E5 Ethnic Factors in the Acceptability of Foreign Clinical Data

Administrative guidance, not enacted legislation. This captured publisher edition preserves the listed document and attachments; later developments are not independently consolidated.

31790 	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
period of 5 years. Any person with an
approved or pending drug product
application who knowingly uses the
services of Mr. Feuer in any in any
capacity during his period of debarment
will be subject to civil money penalties
(section 307(a)(6) of the act (21 U.S.C.
335b(a)(6))). If Mr. Feuer, during his
period of debarment, provides services
in any capacity to a person with an
approved or pending drug product
application, he will be subject to civil
money penalties (section 307(a)(7) of the
act). In addition, FDA will not accept or
review any abbreviated new drug
applications or abbreviated antibiotic
drug applications submitted by or with
the assistance of Mr. Feuer during his
period of debarment.
Any application by Mr. Feuer for
termination of debarment under section
306(d)(4) of the act should be identified
with Docket No. 98N–0131 and sent to
the Dockets Management Branch
(address above). All such submissions
are to be filed in four copies. The public
availability of information in these
submissions is governed by 21 CFR
10.20(j). Publicly available submissions
may be seen in the Dockets Management
Branch between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
Dated: May 18, 1998.
Janet Woodcock,
Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research.
[FR Doc. 98–15482 Filed 6–9–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–F
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. 97D–0299]
International Conference on
Harmonisation; Guidance on Ethnic
Factors in the Acceptability of Foreign
Clinical Data; Availability
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is publishing a
guidance entitled ‘‘E5 Ethnic Factors in
the Acceptability of Foreign Clinical
Data.’’ The guidance was prepared
under the auspices of the International
Conference on Harmonisation of
Technical Requirements for Registration
of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use
(ICH). The guidance recommends
regulatory and development strategies to
permit clinical data collected in one
region to be used for the support of drug
and biologic registrations in another
region while allowing for the influence
of ethnic factors.
DATES: Effective June 10, 1998. Submit
written comments at any time.
ADDRESSES : Submit written comments
on the guidance to the Dockets
Management Branch (HFA–305), Food
and Drug Administration, 12420
Parklawn Dr., rm. 1–23, Rockville, MD
20857. Copies of the guidance are
available from the Drug Information
Branch (HFD–210), Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers
Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–827–
4573. Single copies of the guidance may
be obtained by mail from the Office of
Communication, Training and
Manufacturers Assistance (HFM–40),
Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research (CBER), or by calling the CBER
Voice Information System at 1–800–
835–4709 or 301–827–1800. Copies may
be obtained from CBER’s FAX
Information System at 1–888–CBER–
FAX or 301–827–3844.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Regarding the guidance: Barbara G.
Matthews, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFM–
570), Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, 301–
827–5094.
Regarding ICH: Janet J. Showalter,
Office of Health Affairs (HFY–20),
Food and Drug Administration,
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD
20857, 301–827–0864.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In recent
years, many important initiatives have
been undertaken by regulatory
authorities and industry associations to
promote international harmonization of
regulatory requirements. FDA has
participated in many meetings designed
to enhance harmonization and is
committed to seeking scientifically
based harmonized technical procedures
for pharmaceutical development. One of
the goals of harmonization is to identify
and then reduce differences in technical
requirements for drug development
among regulatory agencies.
ICH was organized to provide an
opportunity for tripartite harmonization
initiatives to be developed with input
from both regulatory and industry
representatives. FDA also seeks input
from consumer representatives and
others. ICH is concerned with
harmonization of technical
requirements for the registration of
pharmaceutical products among three
regions: The European Union, Japan,
and the United States. The six ICH
sponsors are the European Commission,
the European Federation of
Pharmaceutical Industries Associations,
the Japanese Ministry of Health and
Welfare, the Japanese Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers Association, the Centers
for Drug Evaluation and Research and
Biologics Evaluation and Research,
FDA, and the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America. The ICH
Secretariat, which coordinates the
preparation of documentation, is
provided by the International
Federation of Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers Associations (IFPMA).
The ICH Steering Committee includes
representatives from each of the ICH
sponsors and the IFPMA, as well as
observers from the World Health
Organization, the Canadian Health
Protection Branch, and the European
Free Trade Area.
In the Federal Register of July 31,
1997 (62 FR 41054), FDA published a
draft tripartite guideline entitled
‘‘Ethnic Factors in the Acceptability of
Foreign Clinical Data’’ (E5). The notice
gave interested persons an opportunity
to submit comments by October 29,
1997.
After consideration of the comments
received and revisions to the guidance,
a final draft of the guidance was
submitted to the ICH Steering
Committee and endorsed by the three
participating regulatory agencies on
February 5, 1998.
In accordance with FDA’s good
guidance practices (62 FR 8961,
February 27, 1997), this document has
been designated a guidance, rather than
a guideline.
The guidance is intended to facilitate
the registration of drugs and biologics
among ICH regions by recommending a
framework for evaluating the impact of
ethnic factors on a drug’s effect, i.e., its
efficacy and safety at a particular dosage
and dose regimen. The guidance
recommends regulatory and
development strategies that will permit
adequate evaluation of the influence of
ethnic factors, minimize duplication of
clinical studies, and expedite the drug
approval process.
This guidance represents the agency’s
current thinking on ethnic factors in the
acceptability of foreign clinical data for
approval of both drugs and biologics. It
does not create or confer any rights for
or on any person and does not operate
to bind FDA or the public. An
alternative approach may be used if
such approach satisfies the
requirements of the applicable statute,
regulations, or both.
As with all of FDA’s guidances, the
public is encouraged to submit written
comments with new data or other new
information pertinent to this guidance.
The comments in the docket will be

31791	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
periodically reviewed, and, where
appropriate, the guidance will be
amended. The public will be notified of
any such amendments through a notice
in the Federal Register.
Interested persons may, at any time,
submit written comments on the
guidance to the Dockets Management
Branch (address above). Two copies of
any comments are to be submitted,
except that individuals may submit one
copy. Comments are to be identified
with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this
document. The guidance and received
comments may be seen in the office
above between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday. An electronic
version of this guidance is available on
the Internet at ‘‘http://www.fda.gov/
cder/guidance/index.htm’’ or at CBER’s
World Wide Webb site at ‘‘http://
www.fda.gov/cber/publications.htm’’.
The text of the guidance follows:
E5 Ethnic Factors in the Acceptability of
Foreign Clinical Data1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Objectives
1.2 Background
1.3 Scope
2.0 Assessment of the Clinical Data Package
Including Foreign Clinical Data for Its
Fulfillment of Regulatory Requirements in
the New Region
2.1 Additional Studies to Meet the New
Region’s Regulatory Requirements
3.0 Assessment of the Foreign Clinical Data
for Extrapolation to the New Region
3.1 Characterization of the Medicine’s
Sensitivity to Ethnic Factors
3.2 Bridging Data Package
3.2.1 Definition of Bridging Data Package
and Bridging Study
3.2.2 Nature and Extent of the Bridging
Study
3.2.3 Bridging Studies for Efficacy
3.2.4 Bridging Studies for Safety
4.0 Developmental Strategies for Global
Development
5.0 Summary
Glossary (Italicized words and terms in the
text of the guidance are defined or explained
in the glossary.)
Appendix A: Classification of intrinsic and
extrinsic ethnic factors
Appendix B: Assessment of the clinical data
package (CDP) for acceptability
Appendix C: Pharmacokinetic,
pharmacodynamic, and dose-response
considerations
Appendix D: A medicine’s sensitivity to
ethnic factors
1 This guidance represents the agency’s current
thinking on ethnic factors in the acceptability of
foreign clinical data for approval of both drugs and
biologics. It does not create or confer any rights for
or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA
or the public. An alternative approach may be used
if such approach satisfies the requirements of the
applicable statute, regulations, or both.
1.0 Introduction
The purpose of this guidance is to facilitate
the registration of medicines among ICH
regions (see Glossary) by recommending a
framework for evaluating the impact of
ethnic factors upon a medicine’s effect, i.e.,
its efficacy and safety at a particular dosage
and dose regimen. It provides guidance with
respect to regulatory and development
strategies that will permit adequate
evaluation of the influence of ethnic factors
while minimizing duplication of clinical
studies and supplying medicines
expeditiously to patients for their benefit.
This guidance should be implemented in
context with other ICH guidances. For the
purposes of this document, ethnic factors are
defined as those factors relating to the genetic
and physiologic (intrinsic) and the cultural
and environmental (extrinsic) characteristics
of a population (Appendix A).
1.1 Objectives
To describe the characteristics of foreign
clinical data that will facilitate their
extrapolation to different populations and
support their acceptance as a basis for
registration of a medicine in a new region.
• To describe regulatory strategies that
minimize duplication of clinical data and
facilitate acceptance of foreign clinical data
in the new region.
• To describe the use of bridging studies,
when necessary, to allow extrapolation of
foreign clinical data to a new region.
• To describe development strategies
capable of characterizing ethnic factor
influences on safety, efficacy, dosage, and
dose regimen.
1.2 Background
All of the ICH regions acknowledge the
desirability of utilizing foreign clinical data
that meet the regulatory standards and
clinical trial practices acceptable to the
region considering the application for
registration.
However, concern that ethnic differences
may affect the medication’s safety, efficacy,
dosage, and dose regimen in the new region
has limited the willingness to rely on foreign
clinical data. Historically, this has been one
of the reasons, therefore, the regulatory
authority in the new region has often
requested that all, or much of, the foreign
clinical data in support of registration be
duplicated in the new region. Although
ethnic differences among populations may
cause differences in a medicine’s safety,
efficacy, dosage, or dose regimen, many
medicines have comparable characteristics
and effects across regions. Requirements for
extensive duplication of clinical evaluation
for every compound can delay the
availability of new therapies and
unnecessarily waste drug development
resources.
1.3 Scope
This guidance is based on the premise that
it is not necessary to repeat the entire clinical
drug development program in the new region
and is intended to recommend strategies for
accepting foreign clinical data as full or
partial support for approval of an application
in a new region. It is critical to appreciate
that this guidance is not intended to alter the
data requirements for registration in the new
region; it seeks to recommend when these
data requirements may be satisfied with
foreign clinical data. All data in the clinical
data package, including foreign data, should
meet the standards of the new region with
respect to study design and conduct, and the
available data should satisfy the regulatory
requirements in the new region. Additional
studies conducted in any region may be
required by the new region to complete the
clinical data package.
Once a clinical data package fulfills the
regulatory requirements of the new region,
the only remaining issue with respect to the
acceptance of the foreign clinical data is its
ability to be extrapolated to the population of
the new region. When the regulatory
authority or the sponsor is concerned that
differences in ethnic factors could alter the
efficacy or safety of the medicine in the
population in the new region, the sponsor
may need to generate a limited amount of
clinical data in the new region in order to
extrapolate or ‘‘bridge’’ the clinical data
between the two regions. If a sponsor needs
to obtain additional clinical data to fulfill the
regulatory requirements of the new region, it
is possible that these clinical trials can be
designed to also serve as the bridging studies.
Thus, the sponsor and the regional
regulatory authority of the new region would
assess an application for registration for:
(1) Its completeness with respect to the
regulatory requirements of the new region,
and
(2) The ability to extrapolate to the new
region those parts of the application (which
could be most or all of the application) based
on studies from the foreign region (Appendix
B).
2.0 Assessment of the Clinical Data Package
Including Foreign Clinical Data for Its
Fulfillment of Regulatory Requirements in
the New Region
The regional regulatory authority would
assess the clinical data package, including
the foreign data, as to whether or not it meets
all of the regulatory standards regarding the
nature and quality of the data, irrespective of
its geographic origin, i.e., data generated
either totally in a foreign region (or regions)
or data from studies conducted both in a
foreign and the new region to which the
application is being made. A clinical data
package that meets all of these regional
regulatory requirements is defined as a
‘‘complete’’ clinical data package for
submission and potential approval. The
acceptability of the foreign clinical data
component of the complete data package
depends then upon whether it can be
extrapolated to the population of the new
region.
Before extrapolation can be considered, the
complete clinical data package, including
foreign clinical data, submitted to the new
region should contain:
• Adequate characterization of
pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, dose
response, efficacy, and safety in the
population of the foreign region(s).
• Clinical trials establishing dose response,
efficacy and safety. These trials should:

31792 	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
—Be designed and conducted according to
regulatory standards in the new region, e.g.,
choice of controls, and should be conducted
according to good clinical practice (GCP),
—Be adequate and well-controlled,
—Utilize endpoints that are considered
appropriate for assessment of treatment,
—Evaluate clinical disorders using medical
and diagnostic definitions that are acceptable
to the new region.
• Characterization in a population relevant
to the new region of the pharmacokinetics,
and where possible, pharmacodynamics and
dose response for pharmacodynamic
endpoints. This characterization could be
performed in the foreign region in a
population representative of the new region
or in the new region.
Several ICH guidances that address aspects
of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of
clinical trials will help implement the
concepts of the complete clinical data
package. These guidances include GCP’s (E6),
evaluation of dose response (E4), adequacy of
safety data (E1 and E2), conduct of studies in
the elderly (E7), reporting of study results
(E3), general considerations for clinical trials
(E8), and statistical considerations (E9). A
guidance on the choice of control group in
clinical study design (E10) is under
development.
2.1 Additional Studies to Meet the New
Region’s Regulatory Requirements
When the foreign clinical data do not meet
the regional regulatory requirements, the
regulatory authority may require additional
clinical trials such as:
• Clinical trials in different subsets of the
population, such as patients with renal
insufficiency, patients with hepatic
dysfunction, etc.,
• Clinical trials using different comparators
at the new region’s approved dosage and
dose regimen,
• Drug-drug interaction studies.
