Gentry Gregory
Morrison Mahoney, LLP, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Food Drug Law J. 2009;64(3):441-58.
Your company has spent months designing a compliance program and training your sales representatives. They know never to mention the off-label uses of your product. If they are asked about the off-label uses by the physician they are detailing, they know to forward those inquiries to the scientific liaisons at headquarters. But, could your company still be in legal jeopardy simply because it knows that the product is being used for an off-label purpose? This article attempts to track the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) shifting interpretation of its "intended use" regulations, from focusing entirely on the statements of the manufacturers to focusing on the knowledge of the industry, indeed, of the consumers of products, in determining the true intended use of a product. It will look at several recent attempts by FDA to use that new interpretation of the regulations to expand its power: to regulate tobacco and to require pediatric indications for any new drug. Finally, it will look at several recent examples of how this new interpretation has manifested in actions by FDA and the Department of Justice (DOJ).
贵公司已经花费数月时间设计了一个合规计划并培训销售代表。他们知道绝不能提及产品的未标示用途。如果在向医生详细介绍产品时被问及未标示用途,他们知道要将这些询问转交给总部的科学联络人员。但是,仅仅因为贵公司知道产品被用于未标示用途,它是否仍会面临法律风险呢?本文试图追踪美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)对其“预期用途”法规的不断变化的解释,从完全关注制造商的声明到在确定产品的真正预期用途时关注行业乃至产品消费者的认知。本文将审视FDA最近几次试图利用对法规的这种新解释来扩大其权力的做法:监管烟草以及要求任何新药都要有儿科适应症。最后,本文将审视几个近期的例子,看看这种新解释是如何在FDA和美国司法部(DOJ)的行动中体现出来的。