National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$59.95
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety (2005)
Institute of Medicine (IOM)

Citation Manager

. "3 The Framework." Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
91
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Dietary Supplements: A Framework for Evaluating Safety

information obtained into a monitoring database for future use if new data regarding the ingredient become available.

Maintaining a database of specific issues to monitor would allow FDA staff familiar with the criteria outlined in Chapters 4 through 8 to systematically look for information that may address the data gaps. Similarly, data collected should be saved in case a decision is made to move to an integrative evaluation. If a decision is made to conduct an integrative evaluation, but a monograph is not subsequently prepared, then information and a summary of the thought processes involved in the integrative evaluation should be noted and filed for future consideration. Making data gaps and unanswered questions available to other interested parties such as the National Toxicology Program of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) or the Office of Dietary Supplements, both part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Department of Health and Human Services, would allow them to incorporate these data needs on specific dietary supplement ingredients into their programs of work.

In summary, once the initial level of concern based on the initial review of the signal is determined, FDA might decide that continued routine monitoring is needed, or it could decide to proceed with an integrative evaluation. This depends on the level of concern raised by the signal: ingredients provoking higher concern should proceed to the integrative evaluation; ingredients resulting in lower levels of concern would generally not proceed; and ingredients with moderate concerns might proceed after considering additional information not necessarily related to the initial signal, such as prevalence of use or concern related to a specific vulnerable population group. Since it is assumed by the DSHEA that dietary supplements are safe, there should be relatively few dietary supplement ingredients that will be categorized as of higher concern after the initial review and thus warrant further examination. This allows FDA to focus its efforts on dietary supplement ingredients that are strong candidates for regulation.

Integrative Evaluation

The third component of the Framework is to conduct an integrative evaluation for those dietary supplement ingredients that are deemed to warrant further investigation, based on the preliminary data reviewed in the second component and the resulting relative placement on the spectra of concern continuums. There are four aspects to the Integrative Evaluation component (see Figure 3-1): in-depth literature search and review, drafting a safety monograph based on this information, integrating the available data into an analysis to complete the monograph, and possibly referring the draft monograph and accompanying information to an expert committee for additional input prior to determining whether to take regulatory action.

Page
91
Front Matter (R1-R20)
Executive Summary (1-18)
1 Introduction and Background (19-42)
2 Approaches Used by Others and Existing Safety Frameworks (43-84)
3 The Framework (85-125)
4 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Human Information and Data (126-155)
5 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Animal Data (156-174)
6 Categories of Scientific Evidence--Information About Related Substances (175-216)
7 Categories of Scientific Evidence--In Vitro Data (217-234)
8 Interactions (235-246)
9 Vulnerable Groups and Prevalance of Use (247-252)
10 Scientific Principles for Integrating and Evaluating the Available Data (253-268)
11 Applying the Framework: Case Studies Using the Prototype Safety Monographs (269-291)
12 Factors Influencing Use of the Safety Framework (292-296)
13 Findings and Recommendations (297-306)
Appendix A: Existing Frameworks or Systems for Evaluating the Safety of Other Substances (307-315)
Appendix B: Scope of Work and Comments to Initial July 2002 Framework (316-321)
Appendix C: Plant Family Information (322-355)
Appendix D: Chaparral: Prototype Monograph Summary (356-362)
Appendix E: Glucosamine: Prototype Monograph Summary (363-366)
Appendix F: Melatonin: Prototype Monograph Summary (367-371)
Appendix G: Chromium Picolinate: Prototype Monograph Summary (372-375)
Appendix H: Saw Palmetto: Prototype Monograph Summary (376-379)
Appendix I: Shark Cartilage: Prototype Monograph Summary (380-384)
Appendix J: Prototype Focused Monograph: Review of Liver-Related Risks for Chaparral (385-449)
Appendix K: Protoype Focused Monograph: Review of Anti-Androgenic Risks of Saw Palmetto Ingestion by Women (450-477)
Appendix L: Acknowledgements (478-480)
Appendix M: Biographical Sketches of Commitee Members (481-488)
Index (489-506)