Tag: FDA

  • Qnovia Adds Zeller to Advisory Board

    Qnovia Adds Zeller to Advisory Board

    Mitch Zeller

    Mitch Zeller, the former head of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Product, has joined the advisory board of a company developing a first-of-its-kind smoking cessation inhalation product.

    Zeller said Qnovia’s nicotine inhalation product, RespiRX, has the potential to be a “game changer” in lowering the use of combustible cigarettes.

    The former director of the Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) from March 2013 until his retirement in April 2022, Zeller is now providing policy and regulatory strategy consulting to Qnovia, Inc.

    The company is currently preparing an application to the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) for a cessation therapy which, if approved, will be the first inhaled prescription therapy to help tobacco smokers quit.

    Zeller’s addition to the company’s advisory board comes as the FDA aims to finalize proposed bans on menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars by August. The FDA also plans to propose a rule limiting nicotine levels in cigarettes and some other tobacco products.

    Zeller said access to Qnovia’s product can be one essential tool along with an administration-wide effort to provide support to those with nicotine addictions once those product standards take effect.

    “Some people will be able to quit cold turkey, but a whole bunch won’t, and they will be seeking nicotine elsewhere,” Zeller said in an interview, told Bloomberg Law.

    “The last thing that we want smokers to do if any of those policies go into effect is to simply switch to another tobacco product,” he added.

    Qnovia’s goal is for RespiRx to be the first inhaled prescription smoking cessation therapy product, according to Qnovia CEO Brian Quigley. Instead of using heat to create vapor, the RespiRx device uses an orientation-agnostic vibrating mesh nebulizer. The aerosolizing engine is nothing like a traditional e-cigarette that heats a coil to atomize nicotine based in PG and/or VG. 

    RespiRx is activated when a user inhales on the device. To aerosolize the nicotine, it sends an electrical current that causes the perforated piezo mesh to vibrate more than 100,000 times a second. “It’s that vibrating action of the mesh that then forces the liquid to the holes, creating an aerosol that appears vapor-like, allowing it to be inhaled,” says Quigley. That, he says, is fundamentally different from a traditional e-cigarette product, where the heating process can create undesired thermal byproducts.

    RespiRx uses proprietary software to deliver a precise dose of nicotine. Every time it’s activated, the device fires for three seconds and delivers a targeted dose of the drug. The base is reusable and serves as the housing for the battery and software. The RespiRx nebulizer sits within the pod that houses the nicotine drug product. 

    “The nebulizing unit (cartridge) gets replaced by the patient every one to two days. That interface means that the patient doesn’t have to clean the nebulizer,” explains Quigley. “The biggest challenge with other vibrating mesh products is that they require cleaning if used over an extended period. We’re mitigating that through the design of the interface. There is no cleaning required. We do believe that this will result in RespiRx having a very long use life.”

    Late last year, Qnovia raised $17 million to continue the development of its RespiRx nicotine replacement product.

    In June of 2020, the company appointed Quigley, a 16-year veteran of Altria Group, as its Chief Operating Officer. At Altria, Quigley served as CEO of its smokeless tobacco business from 2012 to 2018, a $2.3 billion business with over 800 employees,

  • Reynolds Likely to Prevail in PMTA Lawsuit

    Reynolds Likely to Prevail in PMTA Lawsuit

    When the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit granted a stay to R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. (RJRV) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s denial of its 150,000-page premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) for its menthol Vuse products, the judges indicated that the court believes RJRV is likely to prevail on the merits when the full review is heard. 

    Tobacco harm reduction expert Clive Bates of Counterfactual said the substantive decision rests on three main arguments, as outlined by the judges granting the stay. The order states: “Specifically, RJRV demonstrates that the FDA failed to reasonably consider the company’s legitimate reliance interests concerning the need for longitudinal studies and marketing plans; failed to consider relevant evidence, inter alia, that youthful users do not like menthol-flavored e-cigarettes; and has created a de facto rule banning all nontobacco-flavored e-cigarettes without following APA notice and comment requirements.”

    The three main points argued by the court are outlined below:

    FDA changed the decision-making criteria after the application.

