Feature

Compounding rules challenge practice norms


 


As new rules about drug compounding get shaped, rheumatologists seek to protect their ability to combine injectable drugs – most commonly a steroid and a local anesthetic – in their own offices.

In a position statement sent to government agencies and members of Congress in February, the American College of Rheumatology voiced concerns that the practice, which it called “critical,” could become a casualty of drug-compounding regulations under revision by the United States Pharmacopeial Convention (USP), a nonprofit group whose standards are enforceable by state and federal regulators.

Dr. Donald Miller of North Dakota State University Carol Renner/NDSU

Dr. Donald Miller

These rules – outlined in USP chapter 797, which sets standards for compounding sterile preparations – have already been subject to extensive public comment periods, and will see a further round of comments before becoming final, according to USP.

In the same position statement on compounding, the ACR said it also seeks a change to a Food and Drug Administration rule limiting practitioners’ access to quinacrine, a drug only available through compounding pharmacies that is sometimes used to treat lupus patients. Quinacrine is not on the FDA’s current list of bulk substances approved for compounding, except by special permission. The ACR has asked the agency to add quinacrine to the list, but no one knows when this will happen.

Rheumatologists may also be more restricted than before in terms of which compounding pharmacies they can turn to, as new federal standards divide them into two types – those that can provide medicines in larger quantities and those that can’t.

Steroid fiasco sparked rule revisions

The ACR’s concerns follow a tighter focus by state and federal agencies on drug compounding after a fungal meningitis outbreak in 2012 was traced to contaminated steroids produced in bulk by a compounding pharmacy.

More than 800 infections, 64 of them fatal, occurred after the New England Compounding Center in Framingham, Mass., sold contaminated methylprednisolone acetate that was used in epidural and intra-articular joint injections.

The following year Congress passed the Drug Quality and Security Act, which aims, in part, to prevent compounding pharmacies from engaging in what amounts to unregulated manufacturing.

As part of the law, the FDA created a list of drugs appropriate for compounding and a process by which larger compounding pharmacies must register with the FDA, and agree to inspections. The USP standards, meanwhile, address detailed technical and safety aspects of compounding and are enforceable by the FDA and state agencies.

“USP and FDA have had the ability to regulate compounding for over a decade, but only recently have the rules become actively enforced,” said Donald Miller, PharmD, of North Dakota State University, Fargo, who helped shape the ACR’s position statement on compounding with the help of rheumatologists in private practice.

“When you make guidelines for safety, they make sense, but then you can’t anticipate the way it’s going to affect individuals’ practice. And that’s where rheumatology got caught up,” said Dr. Miller, who was a member of the FDA Arthritis Advisory Committee in 2014-2016.

In-office mixing a top concern

Other specialties, including dermatology and immunology, also stand to be affected by various changes to compounding law and practice – and their societies have been active in voicing concerns.

Though the latest revisions of USP chapter 797, which impacts in-office mixing, are still being sorted out, it’s the No. 1 compounding-related concern for rheumatologists, Dr. Miller said.

Rheumatologists routinely mix an analgesic and a steroid for injection. The analgesic makes the steroids less viscous, and offers patients hours of immediate relief. They also add analgesics to hyaluronic acid injected for viscosupplementation. The mixing is usually conducted bedside, and the injections are administered right away.

Technically, combining these products amounts to sterile compounding, Dr. Miller explained. “And theoretically, under these rules, a physician could still do this, but they’d have to do it under a sterile hood like you find in a pharmacy, and that’s just not practical. It also becomes a matter of interpretation.”

USP chapter 797 sanctions in-office mixing for “immediate use” with individual patients – which is nearly always the case for the steroid injections used in rheumatology. But it’s unclear whether “immediate use” means emergency use only, or allows for routine use, as rheumatologists hope.

“One reason this came to rheumatology’s attention is that some state boards of medicine were inspecting and saying ‘Hey, you can’t do that,’ ” Dr. Miller said.

Dr. Joseph Huffstutter

Dr. Joseph Huffstutter

Joseph Huffstutter, MD, a rheumatologist in private practice in Hixson, Tenn., who helped craft the ACR’s position statement, said in an interview that the potential fallout for rheumatology could be significant if the rules on in-office mixing are not clarified. Regulators’ “valid desire to protect the public,” he said, must be balanced with protecting access to care.

“There’s that law of unintended consequences where you snare things in a net that you really don’t want to,” Dr. Huffstutter said.

Marcus Snow, MD, a rheumatologist at the University of Nebraska, Omaha, who also worked on the statement, said that most rheumatologists are likely unaware that their ability to mix drugs in-office has been called into question.

“I brought it up at our division meeting with a group of 10 rheumatologists, and no one was aware that this was coming down the pike,” Dr. Snow said in an interview.

Dr. Marcus Snow

Dr. Marcus Snow

“The alternative, I suppose, would be to perform two separate injections with corticosteroid and lidocaine if you wanted that mixture in the joint, or only injecting corticosteroid into the joint,” he said.

