Memorandum of Understanding Addressing Certain Distributions of Compounded Human Drug Products Between the States and the Food and Drug Administration; New Proposed Draft; Availability, 8874-8881 [2015-03420]
Download as PDF
8874
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN 1
Type of recordkeeping
Number of
recordkeepers
Number of
records per
recordkeeper
Total annual
records
Average burden per recordkeeping
(hours)
Total hours
Records of adverse events, including records of efforts to
obtain the data elements for each adverse event report
50
1
50
16
800
1 There
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
III. Comments
Interested persons may submit either
electronic comments regarding this
document to https://www.regulations.gov
or written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It
is only necessary to send one set of
comments. Identify comments with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments can be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
IV. Electronic Access
Persons with access to the Internet
may obtain the document at either
https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/Guidance
ComplianceRegulatoryInformation/
Guidances/default.htm or https://
www.regulations.gov.
Dated: February 11, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–03419 Filed 2–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2014–N–1459]
Memorandum of Understanding
Addressing Certain Distributions of
Compounded Human Drug Products
Between the States and the Food and
Drug Administration; New Proposed
Draft; Availability
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notice of availability;
withdrawal.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing the availability for public
comment of a draft standard
memorandum of understanding (MOU)
entitled ‘‘Memorandum of
Understanding Addressing Certain
Distributions of Compounded Human
Drug Products Between the State of
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
[insert State] and the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration.’’ The draft
standard MOU describes the
responsibilities of the State that chooses
to sign the MOU in investigating and
responding to complaints related to
compounded human drug products
distributed outside the State and in
addressing the interstate distribution of
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products.
FDA is also announcing the
withdrawal of an earlier draft standard
MOU entitled ‘‘Memorandum of
Understanding on Interstate Distribution
of Compounded Drug Products,’’ which
was issued in January 1999. The January
1999 draft standard MOU is superseded
by the new draft standard MOU.
DATES: FDA is withdrawing its draft
standard MOU that published on
January 21, 1999 (64 FR 3301), as of
February 19, 2015. Submit either
electronic or written comments on the
new draft standard MOU by June 19,
2015. Submit comments on information
collection issues under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 by June 19, 2015
(see the ‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995’’ section of this document).
ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for
single copies of the MOU to Edisa
Gozun, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 51, Suite 5100, Silver
Spring, MD 20993–0002. Send one selfaddressed label to assist that office in
processing your request. See the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for
electronic access to the new draft
standard MOU.
Submit electronic comments on the
new draft standard MOU or on the
collection of information to https://
www.regulations.gov. Submit written
comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edisa Gozun, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 51, Suite 5100, Silver
Spring, MD 20993–0002, 301–796–3110.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
I. Background
Section 503A of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act)
(21 U.S.C. 353a) describes the
conditions that must be satisfied for
drug products compounded by a
licensed pharmacist or licensed
physician to be exempt from the
following sections of the FD&C Act: (1)
Section 501(a)(2)(B) (21 U.S.C.
351(a)(2)(B)) (concerning current good
manufacturing practice (CGMP)
requirements), (2) section 502(f)(1) (21
U.S.C. 352(f)(1)) (concerning the
labeling of drugs with adequate
directions for use), and (3) section 505
(21 U.S.C. 355) (concerning the approval
of drugs under new drug applications or
abbreviated new drug applications).
One of the conditions to qualify for
the exemptions listed in section 503A of
the FD&C Act is that (1) the drug
product is compounded in a State that
has entered into an MOU with FDA that
addresses the distribution of inordinate
amounts of compounded drug products
interstate and provides for appropriate
investigation by a State agency of
complaints relating to compounded
drug products distributed outside such
State; or (2) if the drug product is
compounded in a State that has not
entered into such an MOU, the licensed
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician
does not distribute, or cause to be
distributed, compounded drug products
out of the State in which they are
compounded in quantities that exceed 5
percent of the total prescription orders
dispensed or distributed by such
pharmacy or physician (see section
503A(b)(3)(B)(i) and (b)(3)(B)(ii) of the
FD&C Act).
Section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act
directs FDA to develop, in consultation
with the National Association of Boards
of Pharmacy (NABP), a standard MOU
for use by the States in complying with
section 503A(b)(3)(B)(i).
II. Previous Efforts To Develop a
Standard MOU
In the Federal Register of January 21,
1999 (64 FR 3301), FDA announced the
availability for public comment of a
draft standard MOU, developed in
consultation with NABP (1999 draft
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
standard MOU). Over 6,000 commenters
submitted comments on the 1999 draft
standard MOU. Because of litigation
over the constitutionality of the
advertising, promotion, and solicitation
provisions in section 503A,1 the draft
standard MOU was never completed. In
2013, section 503A of the FD&C Act was
amended by the Drug Quality and
Security Act (DQSA) (Pub. L. 113–54) to
remove the advertising, promotion, and
solicitation provisions that were held
unconstitutional, and FDA is
implementing section 503A, including
the provisions on the MOU. By this
notice, FDA is withdrawing the 1999
draft standard MOU, and the new draft
standard MOU made available today
supersedes that draft standard MOU.
III. New 503A Guidance
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Immediately after the enactment of
the DQSA, in December 2013, the
Agency published a draft guidance on
section 503A of the FD&C Act entitled
‘‘Pharmacy Compounding of Human
Drug Products Under Section 503A of
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act’’ (2013 draft 503A guidance) (see 78
FR 72901 (December 4, 2013)
announcing the availability of the draft
guidance). That draft guidance
described FDA’s proposed policy with
regard to specific provisions of section
503A of the FD&C Act that require
rulemaking or other action by FDA,
such as the MOU provisions. Thirty-one
commenters on the 2013 draft 503A
guidance offered FDA their views on the
MOU provisions of section 503A. FDA
considered these comments in
developing the new draft standard
MOU. The final 503A guidance,
published July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37742
announcing the availability of the final
503A guidance), states that FDA does
not intend to enforce the 5 percent limit
on distribution of compounded drug
products out of the State in which they
are compounded until after FDA has
finalized an MOU and made it available
to the States for their consideration and
signature. After considering any
comments on the new draft standard
MOU submitted to this docket, FDA
intends to finalize the standard MOU
and make it available for signature by
individual States. FDA will determine at
the time of publication of the final MOU
how long it will allow States to consider
1 The conditions of section 503A of the FD&C Act
originally included restrictions on the advertising
or promotion of the compounding of any particular
drug, class of drug, or type of drug and the
solicitation of prescriptions for compounded drugs.
These provisions were challenged in court and held
unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in
2002. See Thompson v. Western States Med. Ctr.,
535 U.S. 357 (2002).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
whether to sign the MOU before FDA
begins to enforce the 5 percent limit in
those States that have not signed an
MOU.
IV. New Draft Standard MOU
FDA has now developed a new draft
standard MOU on which it is soliciting
public comment. FDA has consulted
with NABP in developing this new draft
standard MOU. FDA also considered the
comments submitted in 1999 on the
previous draft standard MOU, as well as
comments on the MOU provisions it
received in connection with the
published 2013 draft 503A guidance.
Key provisions of the new draft
standard MOU are summarized and
discussed in this section of the
document and, where appropriate,
compared to the provisions in the 1999
draft standard MOU.
A. Investigation of Complaints
The new draft standard MOU
provides that States that enter into the
MOU will agree to:
• Investigate complaints relating to
human drug products compounded in
the State and distributed outside the
State, including complaints about
adverse drug experiences or certain
product quality issues to, among other
things, determine whether there is a
potential public health risk or safety
concern, and confirm that any risk or
safety concern is adequately contained;
• As appropriate, take action to
ensure that the relevant compounding
pharmacy, pharmacist, or physician
determines the root cause of the
problem and eliminates any public
health risk identified in relation to the
complaint;
• Notify FDA within 72 hours of any
complaints relating to a compounded
human drug product distributed outside
the State involving a potential public
health risk or immediate safety concern,
such as a report of a serious adverse
drug experience or serious product
quality issue, the State’s initial
assessment of the validity of the
complaint, and any actions the State has
taken or plans to take to address such
complaints;
• Provide FDA with certain
information about the complaint,
including the following:
Æ Name and contact information of
the complainant;
Æ name and address of the
pharmacist/pharmacy/physician that is
the subject of the complaint;
Æ a description of the complaint,
including a description of any
compounded drug product that is the
subject of the complaint;
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8875
Æ the State’s initial assessment of the
validity of the complaint relating to a
compounded human drug product
distributed outside the State; and
Æ a description and date of any
actions the State has taken to address
the complaint; and
• Maintain records of the complaints
it receives, the investigation of each
complaint, and any response to or
action taken as a result of a complaint,
beginning when the State receives
notice of the complaint. The draft
standard MOU says that the State agrees
to maintain these records for at least 3
years, beginning on the date of final
action or the date of a decision that the
complaint requires no action.
The new draft standard MOU, as
compared to the 1999 draft standard
MOU, clarifies that the types of
complaints of compounded human drug
products that should be investigated
include any adverse drug experience
(not just serious adverse drug
experiences, which were identified as
an example of the types of complaints
to be investigated in the 1999 draft
standard MOU) and product quality
issues that, if left uncorrected, could
lead to potential public health risks or
safety concerns. Even nonserious
adverse drug experiences and product
quality issues can be indicative of
problems at a compounding facility that
could result in product quality defects
leading to serious adverse drug
experiences if not corrected. For
example, inflammation around the site
of an injection can indicate product
contamination from inadequate sterile
practices at the compounding
pharmacy. If the pharmacy has
inadequate sterile practices, other more
serious contamination could result in
serious adverse events.
FDA is clarifying that the complaints
that States agree to investigate under the
MOU are only those complaints that are
made about compounded human drug
products distributed outside the State.
In contrast to the 1999 draft standard
MOU, the new draft standard MOU does
not contain a provision that would
require the States entering into the MOU
with FDA to agree to investigate alleged
violations of the FD&C Act. Upon
further reflection, FDA has tentatively
concluded that it would be more
appropriate for FDA to determine
whether a particular action is a violation
of Federal law. Of course, if any State
identifies a potential violation of
Federal law, it is encouraged to report
it to FDA.
