expected estimates from FDA on manufacturers' costs to comply with adverse event report labeling requirements. The trade group says Oct. 7 a draft of a Federal Register notice the agency posted and withdrew the same day included cost estimates for compliance with FDA's December 2007 AER draft guidances. The guidances recommend that labels for supplements and OTC drugs include complete mailing addresses and statements informing consumers the information should be used for reporting AEs (1"The Tan Sheet" July 28, 2008, p. 12). NPA and other trade groups say neither requirement was in the law that made AERs mandatory and they should not be included in FDA's guidance

Related Content

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

RS136325

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel