Tag Archives: manufacturer

DSCSA: Special Privileges For The “Big-3” Wholesale Distributors, Part 1

iStock_000011736093SmallerAre you a pharmaceutical manufacturer who is acting as a wholesale distributor, as defined by the U.S. Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA), for some of your products?  This might occur if you are buying pre-packaged drugs from the New Drug Application (NDA)-holder or Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA)-holder and offering them for sale to U.S. wholesale distributors.  If you cannot justifiably fit into the DSCSA definitions of either a “co-licensed partner”, or an “exclusive distributor” for those drugs, you might as well remove them from your catalog because the “Big-3” wholesale distributors—AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health and McKesson—probably will not be willing to buy them anymore as of next January.

That’s because the DSCSA, which begins to take effect at that time, will most likely consider you as a Continue reading DSCSA: Special Privileges For The “Big-3” Wholesale Distributors, Part 1

Product Identifier Authentication (PIA)

iStock_000015985566SmallerIn my last essay I touched on the use of Product Identifier Authentication, or PIA, as an alternative to the collection and distribution of aggregation data to allow wholesale distributors and repackagers to meet the verification requirements of the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA).  Starting in November of 2018 for repackagers and in November of 2019 for wholesalers, the DSCSA will require these companies to verify that the standardized numerical identifier (SNI)—commonly referred to as “the serial number”—corresponds with one that the manufacturer originally applied to drugs that are found to be suspect, and for any returned drug that will be resold.

As I pointed out in my previous essay (see “The Aggregation Hoax and PIA”), manufacturers and repackagers may be able to choose to pass on aggregation information that would allow wholesale distributors to meet their requirements, or they might choose to offer a PIA service that would allow these companies to check the authenticity of one or more SNIs via a web service. Continue reading Product Identifier Authentication (PIA)

The Aggregation Hoax and PIA

????????Pharmaceutical manufacturers should be aware that there is a lot of uninformed misinformation going around out there lately about the need for them to supply aggregation data to their trading partners to meet the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) (for more on aggregation, see “Pharma Aggregation: How Companies Are Achieving Perfection Today”, “DQSA: Will U.S. Pharma Distributors Mandate Aggregation Data In Phase 1?”, and “Does The DQSA Require Manufacturers To Provide Aggregation Data? Survey Says…”).  In my view, prior to 2023 you can collect aggregation data if you want to, but don’t let anyone tell you that the DSCSA requires you to.  It doesn’t.  And I also encourage you to be skeptical of any claims that wholesale distributors will not accept your product anytime soon unless you provide them with aggregation data.  Feel free to Continue reading The Aggregation Hoax and PIA

DSCSA: Transaction Statement

TS.iStock_000008261949SmallerThis is the third in a series of essays about data exchange components required by the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) beginning next January.  The previous essays in this series include DSCSA Transaction Information (TI) and DSCSA Transaction History (TH).   The DSCSA, which is Title II of the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA), defines Transaction Statement (TS) this way:

“(27) TRANSACTION STATEMENT.—

The ‘transaction statement’ is a statement, in paper or electronic form, that the entity transferring ownership in a transaction—

(A) is Continue reading DSCSA: Transaction Statement

DSCSA: Transaction History

TH.iStock_000000755934SmallerThis is the second in a series of essays about data exchange components required by the Drug Supply Chain Security Act (DSCSA) beginning next January.  Last week’s essay was about DSCSA Transaction Information (TI).  On the surface, Transaction History (TH) looks simple.  The DSCSA, which is Title II of the Drug Quality and Security Act (DQSA), defines TH this way:

“(25) TRANSACTION HISTORY.—

The term ‘transaction history’ means a statement in paper or electronic form, including the transaction information for each prior transaction going back to the manufacturer of the product.”

According to this simple definition, Continue reading DSCSA: Transaction History

3PL Operation Under California ePedigree

Distribution_centre
Photo from Wikipedia

Important Notice To Readers of This Essay On November 27, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Drug Quality and Security Act of 2013 into law. That act has many provisions, but one is to pre-empt all existing and future state serialization and pedigree laws like those that previously existed in California and Florida. Some or all of the information contained in this essay is about some aspect of one or more of those state laws and so that information is now obsolete. It is left here only for historical purposes for those wishing to understand those old laws and the industry’s response to them.Another one of the many types of businesses that will need to make changes to their operations in California once the pharmaceutical ePedigree law goes into effect is the third party logistics provider (3PL) business.  There are a number of important differences between wholesale distributors and 3PLs, and because there seem to be confusion over the wording of the California law and recent comments made by California Board of Pharmacy officials regarding 3PLs (at least I’m confused), companies should be careful about their implementations.   I do not have the answers and this is not legal advice, so please check with the Board and your lawyer to confirm anything you read here, but I will tell you my current thinking on the subject. Continue reading 3PL Operation Under California ePedigree

The New Grandfathering Provisions Of The California Pedigree Law

Grandfather clockImportant Notice To Readers of This Essay On November 27, 2013, President Barack Obama signed the Drug Quality and Security Act of 2013 into law. That act has many provisions, but one is to pre-empt all existing and future state serialization and pedigree laws like those that previously existed in California and Florida. Some or all of the information contained in this essay is about some aspect of one or more of those state laws and so that information is now obsolete. It is left here only for historical purposes for those wishing to understand those old laws and the industry’s response to them.At the February 5, 2013 meeting of the California Board of Pharmacy the Board took the final vote to proceed with filing a number of important clarifying regulations–the first since the Ridley-Thomas bill was enacted in 2008 that established the current staggered effective dates.  These include  the recognition of the FDA Standardized Numeric Identifier (SNI) as the “unique identifier” for use on each drug package, and definition around how supply chain companies can grandfather their existing non-serialized, non-pedigreed stock at the time the law goes into effect.

The official minutes of the meeting are not yet available but the video has been posted for a few weeks now.  The pertinent action occurs in the first video of the two day meeting at approximately 2:24:00 (hours:minutes:seconds).  (Don’t you just love government meetings on YouTube?)  The source text of the pending regulation (which is Continue reading The New Grandfathering Provisions Of The California Pedigree Law

Pharma Anti-Counterfeiting and Serialization

Counterfeiting of drugs has become a favorite activity of organized criminals and it negatively impacts the citizens of every country in the world.  The pharma industry is multi-national, the criminals are multi-national, the patients that are harmed are multi-national.  What we need now more than ever before is a multi-national approach to fighting these crimes.

That’s why I was deeply disappointed last week to read that the World Health Organization (WHO) has barred a group of people with certain global crime fighting ideas from participating in their “member state” meeting on substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit medical products being held today through Wednesday in Buenos Aires, Argentina.  See the Reuters article “Row flares over global fight against fake medicine” and see Roger Bate’s introduction to the group’s position “How to achieve international action on falsified and substandard medicines” and don’t miss the full PDF containing the group’s well-stated position.

The dispute is Continue reading Pharma Anti-Counterfeiting and Serialization