20.02.2013 Views

Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

Bioidentical Hormones - U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

246<br />

Only <strong>on</strong>e state, Utah, requires that active ingredients be approved by FDA for some<br />

medical use.<br />

See Utah Admin. Code r. 156- 17b-614(3)(d). Of the three remaining states, <strong>on</strong>e requires<br />

that the ingredients meet or exceed USP/NF standards, see Nev. Admin. Code § 639.757,<br />

and two require that the chemical be procured from another entity registered by that<br />

state's board, see 3 Colo. Code Regs. § 719-1.00.24 and Mo. Code Regs. Ann. tit. 20, §<br />

2220-2.400.<br />

3. Determinati<strong>on</strong> of Medical Necessity.<br />

* No state other than Arkansas requires documentati<strong>on</strong> ofmedical necessity prior to<br />

dispensing a compounded product.<br />

In Arkansas, a pharmacist must obtain documentati<strong>on</strong> of a "specific medical need" when<br />

the compounded product is "essentially a copy" of a commercially available FDAapproved<br />

drug product. 3<br />

4. Standards for Compounding Sterile Pharmaceutical Products<br />

* Onlyfour states require compliance with the United States Pharmacopoeia<br />

(USP) chapter <strong>on</strong> sterile compounding.<br />

The USP, a private entity recognized in the FDCA with regard to certain pharmaceutical<br />

standards, has provided a chapter c<strong>on</strong>taining standards for sterile compounding (USP<br />

) that is intended to be mandatory. The USP standards are far less strict than FDA<br />

standards for approved drugs and provide patients with less protecti<strong>on</strong>. Although<br />

opp<strong>on</strong>ents of FDA oversight of sterile compounding point to the USP standards as an<br />

alternative to the higher FDA standards, compounding interests have opposed adopti<strong>on</strong><br />

by the states of the USP requirement and the states have generally failed to adopt the USP<br />

chapter as a requirement. Only four states have adopted the USP chapter. See Utah<br />

Admin. Code r.156-17b-19 (2007); N.M. Code R. § 16.19.6.11 (2007); 856 Ind. Admin.<br />

Code 1-30-1, et seq. (2007); 247 Mass. Code Regs. 9.01(3) (2007).<br />

3 The Arkansas rule provides:<br />

Compounding a drug product that is commercially available in the marketplace or that is<br />

essentially a copy of a commercially available FDA-approved drug product is generally<br />

prohibited. However, in special circumstances a pharmacist may compound an appropriate<br />

quantity of a drug that is <strong>on</strong>ly slightly different than an FDA-approved drug that is commercially<br />

available based <strong>on</strong> documentati<strong>on</strong> provided by the prescribing physician of a patient speci ic<br />

medical need (e.g. the physician requests an alternate product due to hypersensitivity to excipients<br />

or preservative in the FDA-approved product, or the physician requests an effective alternate<br />

dosage form) or if the drug product is not commercially available. The unavailability of such drug<br />

product must be documented prior to compounding. The recommended methodology for<br />

documenting unavailability is to print the screen of wholesalers showing back-ordered.<br />

disc<strong>on</strong>tinued, or out-of-stock items." Id (emphasis added).<br />

070-02-0001 Ark. Code R. (2007).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!