Pediatric issues

Pediatric rheumatologists, and adult rheumatologists who see children occasionally, use compounding pharmacies to create palatable oral medicines and adjusted doses of adult treatments.

They also use injections combining steroids with analgesics, and consider the addition of the analgesic a key aid to compliance.

“The biggest barrier we have is patient and parent anxiety about doing the procedure and the associated pain. We always administer our steroids mixed with lidocaine to help with the postprocedural discomfort,” said Adam Reinhardt, MD, chief of pediatric rheumatology at the University of Nebraska and Children’s Hospital and Medical Center in Omaha.

Dr. Adam Reinhardt

“Part of that is to reassure the family that we are doing something for the pain, but also for the outcome post procedure for that first injection so that families will feel comfortable in the event of a future flare that they can proceed with it again,” Dr. Reinhardt said.

Steroid injections can mean avoiding or delaying systemic treatment in children with oligoarticular arthritis, he said. “Most of us consider them a first-line therapy. The hope is that you can get by without having to use meds like methotrexate if you can get a prolonged response in the one or two joints that are active in that patient.”

But Dr. Reinhardt said that, while he mixed his own injections during his fellowship training, Children’s of Omaha now insists that they be prepared by in-house pharmacists, working under sterile hoods. The delay to receiving them in the clinic or procedure room is 40 minutes to an hour, he said, which the clinicians accommodate through careful scheduling.

The change from mixing in-clinic to relying on the central pharmacy came about in recent years, Dr. Reinhardt said, because of broader concerns related to medication storage in the clinics. While ordering from the central pharmacy works for his practice, he said, “I probably only inject maybe 50-70 joints a year, while adult rheumatologists are injecting far more than that. For a busy private practice, I can see that being a huge time constraint,” he said.

Relevance of rules

None of the rheumatologists interviewed questioned the need for tightened state and federal oversight of compounding practices overall – just the applicability of certain rules to their own practice.

Dr. Snow and Dr. Huffstutter noted that reports of infected joints – a potential result of a contaminated injection – are sporadic and rare. “There’s very little research in this, but [these types of injections] have been standard practice for decades,” Dr. Snow said.

Srikanth Mukkera, MD, a rheumatologist in Tupelo, Miss., agreed that “sporadic cases of joint infection do happen following injection, but it can be hard to show if an injection was the cause.”

Assuring that medicines are mixed only immediately prior to injection, and not stored, reduces the likelihood of contamination, Dr. Mukkera said. Moreover, he noted, epidural injections such as those that resulted in the 2012 meningitis outbreak carry different risks than those seen in intra-articular injections.

Dr. Miller, the lead author of the ACR statement, said that the rheumatologists on our committee “don’t know of anyone that’s had a knee or other joint infection from a contaminated injection. They feel that unless somebody finds some evidence of that, they should be allowed to continue” with their usual practice.

He said that he feels that the USP will ultimately heed the concerns of rheumatologists and hopefully provide a more relaxed interpretation of in-office compounding. “We’re hoping they’ll make some exceptions when they revise 797 standards or at least maybe leave room for organizations to create a best practice statement. We’ll see,” Dr. Miller said.

But this is in no way guaranteed. Dr. Huffstutter said he fears that, if the rules come to be interpreted more narrowly, even standard practices like reconstituting biologic drugs for infusion – something that’s also a routine part of in-office practice – could fall under the rubric of sterile compounding and come into question.

The quinacrine problem

A separate compounding-related issue in rheumatology is clinicians’ access to quinacrine, an antimalarial rheumatology drug that, while infrequently used, represents the only alternative to hydroxychloroquine for some lupus patients.

“There are no alternatives out there for hydroxychloroquine, so we need it as a backup,” Dr. Snow said. “If hydroxychloroquine isn’t an option, there’s nothing out there that we can use. There’s no easy replacement.”

Dr. Huffstutter said he currently had no patients on quinacrine. “It’s not very often that we use it, but in those patients that really need it, it can make a huge difference in how they do.”

Quinacrine is no longer manufactured commercially as a finished drug product but is available in a powder that compounding physicians put into 100-mg capsules. It is not on the FDA’s current list of drugs available for compounding except with special permission.

While the ACR has requested that the FDA add it the list of bulk drug substances that can be used in compounding, quinacrine remains off the list for now – and, providers say, hard to find.

Moreover, while rheumatologists may have previously been able to order and store quantities of quinacrine and other compounded nonsterile medications to dispense to their patients, they can no longer easily do so, as only the FDA-approved compounding “outsourcing facilities” are allowed to process larger orders; the rest can only respond to prescriptions for individual patients.

Dr. Miller said it’s likely that quinacrine will make it onto the FDA’s next list of bulk drugs available for compounding. “The FDA has kind of said, ‘Don’t worry about it,’ ” he said.

Next Article: