Saturday, August 31, 2013

Specialty Compounding's Response to Attorney's Claims Posted: Aug 30, 2013 5:18 PM Updated: Aug 30, 2013 5:21 PM


CORPUS CHRISTI - The compounding company at the center of the alleged tainted IVs investigation issued a response to attorney Thomas J. Henry's claims.
Specialty Compounding says testing by the pharmacy's independent lab and by federal and state agencies on samples of their calcium gluconate infusion product has not yet proven an association between Specialty Compounding's medication and the affected patients.
The company statement goes on to say that its top priority is patient safety and ensuring all recalled products are promptly returned to the pharmacy.
On Tuesday, Henry issued a statement saying he's investigating 10 deaths of patients who may have been exposed to the recalled medication.
The FDA had recalled the medications from the firm after reports that patients being treated at Corpus Christi area hospitals developed bacterial infections.

quoted from here

Pharmalot Blog--Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield ends coverage for compounded medications as of November 1


Compounding Problems: Anthem Restricts Coverage Of Some Compounded Meds

More fallout from the compounding controversy. Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield, one of the nation's largest insurers, has decided to end reimbursement of certain compounded medications as of November 1. Specifically, the insurer will not pay for compounded bulk powders or pharmaceutical adjuvants that are not approved by the FDA, according to a mailing that were sent to beneficiaries.
It is not clear if the policy applies across the board to both retail pharmacies and hospitals or whether Anthem has established a waiver policy for beneficiaries to appeal a reimbursement decision. We asked Anthem for comment and willl update you accordingly. A copy of the newsletter was obtained by Pharmalot.
The Anthem newsletter says that: "Due to the recent enhancement of the HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) standard for electronic submission of prescription drug claims, we now have the ability to better administer our drug benefits, as they pertain to compounded drugs. During a recent review, we learned that claims for certain compounded drugs have been submitted and paid as a prescription drug benefit.  For a compound drug to be covered it must contain at least one ingredient/drug that requires a prescription to obtain. Additionally, that ingredient/drug must also be approved by the Food and Drug Administration."

continue to read here

Second Question of the Day August 30, 2013 If IACP's claim is that the FDA only has jurisdiction to inspect compounders acting like manufacturers, then isn't the FDA applying the correct standards when it inspects "compounders acting like manufacturers" by applying cGMPs?

Alternatively, if states and not the FDA have the authority to inspect traditional compounders, as the IACP argues, then why would the FDA inspect "compounders acting as manufacturers"  and apply standards such as 797?  Again, it seems like IACP's argument is illogical.  

IACP Claims Another FDA Salvo Against Compounding?


Last week, the Food and Drug Administration issued a national statement  advising pharmacies of concerns about the adequacy of testing performed by Front Range Laboratories, Inc., located in Loveland, Colo., a testing laboratory used by more than 100 pharmacies in 32 states, to verify quality, sterility, and expiration dating.  According to the agency, FDA investigators observed that methods used by Front Range to assess sterility and other qualities (e.g., strength and stability) may have resulted in pharmacies receiving inaccurate laboratory test results.

Additionally, the FDA recommended that pharmacies not use this firm for sterility and other quality attributes at this time. Since that announcement, the agency has contacted many compounding pharmacies specifically requesting a recall of sterile medications tested by Front Range. Several IACP members have conducted additional in-house testing on their lots -- all showing and confirming that the Front Range results were aligned with their own.

In a statement to its clients, Front Range Laboratories stated: "We are not in the business of manufacturing and do not conduct business with entities that manufacture finished drug products. We are not aware of a single client registered with the FDA as a drug manufacturer. Yet, during this recent inspection, our operations were inspected against the FDA's Current Good Manufacturing Practice (or cGMP) regulations which, by definition, do not legally apply to compounding pharmacies unless they are acting as manufacturers."
 
Front Range adds that:  "For over 10 years of operation, Front Range Laboratories has relied on state law (boards of pharmacy) and United States Pharmacopeia (USP) guidance when performing all of our testing. Specifically, the methods we use to assess sterility and other quality attribute testing are put forth by USP. Patient safety is an ongoing and primary concern within our industry, and Front Range Laboratories has always been extremely diligent in adhering to applicable guidelines as put forth by the organizations that govern the compounding pharmacy community. Our exceptional safety record is proof positive of our actions."
 
Once again, the FDA is applying a different rulebook to inspections, this time to laboratories that specifically service compounding pharmacies. Rather than inspecting pharmacies to USP standards, as required by many state laws and pharmacy practice acts, the FDA has issued inspection reports citing pharmacies' violations of cGMPs. Now the laboratories are being held accountable to cGMP standards. Front Range is not the first testing lab to have been inspected in the past few months.  And shortly, final regulations will be put in place to further enable the agency to halt the importation of APIs including those which are not components of FDA approved drugs.
 
To date, there has been no evidence whatsoever that a compounded preparation tested by Front Range failed to meet USP standards nor have any medications been deemed sterile that have in actuality found to be non-sterile. IACP members should continue to use the laboratory of their choice and raise any concerns about previous or ongoing inspections of those labs with the operators. 

quoted from here