CFSAN/Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling and Dietary Supplements
November 4, 2004
Table of Contents
- General
- Why is FDA issuing this draft guidance?
- How does FDA define "adequate substantiation?"
- What constitutes "competent and reliable scientific evidence?"
- Are manufacturers required to adhere to this guidance document?
- The
Meaning of the Claim
- Why is it important to understand the meaning of a claim?
- What if there are a number of ways a claim can be interpreted?
- The
Relationship of the Evidence to the Claim
- How will FDA evaluate the relationship between the claim and a dietary
supplement product?
- Will FDA accept research from foreign sources?
- The
Quality of the Evidence
- How will FDA evaluate the quality of the evidence submitted?
- What kind of studies does FDA consider the best?
- What are the types of evidence that may substantiate a claim?
- What is the difference between an intervention study and an
observational study?
- What types of information are useful as background to support a claim?
- What design factors affect the quality of a study?
- Totality of the
Evidence
- What kind of data should firms consider in evaluating the evidence to
support a claim?
General
Q: Why is FDA issuing this draft guidance?
A: The Act requires dietary supplement manufacturers to have substantiation
that structure/function, nutrient deficiency, and general well-being claims on
the label of a dietary supplement product are truthful and not misleading under
section 403 (r)(6) of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).
The draft guidance is intended to describe the amount, type, and quality of
evidence FDA recommends a manufacturer have to substantiate a claim under
section 403 (r)(6) of the Act.
Q: How does FDA define "adequate substantiation?"
A: The act does not define what constitutes "substantiation." For this
draft guidance, FDA reviewed regulations, case law, the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC) experience with its policy on substantiating claims made for dietary
supplements in advertising, as well as recommendations from the Commission on
Dietary Supplement Labels.
FTC has typically applied a substantiation standard of "competent and
reliable scientific evidence" when it applies its policy on substantiating
claims made for dietary supplements in advertising. FDA intends to
apply a standard consistent with FTC's approach.
Q: What constitutes "competent and reliable scientific evidence?"
A: FDA considers the following factors important in determining whether
information would constitute "competent and reliable scientific evidence":
- Does each study or piece of evidence bear a relationship to the specific
claim(s)?
- What are the individual studies or evidence's strengths and weaknesses?
- If multiple studies exist, do the studies that have the most reliable
methodologies suggest a particular outcome?
- If multiple studies exist, what do most studies suggest or find?
Does the totality of the evidence agree with the claim(s)?
Q: Are manufacturers required to adhere to this draft guidance
document?
A: FDA guidance documents do not establish legally enforceable
responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe FDA's current thinking on a topic
and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or
statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word "should" in FDA guidances
means that something is suggested or recommended, but not
required.
The Meaning of the Claim
Q: Why is it important to understand the meaning of a claim?
A: The first step in determining what information is needed to substantiate a
claim for a dietary supplement is to understand the meaning of the claim and
clearly identify each implied and express claim. Understanding the claim's
meaning will help identify the appropriate study hypotheses and measureable
endpoints, which can be used to ensure that the firm has appropriate studies to
substantiate the claim.
Q: What if there are a number of ways a claim can be interpreted?
A: When a claim may have more than one reasonable interpretation, FDA
recommends that a firm have substantiation for each interpretation.
Consumer testing may be useful to determine consumer understanding of each
claim, in context. FDA recommends that firms not focus on individual
statements or phrases, but rather on what expected effect or benefit is being
promoted when all of the statements being made for the product are considered
together. Although it is important that individual statements be
substantiated, it is equally important to substantiate the overall "message"
contained when the claims are considered together.
The Relationship of the Evidence to the Claim
Q: How will FDA evaluate the relationship between the claim and a dietary
supplement product?
A: Whether studies or evidence have a relationship to the specific claim
being made or to the dietary supplement product itself is an important
consideration in determining if a claim is substantiated. The following
are some threshold questions in determining this relationship:
- Have the studies specified and measured the dietary supplement or dietary
ingredient that is the subject of the claim?
- Have the studies appropriately specified and measured the nutritional
deficiency, structure/function, or general well-being that is the subject of
the claim?
- Were the studies based on a population that is similar to that which will
be consuming the dietary supplement product?
