Assessment of the effectiveness of the CD3+ tool to detect counterfeit and substandard anti-malarials.

BACKGROUND: The US FDA recently developed CD3+, a counterfeit detection tool that is based on sample illumination at specific wavelengths of light and visual comparison of suspect sample and packaging materials to an authentic sample. To test performance of the CD3+ in field conditions, a study was conducted in Ghana which compared the CD3+ side-by-side with two existing medicine quality screening technologies-TruScan™ Portable Raman spectrometer and GPHF Minilab(®). METHODS: A total of 84 anti-malarial test samples comprising artemether-lumefantrine tablets and artesunate-amodiaquine tablets were used. The technologies were evaluated for sensitivity in determining counterfeit/substandard (The term counterfeit or falsified is used in this article to refer to medicines that carry a false representation of identity or source or both. The term substandard is used to refer to medicines that do not meet the quality specifications given in the accepted pharmacopeia.) medicines, specificity in determining authentic products, and reliability of the results. Authentic samples obtained from manufacturers were used as reference standards. HPLC analysis data was used as the "gold standard" for decisions regarding a sample being authentic or substandard/counterfeit. RESULTS: CD3+ had a sensitivity of 1.00 in detecting counterfeit/substandard products compared to Minilab (0.79) and TruScan (0.79). CD3+ had a lower specificity (0.53) in determining authentic products compared to the specificities reached by Minilab (0.99) and TruScan (1.00). High sensitivity in this context means that the technology is effective in identifying substandard/counterfeit products whereas the low specificity means that the technique can sometimes mischaracterize good products as substandard/counterfeit. Examination of dosage units only (and not packaging) using CD3+ yielded improved specificity 0.64. When only assessment of sample identification was done, the TruScan provided sensitivity (1.00) and specificity (0.99); and the Minilab provided sensitivity (1.00) and specificity (1.00). All three technologies demonstrated 100 % reliability when used to analyse the same set of samples over 3 days by a single analyst and also when used to determine the same set of samples by three different analysts. Eight of the field samples were confirmed to be counterfeits with no active pharmaceutical ingredient content. All three technologies identified these samples as counterfeits. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed the relative effectiveness of the technologies as quality control tools. Using a combination of CD3+, with either the Minilab or TruScan, to screen for medicine quality will allow for complete examination of both the dosage units and the packaging to decide whether it is authentic or counterfeit.

Evaluation of a new handheld instrument for the detection of counterfeit artesunate by visual fluorescence comparison.

There is an urgent need for accurate and inexpensive handheld instruments for the evaluation of medicine quality in the field. A blinded evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of the Counterfeit Detection Device 3 (CD-3), developed by the US Food and Drug Administration Forensic Chemistry Center, was conducted in the Lao People's Democratic Republic. Two hundred three samples of the oral antimalarial artesunate were compared with authentic products using the CD-3 by a trainer and two trainees. The specificity (95% confidence interval [95% CI]), sensitivity (95% CI), positive predictive value (95% CI), and negative predictive value (95% CI) of the CD-3 for detecting counterfeit (falsified) artesunate were 100% (93.8-100%), 98.4% (93.8-99.7%), 100% (96.2-100%), and 97.4% (90.2-99.6%), respectively. Interobserver agreement for 203 samples of artesunate was 100%. The CD-3 holds promise as a relatively inexpensive and easy to use instrument for field evaluation of medicines, potentially empowering drug inspectors, customs agents, and pharmacists.

Vandetanib for the treatment of symptomatic or progressive medullary thyroid cancer in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease: U.S. Food and Drug Administration drug approval summary.

On April 6, 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved vandetanib (Caprelsa tablets; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP) for the treatment of symptomatic or progressive medullary thyroid cancer in patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic disease. Vandetanib is the first drug approved for this indication, and this article focuses on the basis of approval. Approval was based on the results of a double-blind trial conducted in patients with medullary thyroid carcinoma. Patients were randomized 2:1 to vandetanib, 300 mg/d orally (n = 231), or to placebo (n = 100). The primary objective was demonstration of improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with vandetanib compared with placebo. Other endpoints included evaluation of overall survival and objective response rate. The PFS analysis showed a marked improvement for patients randomized to vandetanib (hazard ratio = 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.53; P < 0.0001). The objective response rate for the vandetanib arm was 44% compared with 1% for the placebo arm. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities (>5%) were diarrhea and/or colitis, hypertension and hypertensive crisis, fatigue, hypocalcemia, rash, and corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation. This approval was based on a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS. Given the toxicity profile, which includes prolongation of the QT interval and sudden death, only prescribers and pharmacies certified through the vandetanib Risk Evaluation Mitigation Strategy Program are able to prescribe and dispense vandetanib. Treatment-related risks should be taken into account when considering the use of vandetanib in patients with indolent, asymptomatic, or slowly progressing disease.

Vorinostat for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of advanced primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To discuss vorinostat approval for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Data from 1 single-arm, open-label, multicenter pivotal trial and 11 other trials submitted to support the new drug application for vorinostat in the treatment of advanced primary CTCL were reviewed. The pivotal trial assessed responses by changes in overall skin disease score using a severity-weighted assessment tool (SWAT). Vorinostat could be considered active in CTCL if observed response rate was at least 20% and the lower bound of the corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) excluded 5%. Patients reported pruritus relief using a questionnaire and a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: The pivotal trial enrolled 74 patients with stage IB or higher CTCL. Median number of prior treatments was 3, and 61 patients (82%) had stage IIB or higher disease. The objective response rate in the skin disease assessed by change in the overall SWAT score from the baseline was 30% (95% CI, 18.5 to 42.6) in patients with stage IIB or higher disease. Median response duration (end of response defined by 50% increase in SWAT score from the nadir) was 168 days. Median time to tumor progression was 148 days for overall population and 169 days for patients with stage IIB or higher disease. Assessment of pruritus relief was considered unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: Vorinostat showed activity in CTCL, and skin responses were a clinical benefit. Vorinostat was approved for treatment of cutaneous manifestations of CTCL. A nonblinded, single-arm trial did not allow a reliable assessment of pruritus relief.