Conexiant
Login
  • The Analytical Scientist
  • The Cannabis Scientist
  • The Medicine Maker
  • The Ophthalmologist
  • The Pathologist
  • The Traditional Scientist
The Medicine Maker
  • Explore

    Explore

    • Latest
    • Features
    • Interviews
    • Business & Trends
    • Technology & Manufacturing
    • Product Profiles
    • White Papers

    Featured Topics

    • Biopharma
    • Small Molecules
    • Cell & Gene
    • Future of Pharma

    Issues

    • Latest Issue
    • Archive
    • Cell and Gene Therapy Supplement
  • Topics

    Topics

    • Drug Discovery
    • Development & Clinical
    • Formulation
    • Drug Delivery
    • Bioprocessing
    • Small Molecules
    • Cell and Gene
    • Facilities & Equipment
    • Outsourcing
    • Packaging
    • Supply Chain
    • Regulation & Standards
  • News & Blogs

    News & Blogs

    • Industry News
    • Research News
    • Blogs
  • Events
    • Live Events
    • Webinars
  • Community & Awards

    Community & Awards

    • Power List
    • Sitting Down With
    • Innovation Awards
    • Company of the Year Awards
    • Authors & Contributors
  • Multimedia
    • Video
    • Podcasts
    • eBooks
Subscribe
Subscribe
The Medicine Maker / Issues / 2015 / Articles / Jun / Sterility Fears at the NIH
Business & Regulation Standards & Regulation Technology & Manufacturing Regulation & Standards Business & Trends

Sterility Fears at the NIH

How did the NIH get it so wrong – and how can it move on?

By Stephanie Vine 06/29/2015 1 min read

Share

Aseptic processing is a complex art and it seems no one is immune to problems– or the resulting publicity backlash – including the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). At the start of June, NIH had to shut down sterile operations at its Pharmaceutical Development Section (PDS) after an FDA inspection identified several problems, including fungus contamination in vials of albumin. Drugs from the same batch have already been administered to patients in clinical research programs, who are now being closely monitored.

And the fungal faux pas was only the start of the problems. Some relate to the building, such as flaws in the air handling system, and the construction of the building itself not being best suited to facilitate cleaning, maintenance and proper operations. Operators failed to wear sufficient protective apparel when working with sterile drug products and there was a lack of training in GMP – one operator claimed to have received no GMP training whatsoever. Other problems included deficiencies in cleaning and disinfection programs, lack of validated processes to prevent microbiological contamination, and a lack of conclusions and follow ups in written records of investigations into unexplained discrepancies or batches failing to meet specification; for example, when vials were found to be contaminated with glass particles, a formulator confirmed that no root cause was identified and no preventive actions taken. The list goes on… Overall, FDA inspectors noted 17 observations during their visit in late May. The agency was reportedly first alerted to concerns at the NIH via an anonymous complaint. Aseptic expert Jim Agalloco of Agalloco & Associates commented, “Aseptic processing, especially where it involves human operators, is perhaps the most complex, and thus the most difficult to control process in the pharmaceutical industry.”

Previous problems at compounding centers have put the FDA on high alert, says Agalloco. “Compounding activities involving combination of sterile products are perceived to be simple, low-risk activities; a belief derived from the current USP <797> Pharmaceutical Compounding – Sterile Products, but that view is not shared by others working outside the compounding sector. FDA’s response to the 2012 New England Compounding Center meningitis disaster in 2012 was to expect industrial scale controls to be used by compounders,”  he continues. “The alignment of sterile compounding practices with the controls employed by the pharmaceutical industry is unprecedented and, although well intended, may be excessive. Improvements in compounding practices appear to be needed, but how closely those upgrades must mimic industrial scale operations is open to discussion.” The NIH has acknowledged the problems, with Francis Collins, Director of the NIH, describing the situation as “distressing and unacceptable.” A corrective action plan has already been submitted to the FDA, and all sterile production has ceased until the problems are resolved. To help get to the bottom of the issues, NIH will be appointing an external group of microbiology and sterile manufacturing experts to do a thorough review of the facility. Around 46 clinical studies could potentially be affected since they were due to receive products from PDS, but NIH says it is trying to secure alternative sources. Other materials not requiring a sterile environment are still being produced by PDS.

Newsletters

Receive the latest analytical science news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.

Newsletter Signup Image

About the Author(s)

Stephanie Vine

Making great scientific magazines isn’t just about delivering knowledge and high quality content; it’s also about packaging these in the right words to ensure that someone is truly inspired by a topic. My passion is ensuring that our authors’ expertise is presented as a seamless and enjoyable reading experience, whether in print, in digital or on social media. I’ve spent fourteen years writing and editing features for scientific and manufacturing publications, and in making this content engaging and accessible without sacrificing its scientific integrity. There is nothing better than a magazine with great content that feels great to read.

More Articles by Stephanie Vine

False

Advertisement

Recommended

False

Related Content

What Trump’s Latest Moves Mean for the Industry
Business Practice Standards & Regulation Trends & Forecasts Bioprocessing - Upstream & Downstream
What Trump’s Latest Moves Mean for the Industry

May 27, 2025

6 min read

Audrey Greenberg’s latest insight on US-based manufacturing, Trump’s “Administration for A Healthy America”, and an ever-shifting regulatory environment.

Regulators Target Ebola
Standards & Regulation
Regulators Target Ebola

December 1, 2014

0 min read

Will FDA fast review and voucher incentives make a difference?

Safety First - Sizing Up Biologics Side Effects
Standards & Regulation Biosimilars
Safety First - Sizing Up Biologics Side Effects

December 2, 2014

0 min read

Biologic medicines present unique challenges for pharmacovigilance. And with biosimilars hitting the market, life just got more complicated – especially when products share the same name.

United Science Stands
Small Molecules Standards & Regulation
United Science Stands

December 2, 2014

0 min read

Sitting Down With… William Chin, Executive Vice President, Scientific and Regulatory Affairs, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).

The Medicine Maker
Subscribe

About

  • About Us
  • Work at Conexiant Europe
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Copyright © 2025 Texere Publishing Limited (trading as Conexiant), with registered number 08113419 whose registered office is at Booths No. 1, Booths Park, Chelford Road, Knutsford, England, WA16 8GS.