FDA Calls for Repeating Clinical and Bioanalytical Studies

26 October 2021 Health Care Law Today Blog
Authors: Devaki Patel Kyle Y. Faget

Recently, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) notified several pharmaceutical companies that they must repeat their clinical and bioanalytical studies conducted by Synchron Research Services (Synchron) or Panexcell Clinical Lab (Panexcell) due to significant data integrity concerns. The data concerns arose from inspections conducted at the facilities of these two Indian clinical research organizations (CROs) in 2019 as well as FDA’s analyses of study data generated at these two CROs that were submitted in several drug applications.

In a notification to industry, the FDA stated that it found “significant instances of misconduct and violations of federal regulations, which resulted in the submission of invalid study data to FDA.” The FDA further notified pharmaceutical companies that conducted bioequivalence and bioavailability studies at these two CROs that they must repeat these studies if they are essential for approval. This action applies to all pharmaceutical companies with drugs that have been approved, tentatively approved, or are currently under review by the FDA.

In an “untitled letter” to Panexcell, the FDA wrote that “the manner in which Panexcell conducted the studies noted above causes FDA to believe that the reliability and validity of study data generated by your firm cannot be ensured.” The FDA further asserted that Panexcell is responsible for the “creation of false data in the studies” and determined that “all study data from all studies conducted at your firm must be rejected.” The FDA also issued a similar letter to Synchron detailing its findings at their facility and identifying its concerns related to FDA’s review of data generated at Synchron.  

The FDA has concluded that data from these two CROs are not acceptable to support a determination of safety or effectiveness for brand drugs, or to demonstrate that the affected generic drug products are bioequivalent to the respective brand name drugs. As a result, FDA has changed the therapeutic equivalence rating to “BX” for any approved abbreviated new drugs applications (ANDAs) that relied on study data from Synchron or Panexcell. The new rating of “BX” means that the generic drug products are insufficient for FDA to determine therapeutic equivalence with brand drug products. Although these generic drug products are still approved and can be prescribed, these products are no longer automatically substitutable at the pharmacy.

Based on the FDA’s Questions and Answers Regarding Data Integrity Violations at Panexcell Clinical Lab and Synchron Research Services, the FDA reiterated its stance that affected companies would either have to repeat these studies or will have to voluntarily withdraw their products from the markets. FDA also stated that it will work with Synchron and Panexcell to ensure adequate and corrective actions are developed and implemented.

Foley is here to help you address the short- and long-term impacts in the wake of regulatory changes. We have the resources to help you navigate these and other important legal considerations related to business operations and industry-specific issues. Please reach out to the authors, your Foley relationship partner, or to our Health Care Practice Group with any questions.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services