Q: Will FDA accept research from foreign sources?
A: Foreign research could be sufficient to substantiate a claim as long as
the design and implementation of the foreign research are scientifically sound
and the foreign research pertains to the dietary supplement or ingredient at
issue. However, firms should note that in evaluating data from studies
conducted in a foreign population, care should be taken in extending the results
to what might be expected in consumers in the United States who will use the
product.
Differences between the two populations, such as differences in diets,
general health, patterns of use, among other things, could confound the
results. Also, it is important to make sure that the study examined the
same dietary ingredient about which the claim is being made since there may be
instances where, due to provincial or regional differences in custom, language,
or dialect, the same name is given to different substances or different names to
the same substance.
The Quality of the Evidence
Q: How will FDA evaluate the quality of the evidence submitted?
A: In deciding whether human studies substantiate a claim, an important
consideration is the scientific quality of studies. Scientific quality is
based on several criteria including study type, study population, study design
and conduct (e.g., presence of a placebo control), data collection (e.g.,
dietary assessment method), statistical analysis, and outcome measures. If the
scientific study adequately addressed all or most of the above criteria, it
would be considered of high quality. Generally accepted scientific and
statistical principles should be used to determine the quality of the studies
used as evidence to substantiate a claim.
Q: What kind of studies does FDA consider the best?
A: The "gold" standard is randomized, double blind, parallel group, placebo
controlled trial design. However, trials of this type may not always be
possible, practical, or ethical. Since there are several systems available
to rate scientific information, firms are encouraged to refer to these systems
when developing substantiation for claims or relying on existing
information.
Q: What are the types of evidence that may substantiate a claim?
A: Competent and reliable scientific evidence adequate to substantiate
a claim would generally consist of information derived primarily from human
studies. Human studies can be divided into two types: intervention studies
and observational studies.
Q: What is the difference between an intervention study and an
observational study?
A: In intervention studies, an investigator controls whether the subjects
receive the treatment or intervention of interest. Intervention studies
provide the most persuasive form of evidence to substantiate the effect of a
dietary supplement in humans because they evaluate the product's direct effect
in the human body. Although interventional studies are the most reliable
studies for determining a cause-and-effect relationship, generalizing from
evidence on selected populations is cautioned.
In observational studies, the investigator does not have control over the
exposure to the treatment or intervention of interest. Observational studies
have a more limited ability than intervention studies to distinguish
relationships between a substance and the outcomes being evaluated.
Q: What types of information are useful as background to support a
claim?
A: The following additional types of information would generally be
considered background information, but alone may not be adequate to substantiate
a claim.
- animal studies;
- in vitro studies (studies that are done outside a living body);
- testimonials and other anecdotal evidence;
- meta-analysis (the process of systematically combining and evaluating the
results of clinical trials that have been completed or terminated)
- review articles;
- comments and Letters to the Editor; or
- product monographs (documents prepared by the manufacturer to convey
specific information about a product such as its specifications).
Q: What design factors affect the quality of a study?
A: There are multiple factors that should be considered in a study design
including, but not limited to:
- bias and confounders;
- study design;
- assessment of intervention or exposure and outcomes;
- data analysis and assessment; and
- peer review.
Totality of the Evidence
Q: What kind of data should firms consider when evaluating the evidence to
support a claim?
A: In determining whether there is adequate evidence to substantiate a claim,
firms should consider the strength of the entire body of evidence, including
criteria such as quality, quantity (number of various types of studies and
sample sizes), consistency, relevance of exposure, and persuasiveness.
Ideally, the evidence used to substantiate a claim agrees with the
surrounding body of evidence. Conflicting or inconsistent results raise
serious questions as to whether a particular claim is substantiated.
There is no general rule for how many studies, or what combination of types
of evidence, is sufficient to support a claim. However, the replication of
research results in independently conducted studies adds to the persuasiveness
of the evidence.
Although the quality and persuasiveness of individual pieces of evidence are
important, each piece should be considered in the context of all available
information; that is, the strength of the total body of scientific evidence is
the critical factor in assessing whether a claim is substantiated.
Main Page | About Grimes & Reese | Practice Areas | MLM Law Clients | MLM Articles
MLM Law Library | What Our Clients Say | What's New | Search MLM Law | Site Map