Assyro AI
US FDAUnited StatesALApproval Letter

Approval Letter Other 208564 (Jan 1, 2018)

Issued January 1, 2018

Issued

January 1, 2018

Application

Other • 208564

Review center

Other

Stage

Final Decision

Letter type

Approval Letter

Response due January 1, 2019Product may be marketed.

Summary

The FDA issued a Complete Response letter for NDA 208564 for estradiol vaginal insert, indicating that the application cannot be approved in its current form due to deficiencies primarily related to clinical safety data, particularly long-term endometrial safety, and issues with labeling, safety updates, chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and carton/container labeling.

Key points

  • Conduct and provide data from a long-term endometrial trial of sufficient size and duration to adequately characterize endometrial safety with the product.
  • Collect and characterize the long-term general safety profile of the product.
  • Review labeling review resources, including regulations and guidance documents, and the Selected Requirements for Prescribing Information (SRPI) checklist.
  • Ensure prescribing information conforms with format items in regulations and guidances.
  • Include updated content of labeling in structured product labeling (SPL) format.
  • Include a safety update as described at 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b).
  • Describe in detail any significant changes or findings in the safety profile.
  • Incorporate new safety data into sections describing discontinuations due to adverse events, serious adverse events, and common adverse events.

Cited reasons

  • Lack of Long-Term Endometrial Safety Data
  • Inadequate Prescribing Information Content and Format
  • Incomplete Safety Update
  • Deviation from USP Monograph Requirements
  • Inadequate Analytical Test Methods
  • Insufficient Strength Differentiation on Carton Labeling
  • Incorrect Dosage Form Description
  • Lack of Prominence for Established Name

Recommended actions

  • Conduct and provide data from a long-term endometrial trial of sufficient size and duration to adequately characterize endometrial safety with the product.
  • Collect and characterize the long-term general safety profile of the product.
  • Review labeling review resources, including regulations and guidance documents, and the Selected Requirements for Prescribing Information (SRPI) checklist.
  • Ensure prescribing information conforms with format items in regulations and guidances.
  • Include updated content of labeling in structured product labeling (SPL) format.
  • Include a safety update as described at 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b).
  • Describe in detail any significant changes or findings in the safety profile.
  • Incorporate new safety data into sections describing discontinuations due to adverse events, serious adverse events, and common adverse events.

Deficiency summary

The application cannot be approved due to a critical lack of long-term endometrial safety data for the estradiol vaginal inserts, which is essential for chronic use of unopposed estrogen. Additional deficiencies include requirements for a comprehensive safety update, issues with chemistry, manufacturing, and controls (CMC) related to USP monograph compliance and analytical methods, and multiple errors in carton and container labeling. The proprietary name review has also been terminated.

Findings

Lack of Long-Term Endometrial Safety Data

Severity: critical

Your application does not provide long-term endometrial safety data for the 4, 10, mcg estradiol vaginal inserts. Sufficient assessment of endometrial histology to support chronic use is critical to the safety evaluation of unopposed estrogen and to ensure adequate labeling for the safe use of your product. The 12-week safety data from Trial TXV14-01 are inadequate. Long-term data are needed to clarify if the product could be used without an opposing progestin and to guide prescribers on endometrial surveillance and the need for progestin therapy.

Recommended response: Conduct and provide data from a long-term endometrial trial of sufficient size and duration to adequately characterize endometrial safety and the long-term general safety profile of the product. Request a meeting to discuss trial details.

Inadequate Prescribing Information Content and Format

Severity: minor

Comments on proposed labeling are reserved until the application is otherwise adequate. However, any revised labeling must include updated content of labeling in structured product labeling (SPL) format and conform to 21 CFR 314.50(l)(1)(i).

Recommended response: Review labeling review resources, regulations, and guidance documents. Use the SRPI checklist to ensure conformity with format items. Update content of labeling in SPL format.

Cited: 21 CFR 314.50(l)(1)(i)

Incomplete Safety Update

Severity: major

When responding to deficiencies, include a safety update as described at 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b). This includes describing significant changes in safety profile, incorporating new safety data from studies/trials, presenting tabulations of new and combined data, comparing frequencies of adverse events, providing separate tables for other indications, retabulating reasons for premature trial discontinuation, providing case report forms and narrative summaries for deaths/discontinuations due to AE and serious AEs, describing changes in common AEs, providing updated exposure information, and summarizing worldwide safety experience.