3.0 Assessment of the Foreign Clinical Data
for Extrapolation to the New Region
3.1 Characterization of the Medicine’s
Sensitivity to Ethnic Factors
To assess a medicine’s sensitivity to ethnic
factors, it is important that there be
knowledge of its pharmacokinetic and
pharmacodynamic properties and the
translation of those properties to clinical
effectiveness and safety. A reasonable
evaluation is described in Appendix C. Some
properties of a medicine (chemical class,
metabolic pathway, pharmacologic class)
make it more or less likely to be affected by
ethnic factors (Appendix D). Characterization
of a medicine as ‘‘ethnically insensitive,’’ i.e.,
unlikely to behave differently in different
populations, would usually make it easier to
extrapolate data from one region to another
and need less bridging data.
Factors that make a medicine ethnically
sensitive or insensitive will become better
understood and documented as effects in
different regions are compared. It is clear at
present, however, that such characteristics as
clearance by an enzyme showing genetic
polymorphism and a steep dose-response
curve will make ethnic differences more
likely. Conversely, a lack of metabolism or
active excretion, a wide therapeutic dose
range, and a flat dose-response curve will
make ethnic differences less likely. The
clinical experience with other members of
the drug class in the new region will also
contribute to the assessment of the
medicine’s sensitivity to ethnic factors. It
may be easier to conclude that the
pharmacodynamic and clinical behavior of a
medicine will be similar in the foreign and
new regions if other members of the
pharmacologic class have been studied and
approved in the new region with dosing
regimens similar to those used in the original
region.
3.2 Bridging Data Package
3.2.1 Definition of Bridging Data Package and
Bridging Study
A bridging data package consists of: (1)
Selected information from the complete
clinical data package that is relevant to the
population of the new region, including
pharmacokinetic data, and any preliminary
pharmacodynamic and dose-response data
and, if needed, (2) a bridging study to
extrapolate the foreign efficacy data and/or
safety data to the new region.
A bridging study is defined as a study
performed in the new region to provide
pharmacodynamic or clinical data on
efficacy, safety, dosage, and dose regimen in
the new region that will allow extrapolation
of the foreign clinical data to the population
in the new region. A bridging study for
efficacy could provide additional
pharmacokinetic information in the
population of the new region. When no
bridging study is needed to provide clinical
data for efficacy, a pharmacokinetic study in
the new region may be considered as a
bridging study.
3.2.2 Nature and Extent of the Bridging Study
This guidance proposes that when the
regulatory authority of the new region is
presented with a clinical data package that
fulfills its regulatory requirements, the
authority should request only those
additional data necessary to assess the ability
to extrapolate foreign data from the complete
clinical data package to the new region. The
sensitivity of the medicine to ethnic factors
will help determine the amount of such data.
In most cases, a single trial that successfully
provides these data in the new region and
confirms the ability to extrapolate data from
the original region should suffice and should
not need further replication. Note that even
though a single study should be sufficient to
‘‘bridge’’ efficacy data, a sponsor may find it
practical to obtain the necessary data by
conducting more than one study. For
example, where it is intended that a fixed
dose, dose-response study using a clinical
endpoint is needed as the bridging study, a
short-term pharmacologic endpoint study
may be used to choose the dose(s) for the
larger (clinical endpoint) study.
When the regulatory authority requests, or
the sponsor decides to conduct, a bridging
study, discussion between the regional
regulatory authority and sponsor is
encouraged, when possible, to determine
what kind of bridging study will be needed.
The relative ethnic sensitivity will help
determine the need for and the nature of the
bridging study. For regions with little
experience with registration based on foreign
clinical data, the regulatory authorities may
still request a bridging study for approval
even for compounds insensitive to ethnic
factors. As experience with interregional
acceptance increases, there will be a better
understanding of situations in which
bridging studies are needed. It is hoped that
with experience, the need for bridging data
will lessen.
The following is general guidance about
the ability to extrapolate data generated from
a bridging study:
• If the bridging study shows that dose
response, safety, and efficacy in the new
region are similar, then the study is readily
interpreted as capable of ‘‘bridging’’ the
foreign data.
• If a bridging study, properly executed,
indicates that a different dose in the new
region results in a safety and efficacy profile
that is not substantially different from that
derived in the original region, it will often be
possible to extrapolate the foreign data to the
new region, with appropriate dose
adjustment, if this can be adequately justified
(e.g., by pharmacokinetic and/or
pharmacodynamic data).
• If the bridging study designed to
extrapolate the foreign data is not of
sufficient size to confirm adequately the
extrapolation of the adverse event profile to
the new population, additional safety data
may be necessary (section 3.2.4).
• If the bridging study fails to verify safety
and efficacy, additional clinical data (e.g.,
confirmatory clinical trials) would be
necessary.
3.2.3 Bridging Studies for Efficacy
Generally, for medicines characterized as
insensitive to ethnic factors, the type of
bridging study needed (if needed) will
depend upon experience with the drug class
and upon the likelihood that extrinsic ethnic
factors (including design and conduct of
clinical trials) could affect the medicine’s
safety, efficacy, and dose-response. For
medicines that are ethnically sensitive, a
bridging study may often be needed if the
populations in the two regions are different.
The following examples illustrate types of
bridging studies for consideration in different
situations:
• No bridging study
In some situations, extrapolation of clinical
data may be feasible without a bridging
study:
(1) If the medicine is ethnically insensitive
and extrinsic factors such as medical practice
and conduct of clinical trials in the two
regions are generally similar.
(2) If the medicine is ethnically sensitive
but the two regions are ethnically similar and
there is sufficient clinical experience with
pharmacologically related compounds to
provide reassurance that the class behaves
similarly in patients in the two regions with
respect to efficacy, safety, dosage, and dose
regimen. This might be the case for well-
established classes of drugs known to be
administered similarly, but not necessarily
identically, in the two regions.
• Bridging studies using pharmacologic
endpoints

31793	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
If the regions are ethnically dissimilar and
the medicine is ethnically sensitive but
extrinsic factors are generally similar (e.g.,
medical practice, design and conduct of
clinical trials) and the drug class is a familiar
one in the new region, a controlled
pharmacodynamic study in the new region,
using a pharmacologic endpoint that is
thought to reflect relevant drug activity
(which could be a well-established surrogate
endpoint), could provide assurance that the
efficacy, safety, dose and dose regimen data
developed in the first region are applicable
to the new region. Simultaneous
pharmacokinetic (i.e., blood concentration)
measurements may make such studies more
interpretable.
• Controlled clinical trials
It will usually be necessary to carry out a
controlled clinical trial, often a randomized,
fixed dose, dose-response study, in the new
region when:
(1) There are doubts about the choice of
dose,
(2) There is little or no experience with
acceptance of controlled clinical trials
carried out in the foreign region,
(3) Medical practice (e.g., use of
concomitant medications and design and/or
conduct of clinical trials) is different, or
(4) The drug class is not a familiar one in
the new region.
Depending on the situation, the trial could
replicate the foreign study or could utilize a
standard clinical endpoint in a study of
shorter duration than the foreign studies or
utilize a validated surrogate endpoint, e.g.,
blood pressure or cholesterol (longer studies
and other endpoints may have been used in
the foreign phase III clinical trials).
If pharmacodynamic data suggest that there
are interregional differences in response, it
will generally be necessary to carry out a
controlled trial with clinical endpoints in the
new region. Pharmacokinetic differences may
not always create that necessity, as dosage
adjustments in some cases might be made
without new trials. However, any substantial
difference in metabolic pattern may often
indicate a need for a controlled clinical trial.
When the practice of medicine differs
significantly in the use of concomitant
medications, or adjunct therapy could alter
the medicine’s efficacy or safety, the bridging
study should be a controlled clinical trial.
3.2.4 Bridging Studies for Safety
Even though the foreign clinical data
demonstrate efficacy and safety in the foreign
region, there may occasionally remain a
safety concern in the new region. Safety
concerns could include the accurate
determination of the rates of relatively
common adverse events in the new region
and the detection of serious adverse events
(in the 1 percent range and generally needing
about 300 patients to assess). Depending
upon the nature of the safety concern, safety
data could be obtained in the following
situations:
• A bridging study to assess efficacy, such
as a dose-response study, could be powered
to address the rates of common adverse
events and could also allow identification of
serious adverse events that occur more
commonly in the new region. Close
monitoring of such a trial would allow
recognition of such serious events before an
unnecessarily large number of patients in the
new region are exposed. Alternatively, a
small safety study could precede the bridging
study to provide assurance that serious
adverse effects were not occurring at a high
rate.
• If there is no efficacy bridging study
needed or if the efficacy bridging study is too
small or of insufficient duration to provide
adequate safety information, a separate safety
study may be needed. This could occur
where there is:
—An index case of a serious adverse event
in the foreign clinical data,
—A concern about differences in reporting
adverse events in the foreign region,
—Only limited safety data in the new
region arising from an efficacy bridging
study, inadequate to extrapolate important
aspects of the safety profile, such as rates of
common adverse events or of more serious
adverse events.
4.0 Developmental Strategies for Global
Development
Definition of not only pharmacokinetics
but also pharmacodynamics and dose
response early in the development program
may facilitate the determination of the need
for, and nature of, any requisite bridging
data. Any candidate medicine for global
development should be characterized as
ethnically sensitive or insensitive (Appendix
D). Ideally, this characterization should be
conducted during the early clinical phases of
drug development, i.e., human pharmacology
and therapeutic exploratory studies. In some
cases, it may be useful to discuss bridging
study designs with regulatory agencies prior
to completion of the clinical data package.
However, analysis of the data within the
complete clinical data package will
determine the need for, and type of bridging
study. For global development, studies
should include populations representative of
the regions where the medicine is to be
registered and should be conducted
according to ICH guidelines.
A sponsor may wish to leave the
assessment of pharmacokinetics,
pharmacodynamics, dosage, and dose
regimens in populations relevant to the new
region until later in the drug development
program. Pharmacokinetic assessment could
be accomplished by formal pharmacokinetic
studies or by applying population
pharmacokinetic methods to clinical trials
conducted either in a population relevant to
the new region or in the new region.
5.0 Summary
This guidance describes how a sponsor
developing a medicine for a new region can
deal with the possibility that ethnic factors
could influence the effects (safety and
efficacy) of medicines and the risk/benefit
assessment in different populations. Results
from the foreign clinical trials could
comprise most, or in some cases, all of the
clinical data package for approval in the new
region, so long as they are carried out
according to the requirements of the new
region. Acceptance in the new region of such
foreign clinical data may be achieved by
generating ‘‘bridging’’ data in order to
extrapolate the safety and efficacy data from
the population in the foreign region(s) to the
population in the new region.
Glossary
Adequate and well-controlled trial: An
adequate and well controlled trial has the
following characteristics:
• A design that permits a valid comparison
with a control to provide a quantitative
assessment of treatment effect;
• The use of methods to minimize bias in
the allocation of patients to treatment groups
and in the measurement and assessment of
response to treatment; and
• An analysis of the study results
appropriate to the design to assess the effects
of the treatment.
Bridging data package: Selected
information from the complete clinical data
package that is relevant to the population of
the new region, including pharmacokinetic
data, and any preliminary pharmacodynamic
and dose-response data and, if needed,
supplemental data obtained from a bridging
study in the new region that will allow
extrapolation of the foreign safety and
efficacy data to the population of the new
region.
Bridging study: A bridging study is defined
as a supplemental study performed in the
new region to provide pharmacodynamic or
clinical data on efficacy, safety, dosage, and
dose regimen in the new region that will
allow extrapolation of the foreign clinical
data to the new region. Such studies could
include additional pharmacokinetic
information.
Complete clinical data package: A clinical
data package intended for registration
containing clinical data that fulfill the
regulatory requirements of the new region
and containing pharmacokinetic data
relevant to the population in the new region.
Compound insensitive to ethnic factors: A
compound whose characteristics suggest
minimal potential for clinically significant
impact by ethnic factors on safety, efficacy,
or dose response.
Compound sensitive to ethnic factors: A
compound whose pharmacokinetic,
pharmacodynamic, or other characteristics
suggest the potential for clinically significant
impact by intrinsic and/or extrinsic ethnic
factors on safety, efficacy, or dose response.
Dosage: The quantity of a medicine given
per administration, or per day.
Dose regimen: The route, frequency and
duration of administration of the dose of a
medicine over a period of time.
Ethnic factors: The word ethnicity is
derived from the Greek word ‘‘ethnos,’’
meaning nation or people. Ethnic factors are
factors relating to races or large populations
grouped according to common traits and
customs. Note that this definition gives
ethnicity, by virtue of its cultural as well as
genetic implications, a broader meaning than
racial. Ethnic factors may be classified as
either intrinsic or extrinsic. (Appendix A)
• Extrinsic ethnic factors: Extrinsic ethnic
factors are factors associated with the
environment and culture in which a person
resides. Extrinsic factors tend to be less
genetically and more culturally and

31794 	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
behaviorally determined. Examples of
extrinsic factors include the social and
cultural aspects of a region such as medical
practice, diet, use of tobacco, use of alcohol,
exposure to pollution and sunshine,
socioeconomic status, compliance with
prescribed medications, and, particularly
important to the reliance on studies from a
different region, practices in clinical trial
design and conduct.
• Intrinsic ethnic factors: Intrinsic ethnic
factors are factors that help to define and
identify a subpopulation and may influence
the ability to extrapolate clinical data
between regions. Examples of intrinsic
factors include genetic polymorphism, age,
gender, height, weight, lean body mass, body
composition, and organ dysfunction.
Extrapolation of foreign clinical data: The
generalization and application of the safety,
efficacy, and dose-response data generated in
a population of a foreign region to the
population of the new region.
Foreign clinical data: Foreign clinical data
is defined as clinical data generated outside
of the new region (i.e., in the foreign region).