    1. Legitimate reliance interests

    “The FDA did not reasonably consider RJRV’s legitimate reliance interests before changing its position on the types of comparative studies and marketing plans critical to a compliant and complete PMTA.”

    Failure to consider Reynolds’ arguments adequately 

    2. Failure to consider relevant factors

    The FDA did not adequately address RJRV’s evidence that substantial health benefits would accrue to adult and youth cigarette smokers alike who switched to menthol Vuse while popularity among youth would remain low overall. For example, RJRV’s application contained studies that “switching from smoking to use of menthol Vuse Vibe substantially reduces toxicant exposure in a manner similar to smoking abstinence.” RJRV also submitted evidence of low popularity among youth relative to other flavored electronic nicotine-delivery systems (ENDS).

    Bates stated that at least one portion of the court’s argument looks troubling for Brian King, the newly appointed director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP).

    “Then in July 2022, a new CTP director appeared on the scene and told OS that ‘the approach to menthol-flavored ENDS should be the same as for other flavored ENDS, i.e., the products could be found [appropriate for the protection of the public health] only if the evidence showed that the benefits of the menthol-flavored ENDS were greater than tobacco-flavored ENDS, which pose lower risk to youth.’ OS then changed its position.”

    FDA has been implementing a de facto tobacco product standard (a flavor ban) without using the rule-making process, public comment, etc. 

    3. “Tobacco product standard”

    RJRV has adduced evidence that the FDA has effectively banned all nontobacco-flavored e-cigarettes pursuant to its new and secret heightened evidentiary standard without affording affected persons any notice or the opportunity for public comment. There is no dispute that the TCA requires the FDA to abide by notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures before establishing a “tobacco product standard.” 8 21 U.S.C. § 387g(c)–(d). Similarly, it is clear that a ban on all but tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes would constitute a “tobacco product standard.” 

    Bates explains that the court justifies its assertion that the FDA is imposing a de facto standard with reference to the so-called “fatal flaw memo.” This was an expedited decision-making regime that stipulated that applications for nontobacco-flavored products must be supported with controlled trials or longitudinal studies showing a quitting or switching advantage over a tobacco flavor. Otherwise, they would be automatically denied. 

    “We conclude that the Fatal Flaw memo’s heightened evidentiary standard ‘bears all the hallmarks’ of a substantive rule. City of Arlington, 668 F.3d at 242. First, the memo is binding on its face by mandating that applications contain ‘the necessary type of studies.’ Second, it has been applied in a way that indicates it is binding; indeed, the subsequent, myriad Denial Orders refer to the same deficiencies identified as ‘fatal’ in the memo. Third, it took away the FDA reviewers’ former discretion to consider individual PMTAs solely on their merits and instead requires a cursory, box-checking review.

    “Finally, it affected the rights of literally hundreds of thousands of applicants whose PMTAs were denied. This is not a close call.”

    Bates stated that the third point the court makes is potentially “very” serious for the FDA and “not a close call,” as the court suggests. “A tobacco product standard under the TCA s.907 means that the burden is on the FDA to show that its de facto standard is appropriate for the protection of public health—e.g., considering the impact of closing down all vape shops, the likely impact on adults or youth who smoke, unintended consequences, illicit trade, etc.,” explains Bates. “It shifts the analysis from the individual applicant (PMTA) to the system-wide impact (Product Standard)—and FDA will find this difficult or impossible to meet, in my view.”

    Taking everything into account, the court weighs up its decision to grant the stay against four criteria, as Bates outlined: 

    “Our judgment is ‘guided by sound legal principles’ that ‘have been distilled into consideration of four factors: (1) whether the stay applicant has made a strong showing that he is likely to succeed on the merits; (2) whether the applicant will be irreparably injured absent a stay; (3) whether issuance of the stay will substantially injure the other parties interested in the proceeding; and (4) where the public interest lies.’”

    Bates stated that the first of these four criteria reflects the courts’ view on the merits discussed in the three above-stated substantive arguments. In the fourth: where the public interest lies, the court gives significant weight to the “highest public importance that federal agencies follow the law” and states: “In sum, ‘there is generally no public interest in the perpetuation of unlawful agency action,’ Texas v. Biden, 10 F.4th at 560. And there is no evidence that ‘Congress’s policy choice’ included an exemption from mandatory federal administrative procedures.”

    No date has been set for the court to complete its full review.

  • FDA Publishes Citizen Petition Webpage

    FDA Publishes Citizen Petition Webpage

    A new webpage was published by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of all the tobacco products-related citizen petitions received by the agency’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP).

    A citizen petition is a way for the FDA to give individuals, regulated industry representatives, or consumer groups to petition the agency to issue, amend, revoke a regulation, or take other administrative action. The requirements for a citizen petition are set out in the Code of Federal Regulations.

    As part of CTP’s stated commitment to increase transparency, the webpage was developed to provide the public with more easily accessible and user-friendly information about tobacco product-related citizen petitions submitted to FDA and the center’s responses.

    This webpage was one of the immediate actions toward transparency outlined by CTP Director Brian King in CTP’s Response to the Reagan-Udall Foundation’s report.

  • FDA Denies Marketing Applications for Vuse Menthol

    FDA Denies Marketing Applications for Vuse Menthol

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued marketing denial orders (MDOs) for two menthol e-cigarette products currently marketed by R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company under the Vuse Solo brand.

    Reynolds is expected to challenge the order.

    The currently marketed products include the Vuse Replacement Cartridge Menthol 4.8% G1 and the Vuse Replacement Cartridge Menthol 4.8% G2, according to a statement. The company may resubmit applications or submit new applications to address the deficiencies for the products that are subject to these MDOs. 

    The FDA evaluates premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) based on a public health standard that considers the risks and benefits of the product on the population as a whole.

    After reviewing the company’s PMTAs, the FDA determined that the applications lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate that permitting the marketing of the products would be appropriate for the protection of the public health, which is the applicable standard legally required by the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.

    Specifically, the evidence submitted by the applicant did not demonstrate that its menthol-flavored e-cigarettes provide an added benefit for adult smokers relative to tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes.

    In October last year, the FDA issued MDOs for several menthol-flavored vaping products marketed by Logic Technology Development. It was the first time the FDA issued MDOs for menthol products after receiving a scientific review.

    A few days after the order was issued, Logic obtained a court order from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit that temporarily stayed the order.

    The case continues.

  • FDA Proposes New Rules for Manufacturing

    FDA Proposes New Rules for Manufacturing

    Photo: Tobacco Reporter archive

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is proposing new requirements for tobacco product manufacturers regarding the manufacture, design, packing and storage of all tobacco products.

    The proposed requirements would help protect public health by, among other things, minimizing or preventing contamination and limiting additional risks by ensuring product consistency, according to an FDA statement.

    “While no tobacco product is safe, this proposed rule is intended to minimize or prevent additional risks associated with these products,”

    Brian King / Credit: FDA

    said Brian King, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “Once finalized, it would establish requirements for tobacco product manufacturers that will help protect public health.”

    The proposed new requirements would help manufacturers comply with the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act by helping minimize or prevent the manufacture and distribution of tobacco products contaminated with foreign substances—such as metal, glass, and plastics—which have been found in tobacco products. T

    The proposed rule would also help address issues related to inconsistencies between e-liquid product labeling and the actual concentrations in e-liquids, “Such variability can be misleading to consumers, potentially intensifying addiction and exposure to toxins,” the agency states.

    The proposed rule would also establish several requirements related to the identification, tracing and corrective actions for tobacco products that don’t meet specifications or are contaminated, including for tobacco products that have already been distributed.

    In the event of an issue, these requirements would require manufacturers to take corrective actions, which may include conducting a recall.

    The proposed requirements apply to manufacturers of finished and bulk vaping and other tobacco products. As laid out in the proposed rule, a finished tobacco product is a tobacco product, including any component or part, sealed in final packaging; for example, an e-cigarette, a pack of cigarettes or a can of moist snuff.

    A bulk tobacco product is a tobacco product that isn’t sealed in final packaging, but is otherwise suitable for consumer use. 

    The proposed rule establishes a framework for manufacturers to adhere to, including: 

    • establishing tobacco product design and development controls;
    • ensuring that finished and bulk tobacco products are manufactured according to established specifications; 
    • minimizing the manufacture and distribution of tobacco products that don’t meet specifications;
    • requiring manufacturers to take appropriate measures to prevent contamination of tobacco products; 
    • requiring investigation and identification of products that don’t meet specifications to institute appropriate corrective actions, such as a recall; and
    • establishing the ability to trace all components or parts, ingredients, additives and materials, as well as each batch of finished or bulk tobacco product, to aid in investigations of those that don’t meet specifications

    The FDA will hold a public oral hearing on April 12 to gather additional comments from stakeholders, including industry, the scientific community, advocacy groups, and the public.

    The proposed rule also will be available for public comment for 180 days. The agency will review all comments as part of the rulemaking process for this foundational rule.

    “We remain committed to transparency and stakeholder engagement, including providing clarity to industry so that they are equipped to comply with the law,” said King. “We encourage all interested individuals and organizations to participate in the rulemaking process. When the public submits a comment based on sound grounds, that can make an important difference in the agency’s decision-making.”    

    The FDA will also hold a meeting of the Tobacco Products Scientific Advisory Committee (TPSAC) on May 18 to seek recommendations from the agency’s outside panel of experts on the requirements laid out in the proposed rule. As part of the TPSAC meeting, the public will have an opportunity to make oral presentations. The FDA intends to make TPSAC meeting materials available on its website no later than 48 hours before the meeting. 

  • U.S. FDA May Publish Draft Guidance for CBD

    U.S. FDA May Publish Draft Guidance for CBD

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is planning to make recommendations on how to regulate the use of the popular cannabis compound cannabidiol (CBD) in food and supplements, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing agency officials.

    After weighing the evidence on the compound’s safety, the FDA will decide within months how to regulate legal cannabis and whether that will require new agency rules or new legislation from Congress, according to the report.

    In an interview, Janet Woodcock, the FDA’s deputy commissioner and leader of the agency’s cannabis regulation efforts, expressed concern about the safety of CBD and whether current regulatory pathways for food and dietary supplements are suitable for this substance.

    However, the agency is interested in determining whether it is safe to consume CBD on a daily basis for extended periods of time or during pregnancy.

    Woodcock mentioned concerns about potential effects on fertility in the future, but, at the same time, her comment signaled that the agency is working to establish regulatory frameworks for the legal sale of appropriate cannabis and cannabis-derived products.

    CBD is a chemical compound found in cannabis plants. It is one of the main ingredients in cannabis, but unlike THC, it does not cause a high or have psychoactive effects.

    The 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp cultivation in the U.S., which led to significant growth in the market for CBD products. These products, sold as dietary supplements, are believed to have health benefits. As a result, many businesses in the cannabis industry are now selling CBD products across the country.

    Over the last few years, the FDA posted several warning letters to companies for illegally selling products containing CBD. The companies are accused of selling products containing CBD that the FDA states some people may confuse for traditional foods or beverages that do not contain CBD or were making medical claims about their CBD products.

    In 2021, The FDA told Charlotte’s Web Holdings, one of the world’s largest CBD companies, that its cannabidiol product cannot be sold as a dietary supplement, signaling that CBD reform may have to wait for congressional action.

  • Registration Open for Menthol Ban Seminar

    Registration Open for Menthol Ban Seminar

    Interested parties can now register for the Jan. 12 U.S. Food and Drug Administration seminar covering the ban of menthol flavors in tobacco products. “The Scientific Basis of Proposed Tobacco Product Standards to Prohibit Menthol as a Characterizing Flavor in Cigarettes and Flavors in Cigars” is the first FDA tobacco-related seminar of the year.

    The presentation will provide an overview of the scientific evidence that informed the development of these proposed rules, with an explanation of the external peer review process the FDA utilized for review of the highly influential scientific assessments for these proposed rules.

    Bridget Ambrose, director of the Division of Population Health Science in the Office of Science at the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products, will be the speaker. Ambrose has over 20 years of experience in tobacco control and regulatory science, with specialized experience in longitudinal analyses of tobacco use.

  • Vape Industry Experts Predict a Better 2023

    Vape Industry Experts Predict a Better 2023

    With Republicans in control of the U.S. House, some experts expect the vape industry to thrive.

