Tag Archives: California Pedigree Law

InBrief: California Board of Pharmacy Webcasts

September 5, 2012 Dirk Rodgers

The next meeting of the Enforcement Committee of the California Board of Pharmacy is next Tuesday, September 11, 2012. The Enforcement Committee meetings are where the Board has been discussing issues related to the implementation of the pedigree law. The full agenda for next week’s meeting can be found here, but here is the extract of the pedigree content:

II. Discussion on the Implementation of California’s Electronic Pedigree Requirements for Prescription Medication (10 a.m.)

(a) Presentations and Questions from the Pharmaceutical Supply Chain on Their Readiness to Meet California’s Staggered E‐Pedigree Implementation Schedule

(b) Update on the Status of Proposed Regulations to Continue reading InBrief: California Board of Pharmacy Webcasts →

HDMA

Standards and Guidance For U.S. Pharma Supply Chain Technology

August 6, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 1 Comment

[This essay is one of two long lost essays that have now been restored on RxTrace. It was originally published on November 22, 2010. See “Return Of Two Classics” for an explanation.]

In my last essay, “Who Will Decide Which Pedigree Model You Will Invest In?” I pointed out how easy it is to get confused about pedigree technology because of varying claims made by certain companies who have interests that don’t align well with yours. So where can you get better information? I can provide you with a few good sources, and I will also tell you about a missing ingredient that I see in the current guidance landscape that will need to be addressed in the next couple of years. Continue reading Standards and Guidance For U.S. Pharma Supply Chain Technology →

serialization

InBrief: Estimated Rise in Serialized Drugs in The U.S. Supply Chain, 2012

August 1, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 1 Comment

RxTrace.com Serialization Estimate 2012 — Click image to enlarge

In August 2010 I started an annual estimate of the rise in the percentage of drugs in the U.S. supply chain that will have serial numbers attached. Click here to read my first essay on the topic which explains the concept. Click here to read my 2011 essay. These are not estimates of the actual percentage today. Rather, it is a prediction of the rise from an immeasurably small percentage in early 2010 to 100% at some time in the future. My plan is to Continue reading InBrief: Estimated Rise in Serialized Drugs in The U.S. Supply Chain, 2012 →

California Pedigree Law

Who Will Decide Which Pedigree Model You Will Invest In?

July 30, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 5 Comments

[This essay is one of two long lost essays that have now been restored on RxTrace. It was originally published on November 15, 2010. See “Return Of Two Classics” for an explanation.]

In one of my most widely read essays, “RFID is DEAD…At Unit-Level in Pharma”, I pointed out that the choice of serial number carrier technology to be used for compliance with the California Pedigree Law would be decided solely by the pharmaceutical manufacturers. I pointed out that most of them would end up choosing 2D barcodes because their ongoing costs for Radio Frequency IDentification (RFID) would be too high.

Since the law doesn’t specify a carrier technology, and because the manufacturers will foot the bill for whatever technology is used, naturally, they get to lead the supply chain in that choice. If you don’t like what they are choosing, then please, step up and pay them to put your preferred carrier technology on their packages. I’m sure the manufacturer’s would put whatever you want to pay for on their packages as long as it would comply with the law.

But what about the pedigree model that the supply chain will use for compliance? Can we apply similar logic to determine who will get to choose the technology that defines what a compliant pedigree is? Yes we can! And here it is. Continue reading Who Will Decide Which Pedigree Model You Will Invest In? →

California Pedigree Law

PDUFA Will Not Include RxTEC

June 18, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 4 Comments

Politico.com reported today that the national track and trace addendum that many hoped would be made part of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) of 2012 was rejected by the U.S. House and Senate Conference Committee. That committee is working on merging the differences between the versions adopted by the two Houses of Congress into a single bill. See “’Track And Trace’ On Ice For Now” in Politico PULSE.

According to Politico, “The word emerged late Sunday night from congressional staffers working on the package who said a last-minute compromise effort failed to win the support of stakeholders, and a decision had been made to drop it — for now.”