ICH regions: European Union, Japan, the
United States of America.
New region: The region where product
registration is sought.
• Population representative of the new
region: A population that includes the major
racial groups within the new region.
Pharmacokinetic study: A study of how a
medicine is handled by the body, usually
involving measurement of blood
concentrations of drug and its metabolite(s)
(sometimes concentrations in urine or
tissues) as a function of time.
Pharmacokinetic studies are used to
characterize absorption, distribution,
metabolism, and excretion of a drug, either
in blood or in other pertinent locations.
When combined with pharmacodynamic
measures (a PK/PD study) it can characterize
the relation of blood concentrations to the
extent and timing of pharmacodynamic
effects.
Pharmacodynamic study: A study of a
pharmacological or clinical effect of the
medicine in individuals to describe the
relation of the effect to dose or drug
concentration. A pharmacodynamic effect
can be a potentially adverse effect
(anticholinergic effect with a tricyclic), a
measure of activity thought related to clinical
benefit (various measures of beta-blockade,
effect on ECG (electrocardiogram) intervals,
inhibition of ACE (angiotensin converting
enzyme) or of angiotensin I or II response),
a short-term desired effect, often a surrogate
endpoint (blood pressure, cholesterol), or the
ultimate intended clinical benefit (effects on
pain, depression, sudden death).
Population pharmacokinetic methods:
Population pharmacokinetic methods are a
population-based evaluation of
measurements of systemic drug
concentrations, usually two or more per
patient under steady state conditions, from
all, or a defined subset of, patients who
participate in clinical trials.
Therapeutic dose range: The difference
between the lowest effective dose and the
highest dose that gives further benefit.
Appendix A: Classification of intrinsic and extrinsic ethnic factors

31795	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
Appendix B: Assessment of the clinical data package (CDP) for acceptability
Appendix C: Pharmacokinetic,
pharmacodynamic, and dose-response
considerations
Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and
pharmacodynamics, and their comparability,
in the three major racial groups in the ICH
regions (Asian, Black, and Caucasian) is
critical to the registration of medicines in the
ICH regions. Basic pharmacokinetic
evaluation should characterize absorption,
distribution, metabolism, excretion (ADME),
and where appropriate, food-drug and drug-
drug interactions.
Adequate pharmacokinetic comparison
between populations of the two regions
allows rational consideration of what kinds
of further pharmacodynamic and clinical
studies (bridging studies) are needed in the
new region. In contrast to the
pharmacokinetics of a medication, where
differences between populations may be
attributed primarily to intrinsic ethnic factors
and are readily identified, the
pharmacodynamic response (clinical
effectiveness, safety, and dose response) may
be influenced by both intrinsic and extrinsic
ethnic factors and this may be difficult to
identify except by conducting clinical studies
in the new region.
The ICH E4 document describes various
approaches to dose-response evaluation. In
general, dose response (or concentration
response) should be evaluated for both
pharmacologic effect (where one is
considered pertinent) and clinical endpoints
in the foreign region. The pharmacologic
effect, including dose response, may also be
evaluated in the foreign region in a
population representative of the new region.
Depending on the situation, data on clinical
efficacy and dose response in the new region
may or may not be needed, e.g., if the drug
class is familiar and the pharmacologic effect
is closely linked to clinical effectiveness and
dose response, these foreign
pharmacodynamic data may be a sufficient
basis for approval and clinical endpoint and
dose-response data may not be needed in the
new region. The pharmacodynamic
evaluation, and possible clinical evaluation
(including dose response) is important
because of the possibility that the response
curve may be shifted in a new population.
Examples of this are well-documented, e.g.,
the decreased response in blood pressure of
blacks to angiotensin converting enzyme
inhibitors.
Appendix D: A medicine’s sensitivity to
ethnic factors
Characterization of a medicine according to
the potential impact of ethnic factors upon its
pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and
therapeutic effects may be useful in
determining what sort of bridging study is
needed in the new region. The impact of
ethnic factors upon a medicine’s effect will
vary depending upon the drug’s
pharmacologic class and indication and the
age and gender of the patient. No one
property of the medicine is predictive of the
compound’s relative sensitivity to ethnic
factors. The type of bridging study needed is
ultimately a matter of judgment, but
assessment of sensitivity to ethnic factors
may help in that judgment.
The following properties of a compound
make it less likely to be sensitive to ethnic
factors:
• Linear pharmacokinetics (PK).
• A flat pharmacodynamic (PD) (effect-
concentration) curve for both efficacy and
safety in the range of the recommended
dosage and dose regimen (this may mean that
the medicine is well-tolerated).
• A wide therapeutic dose range (again,
possibly an indicator of good tolerability).

31796 	Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 111 / Wednesday, June 10, 1998 / Notices
• Minimal metabolism or metabolism
distributed among multiple pathways.
• High bioavailability, thus less
susceptibility to dietary absorption effects.
• Low potential for protein binding.
• Little potential for drug-drug, drug-diet,
and drug-disease interactions.
• Nonsystemic mode of action.
• Little potential for inappropriate use.
The following properties of a compound
make it more likely to be sensitive to ethnic
factors:
• Nonlinear pharmacokinetics.
• A steep pharmacodynamic curve for both
efficacy and safety (a small change in dose
results in a large change in effect) in the
range of the recommended dosage and dose
regimen.
• A narrow therapeutic dose range.
• Highly metabolized, especially through a
single pathway, thereby increasing the
potential for drug-drug interaction.
• Metabolism by enzymes known to show
genetic polymorphism.
• Administration as a prodrug, with the
potential for ethnically variable enzymatic
conversion.
• High intersubject variation in
bioavailability.
• Low bioavailability, thus more
susceptible to dietary absorption effects.
• High likelihood of use in a setting of
multiple co-medications.
• High likelihood for inappropriate use ,
e.g., analgesics and tranquilizers.
Dated: May 25, 1998.
William K. Hubbard,
Associate Commissioner for Policy
Coordination.
[FR Doc. 98–15408 Filed 6–9–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–F
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–4349–N–23]
Submission for OMB Review:
Comment Request
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Administration, HUD.
ACTION : Notice.
SUMMARY: The proposed information
collection requirement described below
has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act. The Department is
soliciting public comments on the
subject proposal.
DATES: Comments due date: July 10,
1998.
ADDRESSES : Interested persons are
invited to submit comments regarding
this proposal. Comments must be
received within thirty (30) days from the
date of this Notice. Comments should
refer to the proposal by name and/or
OMB approval number and should be
sent to: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., OMB Desk
Officer, Office of Management and
Budget, Room 10235, New Executive
Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wayne Eddins, Reports Management
Officer, Department of Housing and
Urban Development, 451 7th Street,
Southwest, Washington, DC 20410,
telephone (202) 708–1305. This is not a
toll-free number. Copies of the proposed
forms and other available documents
submitted to OMB may be obtained
from Mr. Eddins.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department has submitted the proposal
for the collection of information, as
described below, to OMB for review, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
The Notice lists the following
information: (1) The title of the
information collection proposal; (2) the
office of the agency to collect the
information; (3) the OMB approval
number, if applicable; (4) the
description of the need for the
information and its proposed use; (5)
the agency form number, if applicable;
(6) what members of the public will be
affected by the proposal; (7) how
frequently information submissions will
be required; (8) an estimate of the total
number of hours needed to prepare the
information submission including
number of respondents, frequency of
response, and hours of response; (9)
whether the proposal is new, an
extension, reinstatement, or revision of
an information collection requirement;
and (10) the names and telephone
numbers of an agency official familiar
with the proposal and of the OMB Desk
Officer for the Department.
Authority: Sec. 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as
amended.
Dated: June 4, 1998.
David S. Cristy,
Director, IRM Policy and Management
Division.
Title of Proposal: Public and Indian
Housing: Demolition/Disposition/
Conversion/Taking of Units or Property.
Office: Public and Indian Housing.
OMB Approval Number: 2577–0075.
Description of The Need For The
Information and Its Proposed Use: The
purpose of the Housing Authorities
request is to seek HUD approval of a
change in a public housing development
application from what was originally
authorized under the Annual
Contributions Contract.
Form Number: 52860.
Respondents: State, Local, or Tribal
Governments.
Frequency of Submission:
Recordkeeping and Annually.
Reporting Burden:
Number of
respondents 	× 	Frequency of
response 	× 	Hours per
response 	= 	Burden hours
Application .................................................................................. 	120 	1 	16 	1920
Recordkeeping ........................................................................... 	120 	1 	1 	120
Total Estimated Burden Hours: 2,040.
Status: Reinstatement, with no
changes.
Contact: Virginia Mathis, HUD, (202)
708–1640; Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., OMB,
(202) 395–7316.
Dated: June 4, 1998.
[FR Doc. 98–15478 Filed 6–9–98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–01–M
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–4181–N–06]
Public and Indian Housing Drug
Elimination Program Announcement of
Funding Awards for FY 1997
AGENCY : Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Public and Indian
Housing, HUD.
ACTION: Announcement of funding
awards.
SUMMARY : In accordance with section
102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development
Reform Act of 1989, this announcement
notifies the public of funding decisions
made by the department in competition
for funding under the Notice of Funding
Availability (NOFA) for the Public and
Indian Housing Drug Elimination