Furthermore, the new draft standard
MOU does not include specific
directions to the States relating to how
to conduct their investigation of
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
8876
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
complaints. Rather, as recommended by
comments previously submitted on the
1999 draft standard MOU, the details of
such investigations are left to the States’
discretion.
States signing the new standard MOU
would agree to notify FDA about certain
complaints and provide FDA with
certain information about the complaint
so FDA could investigate the complaint
itself, or take other appropriate action.2
B. Inordinate Amounts
The new draft standard MOU
provides that States that enter into the
MOU will agree to:
• Review compounding records
during inspections of compounding
pharmacies to identify whether the
compounding pharmacy, or the
compounding pharmacist or physician,
is distributing inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate;
• Notify FDA if the State identifies
any pharmacy, pharmacist, or physician
within its jurisdiction that has
distributed inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate;
• Take action regarding any
pharmacy, pharmacist, or physician that
distributes inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate; and
• Provide FDA with certain
information, including the following:
Æ The name and address of the
pharmacy/pharmacist/physician;
Æ a description of the evidence
indicating that the pharmacy/
pharmacist/physician has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate,
including a description of any
compounded drug product that was
distributed in inordinate amounts; and
Æ a description and date of any
actions the State has taken to address
the distribution of inordinate amounts
of compounded human drug product
interstate.
In the new draft standard MOU, a
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician is
considered to have distributed an
inordinate amount of compounded
human drug products interstate if the
number of units of compounded human
drug products distributed interstate
during any calendar month is equal to
or greater than 30 percent of the number
of units of compounded and noncompounded drug products distributed
or dispensed both intrastate and
2 FDA
is currently considering whether to
propose regulations or issue guidance documents to
further its implementation of section 503A(b)(3)(B)
of the FD&C Act. Notice of any such action will be
provided in the Federal Register.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
interstate by such pharmacist,
pharmacy, or physician during that
calendar month. FDA does not intend to
include in the consideration of
inordinate amounts those prescriptions
dispensed to a patient (or patient’s
agent), where the patient (or patient’s
agent) to whom the drug is dispensed
carries the drug across State lines after
it has been dispensed to the patient (or
the patient’s agent) at the facility in
which the drug was compounded.3 This
concept would be called the 30 percent
limit.
The 1999 draft standard MOU defined
‘‘inordinate amounts’’ as the number of
compounded prescriptions dispensed or
distributed interstate annually by a
pharmacy or physician that is equal to
or greater than 20 percent of the total
number of prescriptions dispensed or
distributed (including both intrastate
and interstate) by such pharmacy or
physician; or the number of
compounded prescriptions dispensed or
distributed interstate annually by a
pharmacy or physician that is less than
20 percent of the total number of
prescriptions dispensed or distributed
(including both intrastate and interstate)
by such pharmacy or physician, but
prescriptions for one or more individual
compounded drug products (including
various strengths of the same active
ingredient) dispensed or distributed
interstate constitute more than 5 percent
of the total number of prescriptions
dispensed or distributed. The 1999 draft
standard MOU also included an
exclusion from calculations to
determine inordinate amounts for
‘‘local’’ interstate distribution to
patients within 50 miles of the
compounding pharmacy, and for
interstate distribution in response to a
public health emergency or catastrophic
event.
Many comments on the 1999 draft
standard MOU opposed the percentage
limits it contained, and some comments
on the 2013 draft 503A guidance
opposed any definition of inordinate
amounts that would significantly
restrict interstate distributions under
section 503A of the FD&C Act. Other
comments suggested not defining
‘‘inordinate amounts,’’ leaving the
definition up to the States, or defining
the term as ‘‘the amount that would be
considered conventional
manufacturing.’’ FDA is proposing the
30 percent limit as the definition of
3 Drugs that a patient takes across state lines in
this manner are distributed interstate. However, for
reasons explained in this notice, FDA’s draft
standard MOU does not count them toward the
limit on distributing inordinate amounts of
compounded drug products interstate.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
‘‘inordinate amounts’’ for the following
reasons.
Section 503A of the FD&C Act reflects
Congress’ recognition that human drug
compounding may be appropriate when
it is based on receiving a valid
prescription or notation for an identified
individual patient. However, drug
products compounded under this
section of the FD&C Act are not required
to demonstrate that they are safe or
effective, bear adequate directions for
use, or conform to CGMP. Congress,
therefore, imposed strict limits on the
distribution of drug products
compounded under this section to
protect the public health and the
integrity of the drug approval process.
In particular, Congress did not intend
for compounders operating under these
statutory provisions to grow into
conventional manufacturing operations
making unapproved drugs, operating a
substantial proportion of their business
interstate. Although other provisions of
the FD&C Act apply to state-licensed
pharmacies and physicians that may
qualify for the exemptions under section
503A of the FD&C Act (e.g., the
adulteration provisions for making
drugs under insanitary conditions), and
although FDA may take action in
appropriate cases against compounders
that violate these provisions or that
operate outside of the conditions in
section 503A, Congress recognized that
these compounders are primarily
overseen by the States. If a substantial
proportion of a compounder’s drugs are
distributed outside a State’s borders,
adequate regulation of those drugs poses
significant challenges to State
regulators. States face logistical,
regulatory, and financial challenges
inspecting compounders located outside
of their jurisdiction. In addition,
particularly if a compounder distributes
drugs to multiple States, it can be very
difficult to gather the scattered
information about possible adverse
events associated with those drugs,
connect them to the compounder, and
undertake coordinated action to address
a potentially serious public health
problem.
Therefore, as a baseline measure,
section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act
limits the distribution of compounded
human drug products outside of the
State in which they are compounded
under section 503A(a) to 5 percent of
the total prescription orders dispensed
or distributed by a licensed pharmacist,
pharmacy, or physician. It then directs
FDA, in consultation with NABP, to
develop a standard MOU that addresses
the distribution of inordinate amounts
of compounded human drug products
interstate and provides for appropriate
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
investigation by a State agency of
complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed
outside such State. Implementation of
this provision requires FDA to
determine whether a limit higher than 5
percent would be appropriate, provided
the States make certain agreements: A
State agrees to appropriately investigate
complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed out of
the State and agrees to address the
distribution of amounts that would be
inordinate.
FDA tentatively concludes that if a
State agrees to meet the conditions set
forth in this MOU, distribution
interstate up to the 30 percent limit
would not be inordinate. This
conclusion is based on FDA’s
expectation that States signing the MOU
would appropriately investigate
complaints about compounded human
drug products distributed out of State,
and address compounders distributing
an inordinate amount of compounded
drug products out of the state in which
they are compounded. FDA’s current
view is that its proposed limit would
appropriately balance the benefits of
access to compounded human drug
products with the need to protect the
public health and the drug approval
system. We do not believe that an
additional limit is necessary for the
distribution of an individual
compounded drug product such as that
contained in the 1999 draft standard
MOU.
In developing the new draft standard
MOU, we considered that patients can
now obtain compounded human drug
products from outsourcing facilities,4
which are not subject to volume
restrictions on interstate distribution.
This could mitigate the access concerns
noted in some comments FDA received
on the definition of ‘‘inordinate
amounts’’ in the 1999 draft standard
MOU, and in more recent comments
expressing concerns about access if
‘‘inordinate amounts’’ is defined
restrictively or the 5 percent limit is
enforced.
It is appropriate to provide a bright
line test for when compounding
pharmacies located in States that sign
4 The DQSA adds new section 503B to the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 353b). Under section 503B(b) of the
FD&C Act, a compounder may elect to become an
outsourcing facility by registering with FDA.
Products compounded in a registered outsourcing
facility can qualify for exemptions from the FDA
approval requirements in section 505 of the FD&C
Act and the requirement to label products with
adequate directions for use under section 502(f)(1)
of the FD&C Act if the requirements in section 503B
are met. Outsourcing facilities will be inspected by
FDA and must comply with other provisions of the
FD&C Act, such as CGMP requirements.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
8877
the MOU cross the line to conventional
manufacturing that should be subject to
all of the requirements of the FD&C Act,
including the new drug approval and
CGMP requirements. Congress provided
such a bright line test, the 5 percent
limit, for compounders located in States
that do not sign the MOU.
Some commenters in response to the
1999 draft MOU and the 2013 draft
503A guidance were concerned with
limitations on interstate distribution of
compounded human drug products to
contiguous States. In the 1999 draft
MOU, the calculation of ‘‘inordinate
amounts’’ excluded compounded
human drug products that were
distributed interstate but within 50
miles of the pharmacy or physician’s
office. After considering the provision
in the 1999 draft MOU and the
comments, FDA believes that the 30
percent limit on inordinate amounts
provided in this new draft standard
MOU is high enough that special
calculations to address interstate
distribution between contiguous States
or over short distances are not needed.
Moreover, the new draft standard MOU
includes consideration of inordinate
amounts of prescriptions dispensed to a
patient (or patient’s agent), if the patient
(or patient’s agent) to whom the drug is
dispensed carries the drug across State
lines after it has been dispensed to the
patient (or patient’s agent) at the facility
in which the drug was compounded. We
also do not intend to count as part of the
5 percent limit on distribution out of the
State prescriptions dispensed to a
patient (or patient’s agent), if the patient
(or patient’s agent) to whom the drug is
dispensed carries the drug across State
lines after it has been dispensed to the
patient (or patient’s agent) at the facility
in which the drug was compounded. We
believe this treatment of these
transactions where there are direct
relationships among the patient, the
prescriber, and the pharmacist or
physician compounding the drug is
consistent with section 503A of the
FD&C Act.
Finally, the new draft standard MOU
does not exclude from the calculation of
‘‘inordinate amounts’’ interstate
distributions in response to a public
health emergency or catastrophic event.
