FDA Update Purchasing Controls

Last week I attended a meeting with FDA staff from the Denver District Office.  The meeting was an annual update from FDA addressed to the members of the Rocky Mountain Regulatory Affairs Society.  Since most of the members work with medical devices, the speakers from FDA focused on that industry sector and in particular talked about Purchasing Control Regulations since failure to comply with them results in a large number of failed inspections, warning letters and product recalls each year. The term “Purchasing Controls” is only used in the regulations for medical devices but the language of these regulations are informative for dietary supplement, food and cosmetic companies as well. 

The regulations covering good manufacturing practices (GMPs) for dietary supplements commonly use the phrase, “ensure that the [product, components, labels and packaging] are consistent with your purchase order”.  The GMP regulations for foods and the GMP guidance for cosmetics both refer to specifications for ingredients.  Since it is impossible to consistently make quality products unless you have ingredients of consistent quality, it is imperative that your purchasing department have detailed information about the requirements for each ingredient or component used in your product.  In other words, purchasing needs detailed ingredient/component specifications. 

Let’s take a brief look at the medical device purchasing control regulations to learn more:

21 CFR 820.50(b) states, “Each manufacturer shall establish and maintain data that clearly describe or reference the specified requirements, including quality requirements, for purchased or otherwise received product and services…”

This could mean that the herbs you purchase must be accompanied by chromatograms that document the amounts of key phytochemical components.  It may mean that you must list a range for the required viscosity of certain oils to ensure that your cosmetic will have the right thickness.  In the case of a food ingredient such as cayenne pepper, it may be important to define the acceptable Scoville Heat Units so that the final product will live up to your label claims of mild, medium and hellfire.

21 CFR 820.50(b) continues, “Purchasing documents shall include, where possible, an agreement that the suppliers, contractors, and consultants agree to notify the manufacturer of changes in the product or service so that manufacturers may determine whether the changes may affect the quality of a finished device.

This is a very important consideration for companies that are using contract manufacturers.  Your contract with your manufacturer should explicitly define not only which ingredients may be substituted but what substitutions are acceptable and that you are to be notified when the manufacturer finds it necessary to make any change to your product.

As specified in the device regulation, the best way to ensure that you always get quality ingredients and services is to first set requirements/specifications for your ingredients, components and service providers and then evaluate their ability to meet your requirements before you contract with them. If your company has purchasing controls that are followed and followed up on by the quality and manufacturing departments it is far more likely that the products, components, labels, etc. will be consistent with your purchase order and meet your specifications.  That in turn will please your customers!

I started my consulting business in 2001 after 15 years working in FDA-regulated industry.  Since that time my colleagues and I have served hundreds of dietary supplement, food, cosmetic and device companies from around the globe.  My colleagues and I are ready to help you determine which FDA regulations apply to your product and what you need to do to comply with them. Contact us today by replying to this message.

As always, we hope you find these occasional updates interesting. If so, you may use this link http://eepurl.com/Imbjv to subscribe to our occasional email newsletters regarding FDA regulations and other topics of interest to FDA-regulated companies.  We send messages targeted to the dietary supplement, cosmetic, food, OTC drug and medical device industry sectors.  You may subscribe to one or all of the newsletters and you may unsubscribe at any time. Please post any questions you may have.  My associates and I stand ready to help you with your FDA regulatory issues.

All the best to you!
Evelyn & Associates
www.FDALabels.com
www.BioTransApp.com

FDA and Cosmetic Industry Controversies: Anti-aging claims and ingredient safety

Recently the trade publication, Cosmetics Design, published two articles that caught my eye.  One discussed FDA’s Import Alert on cosmetics labeled as anti-aging creams (http://tinyurl.com/n5xq2e6).  The import alert is FDA’s guidance to their staff that inspect imported products.  FDA lists the reason for the alert as,

“There are numerous skin care products on the market with exaggerated "anti aging" claims which cause the products to be unapproved new drugs. Examples of such claims are that the products "counteract," "retard," or "control" the aging process. Claims that the product will "rejuvenate," "repair," or "restructure" the skin may also be drug claims. A claim such as "molecules absorb and expand, exerting upward pressure to 'lift' wrinkles upward" is a claim for an inner structural change that would usually cause a product to be a drug.”

The import alert instructs FDA staff to refuse entry of products with these claims.

This view of anti-aging claims, while in conflict with the marketing programs of many cosmetic manufacturers, is not new to FDA.  In December of 2012, we published a blog post (http://tinyurl.com/kntalmv) about FDA warning letters sent to Avon and Lancôme due to their anti-aging and anti-wrinkle claims.  It is important to note that while imported products have a greater chance of being subject to FDA enforcement actions based on anti-aging claims, products produced and sold domestically in the US are subject to the same rules.  As stated in the Cosmetics Design article the import alert, “is a good reminder for any company.” (http://tinyurl.com/mqrgzno).   

