OTC "HAIR GROWTH" AND "HAIR LOSS PREVENTION" CLAIMS MUST BE REMOVED

OTC "HAIR GROWTH" AND "HAIR LOSS PREVENTION" CLAIMS MUST BE REMOVED from product labeling by Jan. 8, 1990, following publication of the final monograph for OTC hair growth products in the July 7 Federal Register. The final rule establishes that "any OTC hair grower or hair loss prevention drug product for external use is not generally recognized as safe and effective and is misbranded." Like the tentative final monograph published on Jan. 15, 1985, the final rule found no OTC ingredient to be effective against hair loss. * A same day FDA Talk Paper states that the regulation targets products "usually sold by mail or through barbers or beauticians." The rule does not apply to cosmetics and toiletries that make general hair health claims such as "thickens hair" or "nourishes hair." Consequently, "shampoos and scalp cleaners used to cleanse the hair (and not labeled with any claims relating to hair loss prevention or hair growth) are cosmetics and are not covered by this rulemaking proceeding," the agency noted. Although the agency stated in its tentative final monograph fours years ago that OTC antibaldness treatments were not considered to be safe and effective, continued marketing of the products has attracted the attention of both Congress and the Federal Trade Commission. Such marketing triggered expressions of concern by Rep. Dingell (D-Mich.) last year over delays in the OTC Drug Review process ("The Pink Sheet" July 11, 1988, p. 6). Two antibaldness products, Pantron I's Helsinki Formula and California Pacific Research's New Generation were the subject of FTC actions for misrepresentation ("The Pink Sheet" Nov. 28, T&G-10). Publication of the final rule on hair loss prevention products also has been sought by Upjohn to prevent ineffective products from piggybacking on its Rogaine (minoxidil) launch. In a same-day release, Upjohn announced that it "will extend its hair loss information campaign to hair salons and barbershops in Chicago and, over the next two weeks, to three other U.S. cities: Atlanta, New York and Los Angeles." The FDA Talk Paper mentions minoxidil as the only approved product for stimulating hair growth in the treatment of male pattern baldness. Active ingredients cited as safe but not generally recognized as effective by the agency are ascorbic acid, benzoic acid, estradiol (not to exceed 5.5 micrograms per day), lanolin, tetracaine hydrochloride, and wheat germ oil. Other hair grower and hair loss prevention product ingredients which are considered neither safe nor effective and are banned from such claims by the regulation are amino acids, aminobenzoic acid biotin, B-vitamins, dexpanthenol, topical hormones, jojoba oil, nucleic acids, polysorbate 20 and 60, sulfanilamide, sulfer 1% on carbon in a fraction of paraffinic hydrocarbons, and urea. FDA said it received comments from four manufacturers and 218 consumers on the proposed rule. One manufacturer's comments included two studies, one double-blind, on its product which contains estradiol as the active ingredient. The estradiol product was considered at length by FDA in the final rule. Although "there was a slight indication in the [double-blind] study that estradiol, with the cleansing agents, could be more helpful," the agency concluded that "the statistical significance of estradiol over placebo has not been demonstrated." Although the final rule covers only external products, FDA emphasized that "orally ingested products [including vitamins and food supplements] marketed for the same or similar hair grower or hair loss prevention indications are also subject to regulatory action." Oral products making such claims, since they are not covered by OTC rulemaking, "will be handled on a case-by-case basis," the agency said.

Read the full article – start your free trial today!

Join thousands of industry professionals who rely on Pink Sheet for daily insights

  • Start your 7-day free trial
  • Explore trusted news, analysis, and insights
  • Access comprehensive global coverage
  • Enjoy instant access – no credit card required

More from Archive

Ocaliva: Still No Clarity On Why EU Court Opposed Revocation Of Approval

 

Advanz Pharma would have had to show that the European Commission’s decision to revoke Ocaliva’s conditional marketing approval risked causing serious and irreparable harm, according to lawyers from Van Bael & Bellis.

Final Chance To Have Your Say: Take Our Reader Survey This Week

 
• By 

This is your final call to participate in the survey to better understand our subscribers’ content and delivery needs. The deadline is 20 September.

Shape Our Content: Take The Reader Survey

 
• By 

We are conducting a survey to better understand our subscribers’ content and delivery needs. If there are any changes you’d like to see in coverage topics, article format, or the method in which you access the Pink Sheet – or if you love it how it is – now is the time to have your voice heard.

Brazil Pilots Digital Drug Pack Inserts

 

A new pilot aims to take Brazil closer to ‘digital transformation.’

More from Pink Sheet

‘Prices Can Remain Contaminated Indefinitely’: Advanz Brushed Aside On UK Liothyronine Appeal

 
• By 

England’s Court of Appeal has upheld a Competition Appeal Tribunal’s 2023 finding that Advanz and its former owner Cinven abused their dominant position in the UK market for liothyronine tablets by charging prices that were many orders of magnitude higher than the benchmark for fair pricing.

New EU Filings

 

Linerixibat, GSK's treatment for cholestatic pruritus in patients with primary biliary cholangitis, is among the latest products that have been filed for review by the European Medicines Agency for potential EU marketing approval.

Podium Policy Returns To US FDA, Or Is It Podcast Policy?

 

US FDA critics have long decried the practice of using informal communications to convey regulatory expectations as podium policy. In the Makary era, the phrase may need to be updated because the agency now seems to be specializing in policy by podcast.