We believe the 30 percent limit affords
adequate opportunity for interstate
distributions and note that outsourcing
facilities may be able to compound
drugs in an emergency and drugs on
FDA’s drug shortage list, further
mitigating access concerns.
in the MOU, including ‘‘adverse drug
experience,’’ ‘‘serious adverse drug
experience,’’ ‘‘product quality issue,’’
‘‘serious product quality issue,’’ and
‘‘distribution.’’ The definitions of
‘‘adverse drug experience,’’ ‘‘serious
adverse drug experience,’’ ‘‘product
quality issue,’’ and ‘‘serious product
quality issue’’ are taken from relevant
sections of FDA’s regulations (see 21
CFR 310.305 and 314.81). For purposes
of the new draft standard MOU, a
‘‘distribution’’ occurs when a
compounded human drug product
leaves the facility in which the drug was
compounded. Distribution includes
delivery or shipment to a physician’s
office, hospital, or other health care
setting for administration and
dispensing to an agent of a patient or to
a patient for his or her own use.
However, the definition notes that, to
qualify for the exemptions under section
503A of the FD&C Act, a compounder
must obtain a prescription for an
individually identified patient (section
503A(a)), and the draft standard MOU
would not alter this condition. Interstate
distributions of compounded drug
products would count toward the 30
percent limit whether or not the
compounded drug products satisfied the
prescription condition, or other
conditions, in section 503A of the FD&C
Act.
Some comments on the 2013 draft
503A guidance state that provisions in
the standard MOU relating to drug
distribution should not apply to
dispensed drugs. Although the
comments do not share a single
definition of dispensing, or offer a
detailed definition, they generally take
the position that a drug is dispensed
when it is provided pursuant to a
prescription or doctor’s order, and that
dispensing is not a form of distribution.
We have not adopted this approach, and
propose a definition of distribution that
we believe is consistent with the text
and purpose of section 503A of the
FD&C Act. Under our draft standard
MOU, a distribution occurs when a
compounded drug leaves the facility
where it was made, regardless of
whether the drug is also deemed to be
dispensed.
Section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act
directs FDA to include provisions in the
MOU regarding the distribution of
compounded drugs. The section does
not define distribution to exclude
dispensing, which Congress has done
elsewhere when that was its intention.5
C. Definitions
The Appendix to the new draft
standard MOU defines key terms used
5 In different contexts, where it would further a
regulatory purpose, Congress and the Agency have
specifically defined distribute to exclude
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
Continued
19FEN1
8878
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Our proposed definition implements the
purpose of section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the
FD&C Act, which is to limit and regulate
compounded drugs that are sent out of
the state in which they are made.6 Our
definition is also consistent with the
ordinary meaning of distribute; it is
natural to say that an entity
compounding under section 503A of the
FD&C Act distributes the drugs it makes
to patients and health care providers,
just as the manufacturers of other
regulated articles are said to distribute
their products to their customers. The
definition proposed by comments, on
the other hand, would write an
exclusion for dispensing into the statute
where Congress did not. It would also
mean that drug products compounded
under section 503A of the FD&C Act are
excluded from the MOU and the 5
percent limit, because, in order to
qualify for the exemptions under section
503A, a compounder must obtain a
valid prescription order for an
individually identified patient. For the
reasons stated previously in section IV.B
of this document, we believe this would
achieve the opposite of what Congress
intended.
In support of their alternative
approach, commenters note that in
section 503A(b)(3)(B)(ii) of the FD&C
Act, Congress directed FDA to calculate
the quantity of ‘‘prescription orders
dispensed and distributed’’ when the
Agency applies the 5 percent limit to
compounders in states that do not sign
the MOU. This language, however,
supports FDA’s proposed approach,
because it makes clear that Congress
understood the word distribute in this
section to refer to filling prescription
orders; otherwise it would not have
directed the Agency to count the
number of prescription orders that
pharmacists and prescribers
‘‘distributed.’’ Nor is there anything to
suggest that Congress understood
distributed and dispensed to be
mutually exclusive categories rather
dispensing. See, for example, section 581(5) of the
FD&C Act, which applies to Title II of the DQSA,
and 21 CFR 208.3, which applies to 21 CFR part 208
of our regulations. Section 503A of the FD&C Act
does not contain a similar definition, or specific
direction to exclude dispensing from the meaning
of distribution. We also note that these definitions
were adopted for provisions that focus on
conventionally manufactured drug products, which
assign different obligations to dispensers than to
wholesalers, packagers, or other intermediaries in
light of the different role that dispensers play with
respect to product labeling and the drug
distribution chain. In contrast, section 503A of the
FD&C Act focuses on compounded drugs, and the
reasons for defining distribution to exclude
dispensing in Title II of the DQSA or part 208 do
not apply.
6 See discussion of the purposes of section 503A
of the FD&C Act in section IV.B, supra.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
than overlapping categories. Given the
statutory text and purpose, we believe
that Congress referred to drugs
dispensed or distributed in section
503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act to make
clear that the Agency must not limit its
calculation of total prescription orders
to compounded drugs that the pharmacy
or prescriber makes, but also include
any other prescription orders, such as
conventionally manufactured drugs, for
which the pharmacist or prescriber
serves solely as the dispenser.
V. Other Issues
A. Development of a Standard MOU
A number of commenters on both the
1999 draft MOU and on the 2013 draft
503A guidance suggested that FDA
specifically negotiate MOUs with
individual States, rather than develop a
standard MOU. Section 503A of the
FD&C Act requires the Agency to
develop a standard MOU for use by the
States. Furthermore, it would be
impractical to develop an
individualized MOU with every State,
and creating individualized MOUs
would create a patchwork of regulation
of interstate distribution from
compounders seeking to qualify for the
exemptions under section 503A of the
FD&C Act. This would be confusing to
the health care community, as well as
regulators.
B. Exemptions From the Interstate
Distribution Provisions
Some comments on the 2013 draft
503A guidance requested that we
consider exempting certain drug
products or types of compounding
entities from the limits in the MOU and
the 5 percent limit. For example, some
comments recommended that we
exempt nonsterile products or home
infusion pharmacies.
Congress did not exempt any
particular drug products or
compounding entities from the 5
percent limit. Furthermore, FDA
believes that the 5 percent limit and the
MOU limit on inordinate amount
provisions are important to distinguish
pharmacy compounding from
conventional manufacturing in the guise
of compounding, and to protect
consumers and the integrity of the drug
approval process. American consumers
rely on the FDA drug approval process
to ensure that medications have been
evaluated for safety and effectiveness
before they are marketed in the United
States. Drugs made by compounders,
including those made at human drug
compounding outsourcing facilities, are
not FDA-approved. This means that
they have not undergone premarket
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
review of safety, effectiveness, or
manufacturing quality. Therefore, when
an FDA-approved drug is commercially
available, FDA recommends that
practitioners prescribe the FDAapproved drug rather than a
compounded drug unless the
prescribing practitioner has determined
that a compounded product is necessary
for the particular patient and would
provide a significant difference for the
patient as compared to the FDAapproved commercially available drug
product.
In section 503A of the FD&C Act,
Congress enacted several conditions to
differentiate compounders from
manufacturers and provided that only if
they meet those conditions can they
qualify for the exemptions from the drug
approval requirements in section 505 of
the FD&C Act. One of those conditions
relates to limitations on the interstate
distribution of compounded human
drug products, and FDA intends to
enforce those provisions to differentiate
compounding that qualifies for the
exemptions from conventional
manufacturing in the guise of
compounding that does not, and will
apply the conditions to all types of
drugs and all categories of
compounding.
C. Information Sharing Between States
and FDA
Several commenters on the 1999 draft
MOU proposed that signatories to the
MOU would agree to share information
on a variety of subjects. The new draft
standard MOU provides that States will
agree to notify FDA of any complaint
relating to a compounded human drug
product distributed outside the State
involving a potential public health risk
or immediate safety concern, such as a
report of a serious adverse drug
experience or serious product quality
issue, and provide information about
those events and issues. The new draft
standard MOU also provides that States
will notify FDA if they identify a
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician
within their jurisdiction that has
distributed inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate. In addition, FDA regularly
posts on its compounding Web site
information about enforcement and
other actions related to compounders
that violate the FD&C Act, and it is
obligated to share certain information
with States under section 105 of the
DQSA.
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
D. Enforcement of the 5 Percent Limit on
Distribution of Compounded Drug
Products Out of the State in Which They
Are Compounded
In the 2013 draft 503A guidance, FDA
stated that it does not intend to enforce
the 5 percent limit on distribution of
compounded drug products outside of
the State in which they are compounded
until 90 days after FDA has finalized a
standard MOU and made it available to
the States for their consideration and
signature. Most commenters on the 2013
draft 503A guidance said this period
was too short, but did not recommend
a specific alternative. A few commenters
recommended a different timeframe,
one recommending 120 days and
another recommending 365 days. The
1997 Senate Committee Report for the
Food and Drug Administration
Modernization Act suggests that a 180day period for States to decide whether
to sign might be appropriate.7 The
Agency proposes a 180-day period after
the final standard MOU is made
available for signature before FDA will
enforce the 5 percent limit in States that
have not signed the MOU, and invites
public comment on whether this is the
appropriate timeframe. FDA will
announce at the time it publishes the
final standard MOU and makes it
available for signature when it intends
to begin enforcing the 5 percent limit in
States that do not sign.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520), Federal Agencies must obtain
approval from the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for each collection of
information they conduct or sponsor.
‘‘Collection of information’’ is defined
in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests
or requirements that members of the
public submit reports, keep records, or
provide information to a third party.
Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), requires Federal
Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in
the Federal Register for each proposed
collection of information before
submitting the collection to OMB for
approval. To comply with this
requirement, FDA is publishing notice
of the proposed collection of
information set forth in this document.
7 ‘‘[U]ntil the State . . . enters into a
memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the
Secretary or 180 days after the development of the
standard MOU, whichever comes first, the [section
503A] exemption shall not apply if inordinate
quantities of compounded products are distributed
outside of the State in which the compounding
pharmacy or physician is located.’’ (U.S. Senate
Committee Report, see note 2.)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
With respect to the following
collection of information, FDA invites
comments on these topics: (1) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of FDA’s functions, including whether
the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including
through the use of automated collection
techniques, when appropriate, and other
forms of information technology.
Section 503A of the FD&C Act
describes, among other things, the
circumstances under which certain
human drug products compounded by a
licensed pharmacist or licensed
physician are exempt from certain
sections of the FD&C Act. One of the
conditions to qualify for the exemptions
listed in section 503A of the FD&C Act
is that: (1) The human drug product is
compounded in a State that has entered
into an MOU with FDA that addresses
the distribution of inordinate amounts
of compounded human drug products
interstate and provides for appropriate
investigation by a State agency of
complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed
outside such a State; or (2) if the human
drug product is compounded in a State
that has not entered into such an MOU,
the licensed pharmacist, pharmacy, or
physician does not distribute, or cause
to be distributed, compounded human
drug products out of the State in which
they are compounded, more than 5
percent of the total prescription orders
dispensed or distributed by such
pharmacy or physician (see section
503A(b)(3)(B)(i) and (b)(3)(B)(ii).
Section 503A(b)(3) directs FDA, in
consultation with the NABP, to develop
a standard MOU for use by states in
complying with the provisions
concerning the interstate distribution of
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate and
appropriate investigation by a State
agency of complaints relating to
compounded human drug products
distributed outside such State.
The new draft standard MOU contains
the information collections that must be
approved by OMB under the PRA.
These information collections are
described in this section of the
document. For purposes of this analysis,
FDA assumes that 25 States will sign the
standard MOU with FDA.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8879
Under section III.a. of the new draft
standard MOU, the State will notify
FDA by email at StateMOU@fda.hhs.gov
within 72 hours of receiving any
complaint relating to a compounded
human drug product distributed outside
the State involving a potential public
health risk or immediate safety concern,
such as a report of a serious adverse
drug experience or serious product
quality issue. The notification will
include the following information: (1)
The name and contact information of
the complainant, in the case of a
complaint; (2) the name and address of
the pharmacist, pharmacy, and/or
physician that is the subject of the
complaint; (3) a description of the
complaint, including a description of
any compounded drug product that is
the subject of the complaint; (4) the
State’s initial assessment of the validity
of the complaint relating to a
compounded human drug product
distributed outside the State; and (5) a
description and date of any actions the
State has taken to address the
complaint. In addition, the States will
maintain records of the complaints they
receive, the investigation of each
complaint, and any response to or
action taken as a result of a complaint,
beginning when the State receives
notice of the complaint. The States will
maintain these records for at least 3
years, beginning on the date of final
action or the date of a decision that the
complaint requires no action.
Based on our knowledge of State
regulation of compounding practices
and related complaints, we estimate that
annually a total of approximately 25
States (‘‘no. of respondents’’ in table 1,
row 1) will notify FDA within 72 hours
of receiving any complaint relating to a
compounded human drug product
distributed outside the State involving a
potential public health risk or
immediate safety concern. We estimate
that each State will notify FDA annually
of approximately 3 complaints it
receives (‘‘no. of responses per
respondent’’ in table 1, row 1), for a
total of 75 notifications of complaints
sent to FDA (‘‘total annual responses’’ in
table 1, row 1). We estimate that
preparing and submitting this
information to us as described in the
MOU will take approximately 0.5 hours
per response (‘‘average burden per
response’’ in table 1, row 1), for a total
of 37.5 hours (‘‘total hours’’ in table 1,
row 1).
We also estimate that a total of
approximately 25 States (‘‘no. of
recordkeepers’’ in table 2) will prepare
and maintain records for 3 years of the
complaints they receive, investigations
of complaints, and on any State action
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
8880
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
taken or replies to complaints. We
estimate that each State will receive
approximately 3 complaints annually
and will prepare and maintain
approximately 5 records per each
complaint the State receives, for a total
of 15 records per State (‘‘no. of records
per recordkeeper’’ in table 2), and a total
of 375 records annually across all States
(‘‘total annual records’’ in table 2). We
further estimate that preparing and
maintaining these records will take
approximately 1 hour per record
(‘‘average burden per recordkeeping (in
hours)’’ in table 2), for a total of 375
hours (‘‘total hours’’ in table 2).
Under section III.a. of the new draft
standard MOU, investigations
performed by the State under this MOU
will ensure that (1) the root cause of the
problem that is the subject of the
complaint is determined, (2) any risk or
safety concern associated with the
compounded human drug product is
adequately contained (i.e., there is no
ongoing risk to the public), and (3)
sufficient corrective action has been
taken to eliminate any future public
health risk.
Under section III.b of the new draft
standard MOU, the States will notify
FDA by email at StateMOU@fda.hhs.gov
within 7 days of determining that a
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician
within their jurisdiction has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate, as
described in the MOU. The notification
should include the following
information: (1) The name and address
of the pharmacist/pharmacy/physician;
(2) a description of the evidence
indicating that the pharmacist/
pharmacy/physician has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate,
including a description of any
compounded drug product that was
distributed in inordinate amounts; and
(3) a description and date of any actions
the State has taken to address the
distribution of inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate.
We estimate that annually a total of
approximately 25 States (‘‘no. of
respondents’’ in table 1, row 2) will
notify FDA of their determination that a
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician has
distributed inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products
interstate. We estimate that each State
will notify FDA annually of
approximately 2 determinations it
makes (‘‘no. of responses per
respondent’’ in table 1, row 2), for a
total of 50 determinations (‘‘total annual
responses’’ in table 1, row 2). We
estimate that preparing and submitting
this information to FDA as described in
the MOU will take approximately 0.5
hours per response (‘‘average burden per
response’’ in table 1, row 2), for a total
of 25 hours (‘‘total hours’’ in table 1,
row 2).
Under section V of the current draft
standard MOU, a State may designate a
new liaison to the MOU by notifying
FDA’s administrative liaison in writing.
If a State’s liaison becomes unavailable
to fulfill its functions under the MOU,
the State will name a new liaison within
2 weeks and notify FDA.
We estimate that annually a total of
approximately 13 States (‘‘no. of
respondents’’ in table 1, row 3) will
notify FDA of a new liaison to the MOU.
We estimate that each State will submit
to FDA annually approximately 1
notification of a new liaison (‘‘no. of
responses per respondent’’ in table 1,
row 3), for a total of 13 notifications of
a new liaison (‘‘total annual responses’’
in table 1, row 3). We estimate that
preparing and submitting each
notification as described in the MOU
will take approximately 0.2 hours per
response (‘‘average burden per
response’’ in table 1, row 3), for a total
of 2.6 hours (‘‘total hours’’ in table 1,
row 3).
Under section VI of the new draft
standard MOU, a State may terminate its
participation in the MOU by submitting
to FDA a 30-day notice of termination.
We estimate that annually a total of
approximately 1 State (‘‘no. of
respondents’’ in table 1, row 4) will
notify FDA that it intends to terminate
its participation in the MOU. We
estimate that this State will submit to
FDA annually approximately 1
notification of termination (‘‘no. of
responses per respondent’’ in table 1,
row 4), for a total of 1 notification
(‘‘total annual responses’’ in table 1, row
4). We estimate that preparing and
submitting the notification as described
in the MOU will take approximately 0.2
hours per notification (‘‘average burden
per response’’ in table 1, row 4), for a
total of 0.2 hours (‘‘total hours’’ in table
1, row 4).
Under section VI of the new draft
standard MOU, if a State does not
adhere to the provisions of the MOU,
FDA may post a 30-day notice of
termination on its Web site. As a result
of this action by FDA, the State will
notify all pharmacists, pharmacies, and
physicians within the State of the
termination and advise them that
compounded human drug products may
be distributed (or caused to be
distributed) out of the State only in
quantities that do not exceed 5 percent
of the total prescription orders
dispensed or distributed by the
pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician.
We estimate that annually a total of
approximately 1 State (‘‘no. of
respondents’’ in table 3) will submit 1
notification of termination as described
in the MOU (‘‘no. of disclosures per
respondent’’ in table 3) to the
pharmacists, pharmacies, and
physicians in its State for a total of 1
notification of termination (‘‘total
annual disclosures’’ in table 3). We
estimate that preparing and submitting
each notification will take
approximately 1 hour per notification
(‘‘average burden per disclosure (in
hours)’’ in table 3), for a total of 1 hour
(‘‘total hours’’ in table 3).
FDA estimates the burden of this
collection of information as follows:
TABLE 1—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Number o
esponses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Compounding MOU between FDA and States
Average burden per response
Total annual
responses
Total hours
State notifies FDA of compounding complaints it receives
State notifies FDA of the distribution of inordinate
amounts of compounded drug products ........................
State notifies FDA of a new liaison to the MOU ...............
State notifies FDA of its intent to terminate participation
in the MOU .....................................................................
25
3
75
0.5
37.5
25
13
2
1
50
13
0.5
0.2
25
2.6
1
1
1
0.2
0.2
Total ............................................................................
64
7
139
N/A
65.3
1 There
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
8881
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 33 / Thursday, February 19, 2015 / Notices
TABLE 2—ESTIMATED ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN 1
Number of
records per
recordkeeper
Number of
recordkeepers
Compounding MOU between FDA and States
Average burden per recordkeeping
(in Hours)
Total annual
records
Total Hours
State recordkeeping for 3 years of compounding complaints .............................................................................
25
15
375
1
375
Total ............................................................................
25
15
375
1
375
1 There
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
TABLE 3—ESTIMATED ANNUAL THIRD-PARTY DISCLOSURE BURDEN 1
Number of
disclosures
per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Compounding MOU between FDA and States
Average burden per disclosure
(in Hours)
Total annual
disclosures
Total hours
State notification to pharmacists, pharmacies, and physicians that its participation in the MOU has been terminated by FDA ...................................................................
1
1
1
1
1
Total ..............................................................................
