Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on new steps to advance agency’s continued evaluation of potential regulatory pathways for cannabis-containing and cannabis-derived products
In recent years, we’ve seen a growing interest in the development of therapies and other FDA-regulated consumer products derived from cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) and its components, including cannabidiol (CBD). This interest spans the range of product categories that the agency regulates. For example, we’ve seen, or heard of interest in, products containing cannabis or cannabis derivatives that are marketed as human drugs, dietary supplements, conventional foods, animal foods and drugs, and cosmetics, among other things. We also recognize that stakeholders are looking to the FDA for clarity on how our authorities apply to such products, what pathways are available to market such products lawfully under these authorities, and how the FDA is carrying out its responsibility to protect public health and safety with respect to such products.
Interest in these products increased last December when Congress passed the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill). Among other things, this law established a new category of cannabis classified as “hemp” – defined as cannabis and cannabis derivatives with extremely low (no more than 0.3 percent on a dry weight basis) concentrations of the psychoactive compound delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The 2018 Farm Bill removed hemp from the Controlled Substances Act, which means that it is no longer a controlled substance under federal law.
At the same time, Congress explicitly preserved the FDA’s current authority to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act. In doing so, Congress recognized the agency’s important public health role with respect to all the products it regulates. This allows the FDA to continue enforcing the law to protect patients and the public while also providing potential regulatory pathways, to the extent permitted by law, for products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds.
When the 2018 Farm Bill became law, I issued a statement explaining the FDA’s current approach to these products and our intended next steps. Consistent with the approach and commitments described in that statement, today the FDA is announcing a number of important new steps and actions to advance our consideration of a framework for the lawful marketing of appropriate cannabis and cannabis-derived products under our existing authorities. These new steps include:
- A public hearing on May 31, as well as a broader opportunity for written public comment, for stakeholders to share their experiences and challenges with these products, including information and views related to product safety.
- The formation of a high-level internal agency working group to explore potential pathways for dietary supplements and/or conventional foods containing CBD to be lawfully marketed; including a consideration of what statutory or regulatory changes might be needed and what the impact of such marketing would be on the public health.
- Updates to our webpage with answers to frequently asked questions on this topic to help members of the public understand how the FDA’s requirements apply to these products.
- The issuance of multiple warning letters to companies marketing CBD products with egregious and unfounded claims that are aimed at vulnerable populations.
The public hearing will give stakeholders an opportunity to provide the FDA with additional input relevant to the agency’s regulatory strategy related to existing products, as well as the lawful pathways by which appropriate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds can be marketed, and how we can make these legal pathways more predictable and efficient. We hope to gain additional information and data for the FDA to consider with respect to products containing cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds, including CBD.
As we’ve stated before, we treat products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds as we do any other FDA-regulated products. Among other things, the FDA requires a cannabis product (hemp-derived or otherwise) that’s marketed with a claim of therapeutic benefit to be approved by the FDA for its intended use before it may be introduced into interstate commerce. Additionally, it is unlawful to introduce food containing added CBD, or the psychoactive compound THC, into interstate commerce, or to market CBD or THC products as dietary supplements. This is because CBD and THC are active ingredients in FDA-approved drug products and were the subject of substantial clinical investigations before they were marketed as food. In such situations, with certain exceptions that are not applicable here, the only path that the FD&C Act allows for such substances to be added to foods or marketed as dietary supplements is if the FDA first issues a regulation, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, allowing such use.
While the availability of CBD products in particular has increased dramatically in recent years, open questions remain regarding the safety considerations raised by their widespread use. For example, during its review of the marketing application for Epidiolex – a purified form of CBD that the FDA approved in 2018 for use in the treatment of certain seizure disorders – the FDA identified certain safety risks, including the potential for liver injury. These are serious risks that can be managed when the product is taken under medical supervision in accordance with the FDA-approved labeling for the product, but it is less clear how this risk might be managed in a setting where this drug substance is used far more widely, without medical supervision and not in accordance with FDA-approved labeling. There are also unresolved questions regarding the cumulative exposure to CBD if people access it across a broad range of consumer products, as well as questions regarding the intended functionality of CBD in such products. Additionally, there are open questions about whether some threshold level of CBD could be allowed in foods without undermining the drug approval process or diminishing commercial incentives for further clinical study of the relevant drug substance.
It’s critical that we address these unanswered questions about CBD and other cannabis and cannabis-derived products to help inform the FDA’s regulatory oversight of these products – especially as the agency considers whether it could be appropriate to exercise its authority to allow the use of CBD in dietary supplements and other foods. As I stated in December, the FDA would only consider this path if the agency were able to determine that all other requirements in the FD&C Act are met, including those required for food additives or new dietary ingredients.
As part of the public hearing and related public comment period, the agency is interested in whether there are particular safety concerns that we should be aware of as we consider the FDA’s regulatory oversight and monitoring of these products. For example, we’re seeking comments, data and information on a variety of topics including: what levels of cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds cause safety concerns; how the mode of delivery (e.g., ingestion, absorption, inhalation) affects the safety of, and exposure to, these compounds; how cannabis and cannabis-derived compounds interact with other substances such as drug ingredients; and other questions outlined in the hearing announcement.
Additionally, we’re interested in how the incentives for, and the feasibility of, drug development with CBD and other cannabis-derived compounds would be affected if the commercial availability of products with these compounds, such as foods and dietary supplements, were to become significantly more widespread. We don’t want companies to forgo research that might support approval through the FDA’s drug review process, which could potentially lead to important safe and effective therapies. We also don’t want patients to forgo appropriate medical treatment by substituting unapproved products for approved medicines used to prevent, treat, mitigate or cure a particular disease or condition. For example, in the case of Epidiolex, the adequate and well-controlled clinical studies that supported its approval, and the assurance of manufacturing quality standards, can provide prescribers confidence in the drug’s uniform strength and consistent delivery that support appropriate dosing needed for treating patients with these complex and serious epilepsy syndromes. It’s important that we continue to assess whether there could be medical ramifications if patients choose to take CBD to treat certain diseases at levels higher or lower than studied in well-controlled clinical studies.