Recommended response: Provide a comprehensive safety update following 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b), including all specified data and summaries.

Cited: 21 CFR 314.50(d)(5)(vi)(b)

Deviation from USP Monograph Requirements

Severity: major

The current USP includes a monograph for Estradiol Vaginal Inserts, but the product may not conform to its requirements. Deviations should be identified on product labels. Recommend petitioning the USP with proposed revisions to the monograph.

Recommended response: Identify deviations from the USP monograph on product labels. Petition the USP for revisions to the monograph to accommodate the new drug product.

Inadequate Analytical Test Methods

Severity: major

Differences noted in assay test method and acceptance criteria, dissolution test method and acceptance criteria, and procedure for determining related substances. The proposed HPLC-MS method for estradiol-related compounds and degradation impurities is unacceptable for regulatory purposes as it does not work in two different locations. Propose methods suitable for regulatory purposes. Perform dissolution method validation in accordance with US<1092> and adopt appropriate acceptance criteria.

Recommended response: Propose analytical methods suitable for regulatory purposes. Validate the dissolution method per US<1092> and establish appropriate acceptance criteria.

Insufficient Strength Differentiation on Carton Labeling

Severity: major

Insufficient differentiation between strengths due to primary colors (green, pink, purple) used for proprietary name and logo, which are also used for specific strengths. This increases the risk for strength selection errors. Colors chosen should be unique to each strength and avoid overlap or similarity with trade dress.

Recommended response: Revise carton labeling to ensure unique color differentiation for each strength, avoiding overlap or similarity with trade dress colors.

Incorrect Dosage Form Description

Severity: minor

The dosage form is described as '...'. This is not the appropriate dosage form. Revise the dosage form to read 'vaginal insert' on all labels and labeling.

Recommended response: Correct the dosage form description to 'vaginal insert' on all labels and labeling.

Lack of Prominence for Established Name

Severity: minor

The established name lacks prominence commensurate with the proprietary name. Increase prominence taking into account typography, layout, contrast, and other printing features in accordance with 21 CFR 201.10(g)(2).

Recommended response: Increase the prominence of the established name on labeling per 21 CFR 201.10(g)(2).

Cited: 21 CFR 201.10(g)(2)

Misplaced Statement of Strength

Severity: major

The statement of strength is located away from the dosage form, which may lead to medication dispensing errors. Relocate the statement of strength to immediately follow the dosage form.

Recommended response: Relocate the statement of strength to immediately follow the dosage form on labeling.

Incomplete Blister Label Information

Severity: major

Lack of drug-identifying information on the blister label in accordance with 21 CFR 201.10(i)(1) and 21 CFR 201.17. Specifically, missing proprietary and established name, product strength, lot or control number, expiration date (per USP), and name of manufacturer/packer/distributor. Recommend using MMMYYYY or MMMDDYYYY format for expiration date.

Recommended response: Add all required drug-identifying information (proprietary/established name, strength, lot/control number, expiration date, manufacturer) to the blister label, following 21 CFR 201.10(i)(1) and 201.17. Use recommended expiration date format.

Cited: 21 CFR 201.10(i)(1), 21 CFR 201.17

Proprietary Name Review Terminated

Severity: info

The review of your proposed proprietary name has been terminated due to the deficiencies with the application. Resubmit the proposed proprietary name when you respond to the application deficiencies.

Recommended response: Resubmit the proposed proprietary name with the complete response to application deficiencies.

Regulatory context

Submission stage
final decision
Regulatory pathway
505(b)(2)

Impact

Impact score
0.95
Estimated delay
730 days
Estimated rework cost
$0
Subsequent action
resubmission

Strategic insights

The primary reason for non-approval is the critical lack of long-term clinical safety data, specifically regarding endometrial safety for chronic unopposed estrogen use, necessitating a new clinical trial. Secondary issues include deficiencies in CMC analytical methods, comprehensive safety update reporting, and multiple labeling errors related to clarity, prominence, and required information.

Regulatory change impact: Pending sponsor mitigation plan

Approval likelihood after response: 5%

Document viewer

Read the FDA letter and send context to the co-pilot at any time.

Loading document viewer…