    By Timothy S. Donahue

    The next two years should be better than the past two years. That was the overall outlook from vapor industry experts speaking during the Vapor Technology Association’s (VTA) 2022 Post-Election Round-Up webinar in late November. Tony Abboud, executive director of the VTA, told attendees that his organization has been working diligently with two Washington, D.C.-based firms, West Front Strategies, a lobbying group, and FORA Partners, a public affairs agency, to promote the interests of the vaping industry as Republicans take over the U.S. House of Representatives in 2023. “We have a very specific agenda, some of which we’ve discussed (as an overview of what) we are pursuing,” he said. “We’ve done an enormous amount of groundwork.”

    Shimmy Stein

    Shimmy Stein, a partner with West Front Strategies, said the change in leadership at the House could have a positive impact on the vaping industry until at least the next election cycle. “Anytime you can take over the gavels, take over the control of the messaging, take over control of the chairmanships and the legislation, that is an important piece of governing,” he explained. “And so, while it was not to the extent or to the size which Republicans were hoping for in terms of the majority in the House of Representatives, it’s still pretty significant and will change the manner in which Washington will function.”

    Over the next two years, the vaping industry should feel “a little more comfortable, a little more secure” going into a divided Congress (the U.S. Senate leadership did not change), according to Craig Kalkut, a partner with West Front Strategies. However, the vaping industry has always faced threats from both Democrats and Republicans due to their concerns over teen vaping. “We still need to work with both parties. We still could face issues and threats of overregulation and poorly conceived legislation. But the bottom line is that we will have a more comfortable environment with Republicans controlling one house of Congress,” said Kalkut.  

    Craig Kalkut

    Reconciliation, a way for Congress to enact legislation on taxes, spending and the debt limit with only a majority vote, is no longer a threat to the vapor industry, according to Kalkut. He said that’s just not something that can happen in a divided Congress. “What that means, ultimately, is that anything that passes will need to have bipartisan support,” said Kalkut. “And because of that, [legislation] will likely be more limited, more moderate, and hopefully, if there’s any legislation passed in our area, that will be something that allows us to thrive, which addresses the concerns that linger over teen vaping but does not overregulate and drive people away from vaping.”

    Kalkut also confirmed that gridlock is a concern in a divided Congress; however, gridlock could also provide incentives for both parties to compromise. “They’re both seen as in charge, so they both sometimes want to get something done. And that will bring people to the table and often over issues that are not central to either party’s ideology,” he said. “It’s hard to come to a compromise on taxes, or it’s hard to come to a compromise on healthcare … but something like vaping, perhaps there will be opportunity for common sense provisions to prevail in an area where Democrats and Republicans can come together.”

    Max Hamel

    Max Hamel, founding partner of FORA, said when Congress is split, the White House typically relies heavily on its executive privilege. There is no known administration agenda on vaping, so a vaping-related rule is unlikely. With Republicans in control of the House, they also head committees. The House oversight committee and its subcommittees could present opportunity for the vaping industry, according to Hamel.

    “We do have new personalities on both the majority and the minority side, so they’ll probably have some growing pains,” he said. “The big question is, how does this new authority, especially in the House, get wielded[?] … whether it’s one seat or 40 seats, the authority with the majority is the same, and it is substantial from [an] investigation and oversight standpoint; [that’s] probably not necessarily true from a legislative standpoint … the oversight subcommittee, we do have the opportunity to surface some things, but it’s really an opportunity for us now to not be on defense and [to] put forth an agenda and some messaging that really focuses on the things that are advantageous to us.”

    Additionally, with Juul losing its stranglehold on the vaping market, Hamel said the vaping landscape is changing. Juul became the focus to save youth from vaping, and today, Juul isn’t the focus. The market is made up of a more diverse group of companies with different technologies dedicated to harm reduction. Hamel said this is the message that should be projected. “I think our priority will be focusing on the messages that really emphasize the harm reduction aspects,” he said.

    Kalkut then added that the vaping industry has an opportunity now to change the conversation, particularly with Democrats but also Republican critics and skeptics of vaping through the ever-expanding body of science that shows the relative safety and incredible potential for harm reduction that next-generation tobacco products have. “That has become more and more clear as time has gone on over the last couple of years,” he said. “I think once we show that, once we demonstrate our commitment as an association in the industry to addressing teen vaping, we have a real chance of changing the narrative.”

