The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published its completed guidance on the creation of cannabis-based medicines, defining the procedure and special factors that should be taken into account by researchers when working with hemp and marijuana. A notice titled “Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Compounds: Quality Considerations for Clinical Research” that will appear in the Federal Register on Tuesday issued the recommendations.
In the year 2020, the White House reviewed a document that the agency had previously released. The 2018 Farm Bill’s federal legalization of hemp, which changes the drug development methodology for that kind of cannabis plant from marijuana, which is still classified as a Schedule I substance, is one of the factors contributing to the guidance (CSA).
The source of cannabis for clinical research is one of several issues that are relevant to the development of cannabis and cannabis-derived human medicines, according to FDA advice. The purpose of this guidance is to facilitate clinical research for the creation of human cannabis and cannabis-derived therapeutic products.
For researchers interested in creating cannabis-based medicines that could be sold, the FDA issued a number of non-binding guidelines. The recommendations “aim to address the legal definitions and regulatory restrictions connected to cannabis, as well as to address specific questions raised about medications containing cannabis,” according to the advice.
Since the publication of the draft version, the advice has been updated. Clarity is added on, for instance, cannabis sources that are permitted by the federal government for use in drug development. Cannabis that fulfills the federal classification of hemp and has less than 0.3 percent THC by dry weight is typically not classified as a controlled substance like marijuana, which is still regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
So, there is more latitude when it comes to locating hemp than is permitted by the federal government. As long as they are “deemed to be of appropriate quality by FDA,” such goods don’t necessarily have to originate from one of the few marijuana providers with whom the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) has contracted.
Today, FDA issued a final guidance which provides the agency’s current thinking on several topics relevant to clinical research related to the development of drugs containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds: https://t.co/wCsVRpi8J6 pic.twitter.com/F2UgQXY9uO
— FDA Drug Information (@FDA_Drug_Info) January 23, 2023
The organization notes that for “many years,” scientists were only able to obtain marijuana from the University of Mississippi’s NIDA-approved farm. As more manufacturers have now been accepted by the DEA, researchers now have “new sourcing options” for their cannabis-related research. The guidelines also include a new section on calculating THC to distinguish hemp from marijuana.
However, it also suggests that researchers “calculate the delta-9 THC content in their proposed cannabis or cannabis-derived investigational drug product early in the development process to gain insight into their product’s potential abuse liability and control status.” The FDA largely defers to the DEA on this matter.
However, FDA warned that “even if the starting materials meet the definition of hemp, intermediates or drug products that contain greater than 0.3 percent delta-9 THC by dry weight may no longer meet the definition of hemp and may be considered Schedule I controlled substances.” Early analysis may prove “useful,” the agency said.
Farmers and scientists have raised this issue and urged for more latitude for the overall THC concentration because even environmental factors can impact THC levels and perhaps cause a lawful crop to cross the line into the realm of restricted substances. Other manufacturing procedures, like extraction, may unintentionally affect the final THC concentration.
Overall, the purpose of FDA’s guidelines is to explain how investigational new medications work and to guide people through its approval processes. It covers fundamental criteria for clinical investigations, the distinction between combustible drug products and oral preparations, storage needs for researchers, and more.
Advocates, legislators, and other interested parties are still waiting to see what steps if any, the FDA will take to permit the marketing of hemp-based goods like CBD oil in the food supply or as dietary supplements. The head of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, Rep. James Comer (R-KY), has declared his intention to criticize FDA officials for their failure to pass laws allowing for such marketing.
The FDA has maintained that extra legislative work may be necessary before it is ready to adopt such guidelines, but late last year, top agency officials stated that they are months away from releasing a regulatory review on the subject. Officials from the FDA have stated that they are evaluating a few issues, including whether CBD can be taken safely over the long term and what effects it might have on a developing fetus.
Making rules has become more challenging due to the growing popularity of delta-8 THC products, which the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) claims are not controlled narcotics. FDA recently bragged about how it assisted a state agency in taking action against a business selling delta-8 THC candies they claimed were connected to “severe adverse effects.”
Five businesses that offer CBD-containing goods and beverages received letters of warning from the government in November. The agency didn’t explain why it chose to focus on those five businesses over the many others that sell products containing cannabidiol, but it claimed that they do so because they market items that “people may mistake for traditional foods or beverages.
which may result in unintentional consumption or overconsumption of CBD.” In September, Reps. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Brett Guthrie (R-KY) wrote to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf to ask him why there are still no regulations governing CBD for those uses. In August, Griffith and other lawmakers from both parties sent the FDA commissioner a separate, connected letter.
They voiced dissatisfaction over the agency’s “totally inadequate reaction” to their measure, which demanded that CBD derived from hemp be authorized and controlled as a food ingredient. The sponsors of the CBD Product Safety and Standardization Act requested technical help from FDA to provide guidance on important elements when the legislation was filed in December 2021.
The FDA, however, only produced a “one-page” response, which the congressmen claimed was “just a reformatting of a document sent to Congress more than two years earlier,” four months after they sent the query. The FDA’s Califf acknowledged that the agency had moved slowly with the rulemaking for CBD in the food supply at a hearing of the House Appropriations subcommittee in May, saying that the situation “looks pretty much the same in terms of where we are now” as opposed to when he first worked on the issue in 2016.
In order to inform future regulations, he claimed that the FDA has taken steps to investigate the safety profile of cannabinoids. However, he deflected criticism of the agency’s inaction to Congress, claiming that he doesn’t believe “the current authorities we have on the food side or the drug side necessarily give us what we need to have to get the right pathways forward.”
We’ll need to devise a brand-new solution, Califf added. “I’m determined to accomplish that.” All of this is taking place as the FDA works on a significant project: a scientific investigation into marijuana, under President Joe Biden’s direction, to support a determination of its federal scheduling. Although the FDA’s proposal won’t be legally binding, officials say they anticipate the DEA to issue a scheduling recommendation that is consistent with their research on the drug’s advantages and disadvantages.