The other interesting article in Cosmetics Design is titled, “PCPC ‘extremely disappointed’ in FDA’s cosmetics legislation decision” (http://tinyurl.com/lsgzb8m).  The PCPC is the Personal Care Products Council and is the leading cosmetic industry group in the US.  The group has long had a cooperative relationship with FDA to determine the safety of cosmetic ingredients and has been working with FDA on potential updates to cosmetic regulations.  With a little searching I was able to find that in September of 2013 FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg sent a letter expressing disappointment with PCPC for being “unable to proceed toward legislation on the basis of the framework agreement” between the two sides.  Earlier this month, Deputy Commissioner Michael Taylor, sent a similar letter that also included a critique of the draft legislation proposed by the cosmetic industry (http://tinyurl.com/nydrdgv). Based on this letter it seems that the crux of the disagreement between FDA in industry is on the issue of ingredient safety. 

Industry has apparently proposed that chemicals deemed safe for use in food, drinking water, as well as some ingredients used in drugs, be deemed safe for use in cosmetics.  FDA’s position is that safety for ingestion is not the same as safety for topical use and gives examples of some that would not necessarily also be safe in cosmetics.  For example, the Deputy Commissioner notes that sodium hydroxide and ascorbic acid may be used as buffering and neutralizing agents in foods without restrictions but that both chemicals have been associated with harm to hair and scalp due to high levels that have been used in some hair straightening and relaxing products.  It should be noted that the high levels of these ingredients that would be used in hair relaxing/straightening products go well beyond buffering and neutralizing effects to make either very alkaline or very acidic solutions.  Accordingly, it seems to me that if used only as buffers and neutralizers in cosmetics, sodium hydroxide and ascorbic acid could be safe for use in cosmetics without restriction just as for food while leaving room to restrict uses at levels that exceed those neutralizing effects.  It could be very difficult and expensive for the cosmetic industry if an agreement on how to determine which cosmetic ingredients are safe cannot be reached.

Deputy Commissioner Taylor’s letter also discusses objections FDA has to industry proposals for cosmetic product registration and listing as well as for facility inspections, adverse event reporting and recalls.  I will save discussion of those other topics for another message.

All in all, it is clear from the tone of the FDA letter that there has been a breach of trust.  In fact, Mr. Taylor states, “Because your proposal meets none of the safety goals on which we had all agreed last year, I have difficulty seeing a path forward in this process.”  In the Cosmetic Design article PCPC President Lezlee Westine is quoted as responding, “We are extremely disappointed that FDA has indicated they will not participate in further discussions with the cosmetics industry regarding cosmetic legislation and have taken such a hard line approach to our efforts to operate in good faith.”

I hope for the sake of the cosmetic industry and consumers that FDA and cosmetic industry representatives can overcome their disappointment and renew the good working relationship they previously had.

As always, it is my hope that you find these occasional updates interesting and informative. If so, you may use this link http://eepurl.com/Imbjv to subscribe to our occasional email newsletters regarding FDA regulations and other topics of interest to FDA-regulated companies.  We send messages targeted to the dietary supplement, cosmetic, food, OTC drug and medical device industry sectors.  You may subscribe to one or all of the newsletters and you may unsubscribe at any time. Please post any questions you may have. My associates and I stand ready to help you with your FDA regulatory issues.

Best regards,

Evelyn and Associates

www.FDALabels.com

www.BioTransApp.com

Revised FDA Guidance on Cosmetic GMPs

The weather is changing as a new season begins and it’s time to review recent FDA activity in the cosmetic sector.  In June 2013 FDA published a draft guidance revising the Good Manufacturing Practices for cosmetics. While these GMPs remain voluntary, FDA Agents will use these guidelines when inspecting cosmetic facilities.

FDA first published cosmetic GMP inspection guidelines in 1997 and updated them in 2008. FDA participates in the International Cooperation on Cosmetic Regulations (ICCR) and this latest update incorporates portions of the International Organization for Standardization’s (ISO’s) current standard for cosmetic GMPs (ISO 22716:2007)

The new guidance expands the section on documentation and record keeping; placing this information at the beginning of the guidance.  The sections on facilities, equipment, personnel, raw materials, production and laboratory controls are expanded as well.  There are new sections on water used as an ingredient, color additives and prohibited cosmetic ingredients. 

The section on water used as a cosmetic ingredient states in part that the water is to be of defined quality and is to be tested or monitored to verify that it “meets applicable chemical, physical and microbiological specifications for quality”.  It is also noted that the water system “should be routinely cleaned and sanitized according to an appropriate SOP that ensures no biofilm build-up.”

Surprisingly, the new guidance omits the section on labeling that was included in the older version.  It is unlikely that FDA inspectors will skip label reviews during an inspection since labeling requirements are codified in regulations.  

Although the revised draft guidance does not have the force of law, if it is followed, it can help you ensure that your production facility would pass inspection.  The full guidance may be viewed at http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/ucm353046.htm?source=govdelivery.

If you would like to subscribe to email notifications for this blog, please reply to this post.

Kind regards,

Evelyn & Associates

www.BioTransApp.com

www.FDALabels.com