    Ashley Davis

    Ashley Davis, a founding partner at West Front Strategies, told attendees that, looking back on industry challenges, there has been success. However, her concerns going into the last Congress (2020–2022) were that she didn’t really know in what direction or how forcefully Biden would lean on the vapor industry. She says the industry “dodged a bullet.” The industry could have suffered more than it did those first two years in a Biden administration. She also said the issue of youth use will remain at the forefront of any discussion concerning electronic nicotine-delivery system products.

    “We do have to still deal with the youth issue. And I think we all realize that any negative press that comes up is around the youth issue … Everyone loves a microphone. It’s a member of Congress. If there’s an issue to discuss, that’s what they’re going to discuss,” explained Davis. “[We are] trying to make sure that any bad legislation is not passed—it’s much more unlikely in this Congress than it was before.”

    Taking a question from the audience, Abboud closed the session speculating on the impact of the Reagan-Udall Foundation’s external review of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products, the results of which are expected in mid-December.

    Abboud said that numerous comments from staffers of the FDA for the Reagan-Udall assessment suggest the regulatory agency is in a state of disarray and is being influenced by outside forces not scientific research. He said he hopes the foundation will advise the FDA that premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) decisions should be free from any external pressures, especially political pressure.

    “[The review should recommend to the FDA that PMTA] decisions must be made based upon the science that is submitted as well as making sure that the agency does, in fact, review all of the science that has been submitted as part of any applications as well as [reviewing] all of the applications that have [been] submitted,” said Abboud. “Because that was another big failing of the current process where applications have been rejected [without a full review].”

  • FDA Rejects First Menthol Product PMTAs

    FDA Rejects First Menthol Product PMTAs

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued marketing denial orders (MDOs) for several menthol-flavored vaping products marketed by Logic Technology Development. The products include the Logic Pro Menthol e-Liquid Package and Logic Power Menthol e-Liquid Package. It’s the first time the FDA has issued MDOs for menthol products after receiving a scientific review.

    The move seems inline with the regulatory agency’s goal to ban menthol flavors from tobacco products. The FDA also isn’t expected to approve any flavored vaping product other than tobacco.

    “Ensuring new tobacco products undergo premarket evaluation is a critical part of the FDA’s work to reduce tobacco-related disease and death,” said Brian King, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), in a release. “We remain committed to evaluating new tobacco products based on a public health standard that considers the risks and benefits of the tobacco product to the population as a whole.”

    Gregory Conley, director of legislative and external affairs for the American Vapor Manufacturers Association, told Tobacco Reporter that the latest move by the FDA to ban menthol vaping flavors is reminiscent of the agency’s “fatal flaw” review of PMTAs that resulted in millions of denials. The term “fatal flaw” was used by the FDA for PMTA submissions that didn’t have specific studies. The term has been at the center of nearly all lawsuits filed against the FDA for its handling of the PMTA process.

    “The dysfunction at the FDA knows no bounds. For the last year-plus, the FDA has sat back deferred decision making on menthol vaping products,” Conley said. “Lest anyone believe that FDA was hard at work coming up with ways to achieve balance, today they revealed that their big plan for menthol vaping products is to follow the exact same ‘fatal flaw’ review process that has led to dozens of lawsuits being filed against the agency.”

    The agency stated that after reviewing the company’s premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs), the FDA determined that the applications “lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate that permitting the marketing of the products would be appropriate for the protection of the public health (APPH), the applicable standard legally required by the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.”

    The FDA stated that the evidence provided within Logic’s denied PMTAs did not demonstrate that menthol-flavored e-cigarettes are more effective in promoting “complete switching or significant cigarette use reduction” relative to tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes.

    Logic must now decide if it will resubmit its applications or submit new applications to address the deficiencies for the products that are subject to the MDOs. However, these acts could prove futile since the FDA states that for non-tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes, including menthol-flavored e-cigarettes, “existing evidence demonstrates a known and substantial risk” with regard to youth appeal, uptake and use.