1
1
1
1
1
1 There
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
VII. Request for Comments
VIII. Electronic Access
FDA invites comments from
interested persons on the new draft
standard MOU that would establish an
agreement between the signatory States
and FDA regarding the appropriate
investigation by such States of
complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed
outside the State, and the distribution of
inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate. The
Agency is providing a 120-day comment
period.
After considering any comments on
the new draft standard MOU submitted
to this docket, FDA intends to finalize
the standard MOU and make it available
for signature by individual States. FDA
will determine at the time of publication
of the final MOU how long it will allow
States to consider whether to sign the
MOU before FDA begins to enforce the
5 percent limit in those States that have
not signed an MOU.
Interested persons may submit either
electronic comments regarding this
document to https://www.regulations.gov
or written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It
is only necessary to send one set
comments. Identify comments with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Persons with access to the Internet
may obtain the draft standard MOU at
https://www.regulations.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Feb 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
Dated: February 12, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–03420 Filed 2–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA–2014–D–1525]
Mixing, Diluting, or Repackaging
Biological Products Outside the Scope
of an Approved Biologics License
Application; Draft Guidance for
Industry; Availability
ACTION:
Notice.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing the availability of a draft
guidance for industry entitled ‘‘Mixing,
Diluting, or Repackaging Biological
Products Outside the Scope of an
Approved Biologics License
Application.’’ This draft guidance
describes the conditions under which
FDA does not intend to take action
against a state-licensed pharmacy, a
Federal facility, or outsourcing facility
that mixes, dilutes, or repackages
certain biological products without
obtaining an approved biologics license
application (BLA).
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Although you can comment on
any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that the Agency
considers your comment on this draft
guidance before it begins work on the
final version of the guidance, submit
either electronic or written comments
on the draft guidance by May 20, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for
single copies of this guidance to the
Division of Drug Information, Center for
Drug Evaluation and Research, Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 2201,
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002; or the
Office of Communication, Outreach and
Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Avenue, Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128,
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to
assist that office in processing your
requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the guidance document.
Submit electronic comments on the
guidance to https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Leah Christl, Center for Drugs
Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, Rm. 6426,
Silver Spring, MD 20903, 301–796–
0869; or Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research,
Food and Drug Administration, 10903
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\19FEN1.SGM
19FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 33 (Thursday, February 19, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8874-8881]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03420]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1459]
Memorandum of Understanding Addressing Certain Distributions of
Compounded Human Drug Products Between the States and the Food and Drug
Administration; New Proposed Draft; Availability
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of availability; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) is
announcing the availability for public comment of a draft standard
memorandum of understanding (MOU) entitled ``Memorandum of
Understanding Addressing Certain Distributions of Compounded Human Drug
Products Between the State of [insert State] and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration.'' The draft standard MOU describes the responsibilities
of the State that chooses to sign the MOU in investigating and
responding to complaints related to compounded human drug products
distributed outside the State and in addressing the interstate
distribution of inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products.
FDA is also announcing the withdrawal of an earlier draft standard
MOU entitled ``Memorandum of Understanding on Interstate Distribution
of Compounded Drug Products,'' which was issued in January 1999. The
January 1999 draft standard MOU is superseded by the new draft standard
MOU.
DATES: FDA is withdrawing its draft standard MOU that published on
January 21, 1999 (64 FR 3301), as of February 19, 2015. Submit either
electronic or written comments on the new draft standard MOU by June
19, 2015. Submit comments on information collection issues under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 by June 19, 2015 (see the ``Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995'' section of this document).
ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the MOU to
Edisa Gozun, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Suite 5100, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send one self-addressed label to assist that
office in processing your request. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for electronic access to the new draft standard MOU.
Submit electronic comments on the new draft standard MOU or on the
collection of information to https://www.regulations.gov. Submit written
comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edisa Gozun, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Suite 5100, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
301-796-3110.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 503A of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C
Act) (21 U.S.C. 353a) describes the conditions that must be satisfied
for drug products compounded by a licensed pharmacist or licensed
physician to be exempt from the following sections of the FD&C Act: (1)
Section 501(a)(2)(B) (21 U.S.C. 351(a)(2)(B)) (concerning current good
manufacturing practice (CGMP) requirements), (2) section 502(f)(1) (21
U.S.C. 352(f)(1)) (concerning the labeling of drugs with adequate
directions for use), and (3) section 505 (21 U.S.C. 355) (concerning
the approval of drugs under new drug applications or abbreviated new
drug applications).
One of the conditions to qualify for the exemptions listed in
section 503A of the FD&C Act is that (1) the drug product is compounded
in a State that has entered into an MOU with FDA that addresses the
distribution of inordinate amounts of compounded drug products
interstate and provides for appropriate investigation by a State agency
of complaints relating to compounded drug products distributed outside
such State; or (2) if the drug product is compounded in a State that
has not entered into such an MOU, the licensed pharmacist, pharmacy, or
physician does not distribute, or cause to be distributed, compounded
drug products out of the State in which they are compounded in
quantities that exceed 5 percent of the total prescription orders
dispensed or distributed by such pharmacy or physician (see section
503A(b)(3)(B)(i) and (b)(3)(B)(ii) of the FD&C Act).
Section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act directs FDA to develop, in
consultation with the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy
(NABP), a standard MOU for use by the States in complying with section
503A(b)(3)(B)(i).
II. Previous Efforts To Develop a Standard MOU
In the Federal Register of January 21, 1999 (64 FR 3301), FDA
announced the availability for public comment of a draft standard MOU,
developed in consultation with NABP (1999 draft
[[Page 8875]]
standard MOU). Over 6,000 commenters submitted comments on the 1999
draft standard MOU. Because of litigation over the constitutionality of
the advertising, promotion, and solicitation provisions in section
503A,\1\ the draft standard MOU was never completed. In 2013, section
503A of the FD&C Act was amended by the Drug Quality and Security Act
(DQSA) (Pub. L. 113-54) to remove the advertising, promotion, and
solicitation provisions that were held unconstitutional, and FDA is
implementing section 503A, including the provisions on the MOU. By this
notice, FDA is withdrawing the 1999 draft standard MOU, and the new
draft standard MOU made available today supersedes that draft standard
MOU.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The conditions of section 503A of the FD&C Act originally
included restrictions on the advertising or promotion of the
compounding of any particular drug, class of drug, or type of drug
and the solicitation of prescriptions for compounded drugs. These
provisions were challenged in court and held unconstitutional by the
U.S. Supreme Court in 2002. See Thompson v. Western States Med.
Ctr., 535 U.S. 357 (2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. New 503A Guidance
Immediately after the enactment of the DQSA, in December 2013, the
Agency published a draft guidance on section 503A of the FD&C Act
entitled ``Pharmacy Compounding of Human Drug Products Under Section
503A of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act'' (2013 draft 503A
guidance) (see 78 FR 72901 (December 4, 2013) announcing the
availability of the draft guidance). That draft guidance described
FDA's proposed policy with regard to specific provisions of section
503A of the FD&C Act that require rulemaking or other action by FDA,
such as the MOU provisions. Thirty-one commenters on the 2013 draft
503A guidance offered FDA their views on the MOU provisions of section
503A. FDA considered these comments in developing the new draft
standard MOU. The final 503A guidance, published July 2, 2014 (see 79
FR 37742 announcing the availability of the final 503A guidance),
states that FDA does not intend to enforce the 5 percent limit on
distribution of compounded drug products out of the State in which they
are compounded until after FDA has finalized an MOU and made it
available to the States for their consideration and signature. After
considering any comments on the new draft standard MOU submitted to
this docket, FDA intends to finalize the standard MOU and make it
available for signature by individual States. FDA will determine at the
time of publication of the final MOU how long it will allow States to
consider whether to sign the MOU before FDA begins to enforce the 5
percent limit in those States that have not signed an MOU.
IV. New Draft Standard MOU
FDA has now developed a new draft standard MOU on which it is
soliciting public comment. FDA has consulted with NABP in developing
this new draft standard MOU. FDA also considered the comments submitted
in 1999 on the previous draft standard MOU, as well as comments on the
MOU provisions it received in connection with the published 2013 draft
503A guidance. Key provisions of the new draft standard MOU are
summarized and discussed in this section of the document and, where
appropriate, compared to the provisions in the 1999 draft standard MOU.
A. Investigation of Complaints
The new draft standard MOU provides that States that enter into the
MOU will agree to:
Investigate complaints relating to human drug products
compounded in the State and distributed outside the State, including
complaints about adverse drug experiences or certain product quality
issues to, among other things, determine whether there is a potential
public health risk or safety concern, and confirm that any risk or
safety concern is adequately contained;
As appropriate, take action to ensure that the relevant
compounding pharmacy, pharmacist, or physician determines the root
cause of the problem and eliminates any public health risk identified
in relation to the complaint;
Notify FDA within 72 hours of any complaints relating to a
compounded human drug product distributed outside the State involving a
potential public health risk or immediate safety concern, such as a
report of a serious adverse drug experience or serious product quality
issue, the State's initial assessment of the validity of the complaint,
and any actions the State has taken or plans to take to address such
complaints;
Provide FDA with certain information about the complaint,
including the following:
[cir] Name and contact information of the complainant;
[cir] name and address of the pharmacist/pharmacy/physician that is
the subject of the complaint;
[cir] a description of the complaint, including a description of
any compounded drug product that is the subject of the complaint;
[cir] the State's initial assessment of the validity of the
complaint relating to a compounded human drug product distributed
outside the State; and
[cir] a description and date of any actions the State has taken to
address the complaint; and
Maintain records of the complaints it receives, the
investigation of each complaint, and any response to or action taken as
a result of a complaint, beginning when the State receives notice of
the complaint. The draft standard MOU says that the State agrees to
maintain these records for at least 3 years, beginning on the date of
final action or the date of a decision that the complaint requires no
action.
The new draft standard MOU, as compared to the 1999 draft standard
MOU, clarifies that the types of complaints of compounded human drug
products that should be investigated include any adverse drug
experience (not just serious adverse drug experiences, which were
identified as an example of the types of complaints to be investigated
in the 1999 draft standard MOU) and product quality issues that, if
left uncorrected, could lead to potential public health risks or safety
concerns. Even nonserious adverse drug experiences and product quality
issues can be indicative of problems at a compounding facility that
could result in product quality defects leading to serious adverse drug
experiences if not corrected. For example, inflammation around the site
of an injection can indicate product contamination from inadequate
sterile practices at the compounding pharmacy. If the pharmacy has
inadequate sterile practices, other more serious contamination could
result in serious adverse events.
FDA is clarifying that the complaints that States agree to
investigate under the MOU are only those complaints that are made about
compounded human drug products distributed outside the State. In
contrast to the 1999 draft standard MOU, the new draft standard MOU
does not contain a provision that would require the States entering
into the MOU with FDA to agree to investigate alleged violations of the
FD&C Act. Upon further reflection, FDA has tentatively concluded that
it would be more appropriate for FDA to determine whether a particular
action is a violation of Federal law. Of course, if any State
identifies a potential violation of Federal law, it is encouraged to
report it to FDA.
Furthermore, the new draft standard MOU does not include specific
directions to the States relating to how to conduct their investigation
of
[[Page 8876]]
complaints. Rather, as recommended by comments previously submitted on
the 1999 draft standard MOU, the details of such investigations are
left to the States' discretion.
States signing the new standard MOU would agree to notify FDA about
certain complaints and provide FDA with certain information about the
complaint so FDA could investigate the complaint itself, or take other
appropriate action.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FDA is currently considering whether to propose regulations
or issue guidance documents to further its implementation of section
503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act. Notice of any such action will be
provided in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Inordinate Amounts
The new draft standard MOU provides that States that enter into the
MOU will agree to:
Review compounding records during inspections of
compounding pharmacies to identify whether the compounding pharmacy, or
the compounding pharmacist or physician, is distributing inordinate
amounts of compounded human drug products interstate;
Notify FDA if the State identifies any pharmacy,
pharmacist, or physician within its jurisdiction that has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products interstate;
Take action regarding any pharmacy, pharmacist, or
physician that distributes inordinate amounts of compounded human drug
products interstate; and
Provide FDA with certain information, including the
following:
[cir] The name and address of the pharmacy/pharmacist/physician;
[cir] a description of the evidence indicating that the pharmacy/
pharmacist/physician has distributed inordinate amounts of compounded
human drug products interstate, including a description of any
compounded drug product that was distributed in inordinate amounts; and
[cir] a description and date of any actions the State has taken to
address the distribution of inordinate amounts of compounded human drug
product interstate.
In the new draft standard MOU, a pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician
is considered to have distributed an inordinate amount of compounded
human drug products interstate if the number of units of compounded
human drug products distributed interstate during any calendar month is
equal to or greater than 30 percent of the number of units of
compounded and non-compounded drug products distributed or dispensed
both intrastate and interstate by such pharmacist, pharmacy, or
physician during that calendar month. FDA does not intend to include in
the consideration of inordinate amounts those prescriptions dispensed
to a patient (or patient's agent), where the patient (or patient's
agent) to whom the drug is dispensed carries the drug across State
lines after it has been dispensed to the patient (or the patient's
agent) at the facility in which the drug was compounded.\3\ This
concept would be called the 30 percent limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Drugs that a patient takes across state lines in this manner
are distributed interstate. However, for reasons explained in this
notice, FDA's draft standard MOU does not count them toward the
limit on distributing inordinate amounts of compounded drug products
interstate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1999 draft standard MOU defined ``inordinate amounts'' as the
number of compounded prescriptions dispensed or distributed interstate
annually by a pharmacy or physician that is equal to or greater than 20
percent of the total number of prescriptions dispensed or distributed
(including both intrastate and interstate) by such pharmacy or
physician; or the number of compounded prescriptions dispensed or
distributed interstate annually by a pharmacy or physician that is less
than 20 percent of the total number of prescriptions dispensed or
distributed (including both intrastate and interstate) by such pharmacy
or physician, but prescriptions for one or more individual compounded
drug products (including various strengths of the same active
ingredient) dispensed or distributed interstate constitute more than 5
percent of the total number of prescriptions dispensed or distributed.
The 1999 draft standard MOU also included an exclusion from
calculations to determine inordinate amounts for ``local'' interstate
distribution to patients within 50 miles of the compounding pharmacy,
and for interstate distribution in response to a public health
emergency or catastrophic event.
Many comments on the 1999 draft standard MOU opposed the percentage
limits it contained, and some comments on the 2013 draft 503A guidance
opposed any definition of inordinate amounts that would significantly
restrict interstate distributions under section 503A of the FD&C Act.
Other comments suggested not defining ``inordinate amounts,'' leaving
the definition up to the States, or defining the term as ``the amount
that would be considered conventional manufacturing.'' FDA is proposing
the 30 percent limit as the definition of ``inordinate amounts'' for
the following reasons.
Section 503A of the FD&C Act reflects Congress' recognition that
human drug compounding may be appropriate when it is based on receiving
a valid prescription or notation for an identified individual patient.
However, drug products compounded under this section of the FD&C Act
are not required to demonstrate that they are safe or effective, bear
adequate directions for use, or conform to CGMP. Congress, therefore,
imposed strict limits on the distribution of drug products compounded
under this section to protect the public health and the integrity of
the drug approval process.
In particular, Congress did not intend for compounders operating
under these statutory provisions to grow into conventional
manufacturing operations making unapproved drugs, operating a
substantial proportion of their business interstate. Although other
provisions of the FD&C Act apply to state-licensed pharmacies and
physicians that may qualify for the exemptions under section 503A of
the FD&C Act (e.g., the adulteration provisions for making drugs under
insanitary conditions), and although FDA may take action in appropriate
cases against compounders that violate these provisions or that operate
outside of the conditions in section 503A, Congress recognized that
these compounders are primarily overseen by the States. If a
substantial proportion of a compounder's drugs are distributed outside
a State's borders, adequate regulation of those drugs poses significant
challenges to State regulators. States face logistical, regulatory, and
financial challenges inspecting compounders located outside of their
jurisdiction. In addition, particularly if a compounder distributes
drugs to multiple States, it can be very difficult to gather the
scattered information about possible adverse events associated with
those drugs, connect them to the compounder, and undertake coordinated
action to address a potentially serious public health problem.
Therefore, as a baseline measure, section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C
Act limits the distribution of compounded human drug products outside
of the State in which they are compounded under section 503A(a) to 5
percent of the total prescription orders dispensed or distributed by a
licensed pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician. It then directs FDA, in
consultation with NABP, to develop a standard MOU that addresses the
distribution of inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products
interstate and provides for appropriate
[[Page 8877]]
investigation by a State agency of complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed outside such State. Implementation of
this provision requires FDA to determine whether a limit higher than 5
percent would be appropriate, provided the States make certain
agreements: A State agrees to appropriately investigate complaints
relating to compounded human drug products distributed out of the State
and agrees to address the distribution of amounts that would be
inordinate.
FDA tentatively concludes that if a State agrees to meet the
conditions set forth in this MOU, distribution interstate up to the 30
percent limit would not be inordinate. This conclusion is based on
FDA's expectation that States signing the MOU would appropriately
investigate complaints about compounded human drug products distributed
out of State, and address compounders distributing an inordinate amount
of compounded drug products out of the state in which they are
compounded. FDA's current view is that its proposed limit would
appropriately balance the benefits of access to compounded human drug
products with the need to protect the public health and the drug
approval system. We do not believe that an additional limit is
necessary for the distribution of an individual compounded drug product
such as that contained in the 1999 draft standard MOU.
In developing the new draft standard MOU, we considered that
patients can now obtain compounded human drug products from outsourcing
facilities,\4\ which are not subject to volume restrictions on
interstate distribution. This could mitigate the access concerns noted
in some comments FDA received on the definition of ``inordinate
amounts'' in the 1999 draft standard MOU, and in more recent comments
expressing concerns about access if ``inordinate amounts'' is defined
restrictively or the 5 percent limit is enforced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The DQSA adds new section 503B to the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
353b). Under section 503B(b) of the FD&C Act, a compounder may elect
to become an outsourcing facility by registering with FDA. Products
compounded in a registered outsourcing facility can qualify for
exemptions from the FDA approval requirements in section 505 of the
FD&C Act and the requirement to label products with adequate
directions for use under section 502(f)(1) of the FD&C Act if the
requirements in section 503B are met. Outsourcing facilities will be
inspected by FDA and must comply with other provisions of the FD&C
Act, such as CGMP requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is appropriate to provide a bright line test for when
compounding pharmacies located in States that sign the MOU cross the
line to conventional manufacturing that should be subject to all of the
requirements of the FD&C Act, including the new drug approval and CGMP
requirements. Congress provided such a bright line test, the 5 percent
limit, for compounders located in States that do not sign the MOU.
Some commenters in response to the 1999 draft MOU and the 2013
draft 503A guidance were concerned with limitations on interstate
distribution of compounded human drug products to contiguous States. In
the 1999 draft MOU, the calculation of ``inordinate amounts'' excluded
compounded human drug products that were distributed interstate but
within 50 miles of the pharmacy or physician's office. After
considering the provision in the 1999 draft MOU and the comments, FDA
believes that the 30 percent limit on inordinate amounts provided in
this new draft standard MOU is high enough that special calculations to
address interstate distribution between contiguous States or over short
distances are not needed. Moreover, the new draft standard MOU includes
consideration of inordinate amounts of prescriptions dispensed to a
patient (or patient's agent), if the patient (or patient's agent) to
whom the drug is dispensed carries the drug across State lines after it
has been dispensed to the patient (or patient's agent) at the facility
in which the drug was compounded. We also do not intend to count as
part of the 5 percent limit on distribution out of the State
prescriptions dispensed to a patient (or patient's agent), if the
patient (or patient's agent) to whom the drug is dispensed carries the
drug across State lines after it has been dispensed to the patient (or
patient's agent) at the facility in which the drug was compounded. We
believe this treatment of these transactions where there are direct
relationships among the patient, the prescriber, and the pharmacist or
physician compounding the drug is consistent with section 503A of the
FD&C Act.
Finally, the new draft standard MOU does not exclude from the
calculation of ``inordinate amounts'' interstate distributions in
response to a public health emergency or catastrophic event. We believe
the 30 percent limit affords adequate opportunity for interstate
distributions and note that outsourcing facilities may be able to
compound drugs in an emergency and drugs on FDA's drug shortage list,
further mitigating access concerns.
C. Definitions
The Appendix to the new draft standard MOU defines key terms used
in the MOU, including ``adverse drug experience,'' ``serious adverse
drug experience,'' ``product quality issue,'' ``serious product quality
issue,'' and ``distribution.'' The definitions of ``adverse drug
experience,'' ``serious adverse drug experience,'' ``product quality
issue,'' and ``serious product quality issue'' are taken from relevant
sections of FDA's regulations (see 21 CFR 310.305 and 314.81). For
purposes of the new draft standard MOU, a ``distribution'' occurs when
a compounded human drug product leaves the facility in which the drug
was compounded. Distribution includes delivery or shipment to a
physician's office, hospital, or other health care setting for
administration and dispensing to an agent of a patient or to a patient
for his or her own use. However, the definition notes that, to qualify
for the exemptions under section 503A of the FD&C Act, a compounder
must obtain a prescription for an individually identified patient
(section 503A(a)), and the draft standard MOU would not alter this
condition. Interstate distributions of compounded drug products would
count toward the 30 percent limit whether or not the compounded drug
products satisfied the prescription condition, or other conditions, in
section 503A of the FD&C Act.
Some comments on the 2013 draft 503A guidance state that provisions
in the standard MOU relating to drug distribution should not apply to
dispensed drugs. Although the comments do not share a single definition
of dispensing, or offer a detailed definition, they generally take the
position that a drug is dispensed when it is provided pursuant to a
prescription or doctor's order, and that dispensing is not a form of
distribution. We have not adopted this approach, and propose a
definition of distribution that we believe is consistent with the text
and purpose of section 503A of the FD&C Act. Under our draft standard
MOU, a distribution occurs when a compounded drug leaves the facility
where it was made, regardless of whether the drug is also deemed to be
dispensed.
Section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act directs FDA to include
provisions in the MOU regarding the distribution of compounded drugs.
The section does not define distribution to exclude dispensing, which
Congress has done elsewhere when that was its intention.\5\
[[Page 8878]]
Our proposed definition implements the purpose of section 503A(b)(3)(B)
of the FD&C Act, which is to limit and regulate compounded drugs that
are sent out of the state in which they are made.\6\ Our definition is
also consistent with the ordinary meaning of distribute; it is natural
to say that an entity compounding under section 503A of the FD&C Act
distributes the drugs it makes to patients and health care providers,
just as the manufacturers of other regulated articles are said to
distribute their products to their customers. The definition proposed
by comments, on the other hand, would write an exclusion for dispensing
into the statute where Congress did not. It would also mean that drug
products compounded under section 503A of the FD&C Act are excluded
from the MOU and the 5 percent limit, because, in order to qualify for
the exemptions under section 503A, a compounder must obtain a valid
prescription order for an individually identified patient. For the
reasons stated previously in section IV.B of this document, we believe
this would achieve the opposite of what Congress intended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In different contexts, where it would further a regulatory
purpose, Congress and the Agency have specifically defined
distribute to exclude dispensing. See, for example, section 581(5)
of the FD&C Act, which applies to Title II of the DQSA, and 21 CFR
208.3, which applies to 21 CFR part 208 of our regulations. Section
503A of the FD&C Act does not contain a similar definition, or
specific direction to exclude dispensing from the meaning of
distribution. We also note that these definitions were adopted for
provisions that focus on conventionally manufactured drug products,
which assign different obligations to dispensers than to
wholesalers, packagers, or other intermediaries in light of the
different role that dispensers play with respect to product labeling
and the drug distribution chain. In contrast, section 503A of the
FD&C Act focuses on compounded drugs, and the reasons for defining
distribution to exclude dispensing in Title II of the DQSA or part
208 do not apply.
\6\ See discussion of the purposes of section 503A of the FD&C
Act in section IV.B, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In support of their alternative approach, commenters note that in
section 503A(b)(3)(B)(ii) of the FD&C Act, Congress directed FDA to
calculate the quantity of ``prescription orders dispensed and
distributed'' when the Agency applies the 5 percent limit to
compounders in states that do not sign the MOU. This language, however,
supports FDA's proposed approach, because it makes clear that Congress
understood the word distribute in this section to refer to filling
prescription orders; otherwise it would not have directed the Agency to
count the number of prescription orders that pharmacists and
prescribers ``distributed.'' Nor is there anything to suggest that
Congress understood distributed and dispensed to be mutually exclusive
categories rather than overlapping categories. Given the statutory text
and purpose, we believe that Congress referred to drugs dispensed or
distributed in section 503A(b)(3)(B) of the FD&C Act to make clear that
the Agency must not limit its calculation of total prescription orders
to compounded drugs that the pharmacy or prescriber makes, but also
include any other prescription orders, such as conventionally
manufactured drugs, for which the pharmacist or prescriber serves
solely as the dispenser.
V. Other Issues
A. Development of a Standard MOU
A number of commenters on both the 1999 draft MOU and on the 2013
draft 503A guidance suggested that FDA specifically negotiate MOUs with
individual States, rather than develop a standard MOU. Section 503A of
the FD&C Act requires the Agency to develop a standard MOU for use by
the States. Furthermore, it would be impractical to develop an
individualized MOU with every State, and creating individualized MOUs
would create a patchwork of regulation of interstate distribution from
compounders seeking to qualify for the exemptions under section 503A of
the FD&C Act. This would be confusing to the health care community, as
well as regulators.
B. Exemptions From the Interstate Distribution Provisions
Some comments on the 2013 draft 503A guidance requested that we
consider exempting certain drug products or types of compounding
entities from the limits in the MOU and the 5 percent limit. For
example, some comments recommended that we exempt nonsterile products
or home infusion pharmacies.
Congress did not exempt any particular drug products or compounding
entities from the 5 percent limit. Furthermore, FDA believes that the 5
percent limit and the MOU limit on inordinate amount provisions are
important to distinguish pharmacy compounding from conventional
manufacturing in the guise of compounding, and to protect consumers and
the integrity of the drug approval process. American consumers rely on
the FDA drug approval process to ensure that medications have been
evaluated for safety and effectiveness before they are marketed in the
United States. Drugs made by compounders, including those made at human
drug compounding outsourcing facilities, are not FDA-approved. This
means that they have not undergone premarket review of safety,
effectiveness, or manufacturing quality. Therefore, when an FDA-
approved drug is commercially available, FDA recommends that
practitioners prescribe the FDA-approved drug rather than a compounded
drug unless the prescribing practitioner has determined that a
compounded product is necessary for the particular patient and would
provide a significant difference for the patient as compared to the
FDA-approved commercially available drug product.
In section 503A of the FD&C Act, Congress enacted several
conditions to differentiate compounders from manufacturers and provided
that only if they meet those conditions can they qualify for the
exemptions from the drug approval requirements in section 505 of the
FD&C Act. One of those conditions relates to limitations on the
interstate distribution of compounded human drug products, and FDA
intends to enforce those provisions to differentiate compounding that
qualifies for the exemptions from conventional manufacturing in the
guise of compounding that does not, and will apply the conditions to
all types of drugs and all categories of compounding.
C. Information Sharing Between States and FDA
Several commenters on the 1999 draft MOU proposed that signatories
to the MOU would agree to share information on a variety of subjects.
The new draft standard MOU provides that States will agree to notify
FDA of any complaint relating to a compounded human drug product
distributed outside the State involving a potential public health risk
or immediate safety concern, such as a report of a serious adverse drug
experience or serious product quality issue, and provide information
about those events and issues. The new draft standard MOU also provides
that States will notify FDA if they identify a pharmacist, pharmacy, or
physician within their jurisdiction that has distributed inordinate
amounts of compounded human drug products interstate. In addition, FDA
regularly posts on its compounding Web site information about
enforcement and other actions related to compounders that violate the
FD&C Act, and it is obligated to share certain information with States
under section 105 of the DQSA.
[[Page 8879]]
D. Enforcement of the 5 Percent Limit on Distribution of Compounded
Drug Products Out of the State in Which They Are Compounded
In the 2013 draft 503A guidance, FDA stated that it does not intend
to enforce the 5 percent limit on distribution of compounded drug
products outside of the State in which they are compounded until 90
days after FDA has finalized a standard MOU and made it available to
the States for their consideration and signature. Most commenters on
the 2013 draft 503A guidance said this period was too short, but did
not recommend a specific alternative. A few commenters recommended a
different timeframe, one recommending 120 days and another recommending
365 days. The 1997 Senate Committee Report for the Food and Drug
Administration Modernization Act suggests that a 180-day period for
States to decide whether to sign might be appropriate.\7\ The Agency
proposes a 180-day period after the final standard MOU is made
available for signature before FDA will enforce the 5 percent limit in
States that have not signed the MOU, and invites public comment on
whether this is the appropriate timeframe. FDA will announce at the
time it publishes the final standard MOU and makes it available for
signature when it intends to begin enforcing the 5 percent limit in
States that do not sign.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``[U]ntil the State . . . enters into a memorandum of
understanding (MOU) with the Secretary or 180 days after the
development of the standard MOU, whichever comes first, the [section
503A] exemption shall not apply if inordinate quantities of
compounded products are distributed outside of the State in which
the compounding pharmacy or physician is located.'' (U.S. Senate
Committee Report, see note 2.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they
conduct or sponsor. ``Collection of information'' is defined in 44
U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or
requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records,
or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)), requires Federal Agencies to provide a
60-day notice in the Federal Register for each proposed collection of
information before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To
comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed
collection of information set forth in this document.
