WASHINGTON — Two-thirds of the foreign drug manufacturers subject to
inspection by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may never have
been visited by agency inspectors, a government watchdog reported to
Congress last week.
The FDA this year listed 3,249
foreign pharmaceutical manufacturers subject to its inspection — yet
the agency cannot determine whether it has ever inspected 2,133 of
them, according to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
released during a House subcommittee hearing.
While some of the more than 3,000 firms may never have exported
prescription drugs or drug ingredients to the United States, others
likely have.
Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., asked who those firms are and what they’re
shipping during last Thursday’s hearing of the House Energy and
Commerce subcommittee on oversight and investigations.
“We don’t know and we are not certain the FDA knows,” Marcia Crosse, director of health care at the GAO, replied.
The few foreign inspections the FDA does conduct in any given year hit
just 7 percent of the foreign drug makers exporting to the U.S., the
GAO estimates. That means more than 13 years can pass before a foreign
manufacturer is visited even once, Crosse said.
In the case of China, which with 714 drug firms boasts the largest
number subject to FDA scrutiny of any country, the record is far worse.
The FDA is slated to inspect just 13 Chinese establishments this year,
meaning just 1.8 percent will see an FDA inspector, according to the
GAO report.
In India, the No. 2 country, the record is far better. There, 65 of its
410 firms, or 15.8 percent, are slated for inspection this year,
according to the GAO. That’s in line with the 16.8 percent of Swiss
drug firms the FDA likely will inspect in 2007.
The GAO and Congress have long warned of the FDA’s shortcomings in its
foreign drug inspection program. The new GAO findings largely reprise
many of the same warnings outlined in a 1998 report.
“It’s déjà vu all over again,” said Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich.
Nearly all U.S. drug makers are inspected at least once every two
years, as mandated by a law drawn up long before imports seized a
sizable chunk of the drug market. There is no such requirement that the
FDA conduct foreign inspections with any regularity, even as imports of
all kinds grow in volume. Concerns about the safety of imported drugs,
food, toys and other consumer products have been at the fore for months.
“We’re finding ourselves again on the brink of one more problem dealing
with imports into our country,” said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas,
adding that current FDA laws and regulations were never intended to
handle the increasing volume of imports.
An estimated 80 percent of the active pharmaceutical ingredients used
to make drugs sold in the U.S. are imported. Among finished drugs, an
estimated 40 percent are made abroad.
The FDA plans to inspect just 300 foreign drug firms this year,
announcing in advance its intent to do so each time. That can hinder
the FDA’s ability to view normal, day-to-day operations, the GAO found.
Further, FDA inspectors aren’t provided with translators, leaving them
to rely on English-speaking firm employees.
Of those foreign inspections, 88 percent are of firms that make drugs
awaiting FDA approval, according to the GAO. The balance are of the
type of periodic assessment meant to ensure a company’s products remain
safe in the years following FDA approval. Within the U.S., the
proportion is flipped, with 78 percent of FDA drug inspections of the
routine, surveillance variety.
The head of the FDA, meanwhile, said the issue is larger than just one of inspection numbers.
“The solution to ensuring the quality of imports does not rely solely
on increasing the number of inspections we conduct abroad — or even at
the border,” Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach said, adding that the FDA seeks
to revamp its whole import strategy to focus on ensuring quality is
built into agency-regulated products from the start. He also proposed
posting FDA employees abroad, where they could help build up the
agency’s foreign counterparts.
When FDA does visit foreign plants, its inspectors sometimes make
harrowing findings. A warning letter released last Thursday by the FDA
cited a Chinese manufacturer of pharmaceutical ingredients for a litany
of problems, including rust, flaking paint and holes in the ceiling of
the production area for an unnamed product.
Much of the uncertainty in the FDA’s handling of foreign drug makers
stems from its outdated computer systems, which rely on multiple
databases containing sometimes conflicting information that can be
compared only manually, the GAO found. Those databases, for instance,
contain tallies of foreign drug firms subject to FDA inspection that
range from roughly 3,000 to about 6,800, the GAO found.
“How can we have any confidence FDA is truly managing the risk that may
come from foreign-made drug products if the FDA doesn’t know the exact
number or location of foreign drug manufacturers?” Stupak asked.
Some clarity should be forthcoming: The FDA is soliciting bids to have
its worldwide registration database verified, said Margaret Glavin, the
FDA’s associate commissioner for regulatory affairs.
Von Eschenbach acknowledged his agency’s computer infrastructure
remains a problem. Still, he said the U.S. drug supply is among the
world’s safest.
“We shouldn’t leave people with the impression the drug supply is
unsafe — “ said William Hubbard, a former FDA associate commissioner.
“It’s vulnerable,” interjected Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., finishing his sentence.
(Associated Press)