Assuming there isn’t a last minute reconsideration, this means that the odds are now slim that a national regulation will preempt the California pedigree law before its effective dates. The remaining chance comes from the fact that the industry is well organized and well represented by the Pharmaceutical Distribution Security Alliance (PDSA) and could decide to back the introduction of a stand-alone bill that contains the essence of the Pharmaceutical Traceability Enhancement Code (RxTEC) language that was part of the PDUFA negotiations, or some other proposal. The success of such an approach likely depends on Continue reading PDUFA Will Not Include RxTEC →

California Pedigree Law

The Preemption Provisions Built Into The California Pedigree Law

June 4, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 10 Comments

In this time of potential Congressional legislative action on drug track and trace I think it is time to take a closer look at the specific provisions contained in the current California pedigree law regarding Federal preemption. As I recall, this language was added in the most recent update of the law, the same update that pushed it out to 2015 – 2017. It is an invitation to the federal government to create their own national pedigree regulation and, if that happens, would cause the California pedigree law to become “inoperative”, thus preempted.

Here is the full text of section 4034.1 from the California Business and Professions Code: Continue reading The Preemption Provisions Built Into The California Pedigree Law →

pharmaceutical supply chain

The Built-in Protections Of The U.S. Pharma Supply Chain

May 7, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 13 Comments

Last week we learned that 11 people were charged with the record-breaking $75 Million drug heist from the Eli Lilly warehouse in Enfield, Connecticut back in March of 2010 (see the excellent article by Jay Weaver in the Miami Herald, including a copy of one of the multiple indictments). Importantly, all of the stolen drugs from the Lilly warehouse were apparently recovered before they could be re-introduced into the legitimate supply chain. But this investigation and the charges go well beyond the infamous Lilly warehouse theft. They include other pharmaceutical, liquor, cigarette and cell phone cargo thefts around the country, allegedly perpetrated by members of the same criminal organization. Cracking this organization could end up disrupting the most prolific source of cargo theft in the United States over the last five years.

Congratulations are due to the law enforcement organizations who contributed to the investigation and to bringing the charges. They include DEA, ATF, FBI, U.S. Attorney of Florida, Miami-Dade Police Department, Florida Highway Patrol, U.S. Attorney of Illinois and U.S. Attorney of New Jersey.

This episode highlights one of the things I call the built-in protections of the U.S. pharmaceutical supply chain—the things that, combined, result in the U.S. having the safest supply chain in the world. In this case, it is strong and cooperative law enforcement organizations. While far from perfect, would you trade our system of justice, including law enforcement, with that of any other country in the world? I don’t think you would (unless you’re one of the Villa brothers or their associates!).

But what are the other components that result in the safest drug supply chain in the world? It’s certainly doesn’t occur by accident, so what are the built-in protections? Continue reading The Built-in Protections Of The U.S. Pharma Supply Chain →

WMS

The Serial Number Handling In Your WMS Probably Isn’t Sufficient For Pharma Serialization

April 30, 2012 Dirk Rodgers 2 Comments

Most Warehouse Management Systems (WMS) available on the market today do a fine job of allowing their users to manage inventories in the warehouses of drug manufacturers, distributors and chain drug stores. A WMS is a software system that may be a part of a larger Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, or it may be a third-party application that is interfaced with the owner’s ERP system.

All WMS systems that I am aware of are intended to be sold into multiple industries, not just in pharma. That’s so that the WMS vendor can maximize their sales. The more industries, the more sales and the more profitable it is. Because some industries have long had serial numbers on some of their products (computers and peripheral equipment, cell phones, electronics, medical equipment, appliances, etc.) WMS vendors have included serial number handling in their software for decades. In fact, I would bet that a serial number handling feature was included in WMS systems since the very beginning of that category of software.

However, buyers of WMS systems in the pharma supply chain should be very careful not to confuse a “serial number handling” or even “serialization” checkbox on the WMS vendor’s spec sheets with the kind of “serialization” they will need for compliance with modern pharma serialization regulations. I include Continue reading The Serial Number Handling In Your WMS Probably Isn’t Sufficient For Pharma Serialization →

…a comprehensive exploration of the intersection between healthcare supply chains, track and trace technology, standards and global regulatory compliance