With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.
Section 503A of the FD&C Act describes, among other things, the
circumstances under which certain human drug products compounded by a
licensed pharmacist or licensed physician are exempt from certain
sections of the FD&C Act. One of the conditions to qualify for the
exemptions listed in section 503A of the FD&C Act is that: (1) The
human drug product is compounded in a State that has entered into an
MOU with FDA that addresses the distribution of inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products interstate and provides for appropriate
investigation by a State agency of complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed outside such a State; or (2) if the
human drug product is compounded in a State that has not entered into
such an MOU, the licensed pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician does not
distribute, or cause to be distributed, compounded human drug products
out of the State in which they are compounded, more than 5 percent of
the total prescription orders dispensed or distributed by such pharmacy
or physician (see section 503A(b)(3)(B)(i) and (b)(3)(B)(ii).
Section 503A(b)(3) directs FDA, in consultation with the NABP, to
develop a standard MOU for use by states in complying with the
provisions concerning the interstate distribution of inordinate amounts
of compounded human drug products interstate and appropriate
investigation by a State agency of complaints relating to compounded
human drug products distributed outside such State.
The new draft standard MOU contains the information collections
that must be approved by OMB under the PRA. These information
collections are described in this section of the document. For purposes
of this analysis, FDA assumes that 25 States will sign the standard MOU
with FDA.
Under section III.a. of the new draft standard MOU, the State will
notify FDA by email at StateMOU@fda.hhs.gov within 72 hours of
receiving any complaint relating to a compounded human drug product
distributed outside the State involving a potential public health risk
or immediate safety concern, such as a report of a serious adverse drug
experience or serious product quality issue. The notification will
include the following information: (1) The name and contact information
of the complainant, in the case of a complaint; (2) the name and
address of the pharmacist, pharmacy, and/or physician that is the
subject of the complaint; (3) a description of the complaint, including
a description of any compounded drug product that is the subject of the
complaint; (4) the State's initial assessment of the validity of the
complaint relating to a compounded human drug product distributed
outside the State; and (5) a description and date of any actions the
State has taken to address the complaint. In addition, the States will
maintain records of the complaints they receive, the investigation of
each complaint, and any response to or action taken as a result of a
complaint, beginning when the State receives notice of the complaint.
The States will maintain these records for at least 3 years, beginning
on the date of final action or the date of a decision that the
complaint requires no action.
Based on our knowledge of State regulation of compounding practices
and related complaints, we estimate that annually a total of
approximately 25 States (``no. of respondents'' in table 1, row 1) will
notify FDA within 72 hours of receiving any complaint relating to a
compounded human drug product distributed outside the State involving a
potential public health risk or immediate safety concern. We estimate
that each State will notify FDA annually of approximately 3 complaints
it receives (``no. of responses per respondent'' in table 1, row 1),
for a total of 75 notifications of complaints sent to FDA (``total
annual responses'' in table 1, row 1). We estimate that preparing and
submitting this information to us as described in the MOU will take
approximately 0.5 hours per response (``average burden per response''
in table 1, row 1), for a total of 37.5 hours (``total hours'' in table
1, row 1).
We also estimate that a total of approximately 25 States (``no. of
recordkeepers'' in table 2) will prepare and maintain records for 3
years of the complaints they receive, investigations of complaints, and
on any State action
[[Page 8880]]
taken or replies to complaints. We estimate that each State will
receive approximately 3 complaints annually and will prepare and
maintain approximately 5 records per each complaint the State receives,
for a total of 15 records per State (``no. of records per
recordkeeper'' in table 2), and a total of 375 records annually across
all States (``total annual records'' in table 2). We further estimate
that preparing and maintaining these records will take approximately 1
hour per record (``average burden per recordkeeping (in hours)'' in
table 2), for a total of 375 hours (``total hours'' in table 2).
Under section III.a. of the new draft standard MOU, investigations
performed by the State under this MOU will ensure that (1) the root
cause of the problem that is the subject of the complaint is
determined, (2) any risk or safety concern associated with the
compounded human drug product is adequately contained (i.e., there is
no ongoing risk to the public), and (3) sufficient corrective action
has been taken to eliminate any future public health risk.
Under section III.b of the new draft standard MOU, the States will
notify FDA by email at StateMOU@fda.hhs.gov within 7 days of
determining that a pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician within their
jurisdiction has distributed inordinate amounts of compounded human
drug products interstate, as described in the MOU. The notification
should include the following information: (1) The name and address of
the pharmacist/pharmacy/physician; (2) a description of the evidence
indicating that the pharmacist/pharmacy/physician has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products interstate,
including a description of any compounded drug product that was
distributed in inordinate amounts; and (3) a description and date of
any actions the State has taken to address the distribution of
inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products interstate.
We estimate that annually a total of approximately 25 States (``no.
of respondents'' in table 1, row 2) will notify FDA of their
determination that a pharmacist, pharmacy, or physician has distributed
inordinate amounts of compounded human drug products interstate. We
estimate that each State will notify FDA annually of approximately 2
determinations it makes (``no. of responses per respondent'' in table
1, row 2), for a total of 50 determinations (``total annual responses''
in table 1, row 2). We estimate that preparing and submitting this
information to FDA as described in the MOU will take approximately 0.5
hours per response (``average burden per response'' in table 1, row 2),
for a total of 25 hours (``total hours'' in table 1, row 2).
Under section V of the current draft standard MOU, a State may
designate a new liaison to the MOU by notifying FDA's administrative
liaison in writing. If a State's liaison becomes unavailable to fulfill
its functions under the MOU, the State will name a new liaison within 2
weeks and notify FDA.
We estimate that annually a total of approximately 13 States (``no.
of respondents'' in table 1, row 3) will notify FDA of a new liaison to
the MOU. We estimate that each State will submit to FDA annually
approximately 1 notification of a new liaison (``no. of responses per
respondent'' in table 1, row 3), for a total of 13 notifications of a
new liaison (``total annual responses'' in table 1, row 3). We estimate
that preparing and submitting each notification as described in the MOU
will take approximately 0.2 hours per response (``average burden per
response'' in table 1, row 3), for a total of 2.6 hours (``total
hours'' in table 1, row 3).
Under section VI of the new draft standard MOU, a State may
terminate its participation in the MOU by submitting to FDA a 30-day
notice of termination.
We estimate that annually a total of approximately 1 State (``no.
of respondents'' in table 1, row 4) will notify FDA that it intends to
terminate its participation in the MOU. We estimate that this State
will submit to FDA annually approximately 1 notification of termination
(``no. of responses per respondent'' in table 1, row 4), for a total of
1 notification (``total annual responses'' in table 1, row 4). We
estimate that preparing and submitting the notification as described in
the MOU will take approximately 0.2 hours per notification (``average
burden per response'' in table 1, row 4), for a total of 0.2 hours
(``total hours'' in table 1, row 4).
Under section VI of the new draft standard MOU, if a State does not
adhere to the provisions of the MOU, FDA may post a 30-day notice of
termination on its Web site. As a result of this action by FDA, the
State will notify all pharmacists, pharmacies, and physicians within
the State of the termination and advise them that compounded human drug
products may be distributed (or caused to be distributed) out of the
State only in quantities that do not exceed 5 percent of the total
prescription orders dispensed or distributed by the pharmacist,
pharmacy, or physician.
We estimate that annually a total of approximately 1 State (``no.
of respondents'' in table 3) will submit 1 notification of termination
as described in the MOU (``no. of disclosures per respondent'' in table
3) to the pharmacists, pharmacies, and physicians in its State for a
total of 1 notification of termination (``total annual disclosures'' in
table 3). We estimate that preparing and submitting each notification
will take approximately 1 hour per notification (``average burden per
disclosure (in hours)'' in table 3), for a total of 1 hour (``total
hours'' in table 3).
FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:
Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number o
Compounding MOU between FDA and Number of responses per Total annual Average burden Total hours
States respondents respondent responses per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State notifies FDA of 25 3 75 0.5 37.5
compounding complaints it
receives......................
State notifies FDA of the 25 2 50 0.5 25
distribution of inordinate
amounts of compounded drug
products......................
State notifies FDA of a new 13 1 13 0.2 2.6
liaison to the MOU............
State notifies FDA of its 1 1 1 0.2 0.2
intent to terminate
participation in the MOU......
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................... 64 7 139 N/A 65.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
[[Page 8881]]
Table 2--Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average burden
Compounding MOU between FDA and Number of Number of Total annual per
States recordkeepers records per records recordkeeping Total Hours
recordkeeper (in Hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State recordkeeping for 3 years 25 15 375 1 375
of compounding complaints.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................... 25 15 375 1 375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
Table 3--Estimated Annual Third-Party Disclosure Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Average burden
Compounding MOU between FDA and Number of disclosures Total annual per disclosure Total hours
States respondents per respondent disclosures (in Hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State notification to 1 1 1 1 1
pharmacists, pharmacies, and
physicians that its
participation in the MOU has
been terminated by FDA.........
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 1 1 1 1 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
VII. Request for Comments
FDA invites comments from interested persons on the new draft
standard MOU that would establish an agreement between the signatory
States and FDA regarding the appropriate investigation by such States
of complaints relating to compounded human drug products distributed
outside the State, and the distribution of inordinate amounts of
compounded human drug products interstate. The Agency is providing a
120-day comment period.
After considering any comments on the new draft standard MOU
submitted to this docket, FDA intends to finalize the standard MOU and
make it available for signature by individual States. FDA will
determine at the time of publication of the final MOU how long it will
allow States to consider whether to sign the MOU before FDA begins to
enforce the 5 percent limit in those States that have not signed an
MOU.
Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to https://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set comments. Identify comments with the docket number found
in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be
seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
VIII. Electronic Access
Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft standard
MOU at https://www.regulations.gov.
Dated: February 12, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-03420 Filed 2-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P