    “The FDA conducts a rigorous, scientific review of submitted premarket tobacco product applications, evaluating the data for each product to determine if it meets the public health standard,” said King. “In this case, the applicant did not provide sufficient scientific evidence to show that the potential benefit to adult smokers outweighs the risks to youth.”

    A recently accepted manuscript of an article set for publication in Nicotine & Tobacco Research found that flavored vaping and other tobacco sales restrictions in California did not affect youth e-cigarette use.

    The MDO letter that Logic received today is not limited to the two products named above, according to the agency. In general, the FDA publicly names only products that the applicant is marketing to avoid potential disclosure of confidential commercial information.

    Any products subject to an MDO may not be offered for sale or distributed in the United States, or the FDA may take enforcement action. These products cannot be legally introduced into interstate commerce in the U.S. without risking FDA enforcement. In March, the FDA authorized several tobacco-flavored e-cigarette products from the company under the Logic Vapeleaf, Logic Power and Logic Pro brands, including devices. 

    In addition to ensuring that Logic complies with this order, the FDA intends to ensure compliance by distributors and retailers. Specifically, the FDA notes that all new tobacco products on the market without the “statutorily required premarket authorization” are marketed unlawfully and their distribution or sale is subject to enforcement action.

    Recently, the U.S. Department of Justice filed complaints for permanent injunctions in federal district courts against six e-cigarette manufacturers on behalf of the FDA. The cases represent the first time the FDA has initiated injunction proceedings to enforce the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic (FD&C) Act’s premarket review requirements for new tobacco products.

    Retailers should contact Logic with any questions about products in their inventory. 

  • FDA Issues Warning to Puff Bar, MDOs to Hyde

    FDA Issues Warning to Puff Bar, MDOs to Hyde

    Credit: Puff Bar

    New data from the 2022 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) shows that 2.5 million U.S. youth use e-cigarettes, according to the published findings in the Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    “The FDA remains deeply concerned about e-cigarette use among our nation’s youth. It’s clear that we still have a serious public health problem that threatens the years of progress we have made combatting youth tobacco product use,” said FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf. “We cannot and will not let our guard down on this issue. The FDA remains steadfast in its commitment to using the full range of our authorities to address youth e-cigarette use head-on.”

    The study shows that about one in 10 middle school (3.3 percent) and high school (14.1 percent) students reported current e-cigarette use; current use is defined as use within the past 30 days. About 85 percent of surveyed students reported using flavored e-cigarettes while 27.6 percent reported daily use. Respondents most commonly used disposables, with Puff Bar being most common (14.5 percent) followed by Vuse (12.5 percent) and Hyde (5.5 percent). Puff Bar and Vuse were pre-specified options on the survey, but Hyde was written in by students as their preferred brand.

    Since methodology changes occurred, including in survey administration and data collection procedures due to the Covid-19 pandemic, comparisons between the 2022 NYTS and previous years is limited.

    Following the release of this data, the FDA has issued a warning letter to Puff Bar for receiving and delivering e-cigarettes in the U.S. without a marketing authorization order. The FDA has requested a response within 15 working days of receiving the letter, detailing how the company intends to address the FDA’s concerns, including the dates on which they discontinued the sale and/or distribution of these tobacco products and plans for maintaining compliance with the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Failure to address the violations puts the manufacturer at risk of regulatory action, such as a civil money penalty, product seizure and/or injunction.

    The Puff products subject to this warning letter are nontobacco nicotine products.

    After reviewing premarket tobacco product applications for 32 Hyde e-cigarettes, the FDA issued marketing denial orders (MDOs) for these applications submitted by Magellan Technology Inc. In conducting its scientific review, the FDA determined that the applications lacked sufficient evidence demonstrating that the products would provide a benefit to adult users that would be adequate to outweigh the risks to youth. No Hyde products have received marketing authorization orders from the FDA.

    “Congress gave the FDA authority to hold manufacturers and retailers who violate the law accountable,” said Brian King, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “FDA is actively working to identify violations and to swiftly seek corrective actions, particularly for products popular among youth. We will use all compliance and enforcement tools available to us, as appropriate, to protect our nation’s youth.”