Background of
Isotretinoin Teratogenic Risk Management Plan
Accutane
was approved in May, 1982 with a pregnancy category X. Risk management at the time of initial
approval was limited to labeling, which described the risk of teratogenicity in
the contraindications, warnings and precautions sections of the package insert and in a patient
information brochure. Over the years, this risk issue was the subject of
multiple advisory committee discussions leading to subsequent additions to the
risk management program including Dear Doctor letters, red warning stickers
issued to pharmacies, and a pregnancy prevention program (PPP). This PPP (introduced in 1988) consisted of
package warning labels, an informed consent form, a PPP kit for prescribers,
the Accutane tracking study to assess prescriber use of the PPP kit, and a
Patient Enrollment Survey. Despite
these additions, there were continued reports of fetal exposures to Accutane.
An
Advisory Committee was convened in September, 2000 to address the need for
changes to the Accutane risk management program to prevent fetal exposure to
isotretinoin. The Advisory Committee
recommended augmentation of the program, and these recommendations were
accepted by the FDA and communicated to the Sponsor (Hoffman-LaRoche) in a
letter from Dr. Janet Woodcock, Director of Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, FDA, on October 6, 2000[1]. In brief, the letter stated that the goals
of the risk management program (with respect to pregnancy prevention) were
that:
1.
No
one should begin Accutane therapy if pregnant
2.
No
pregnancies should occur while a patient is on Accutane therapy.
To
achieve these goals, the Sponsor was instructed to implement a plan of action
containing the following five components:
1.
A
heightened educational program for each patient that includes verifiable
documented written informed consent
2.
Complete
registration of all patients, both male and female
3.
Complete
registration and certification of practitioners who prescribe Accutane
4.
A
comprehensive program to track fetal exposures to Accutane (and outcomes),
including a formal mandatory pregnancy registry
5.
Linkage
of dispensing of Accutane to female patients to verification of adequate
pregnancy testing.
On
October 30, 2001, following extensive negotiations with the manufacturer, the
FDA approved the System to Manage Accutane Related Teratogenicity (S.M.A.R.T.™)
Program, the Sponsor’s response to the requested changes in the Accutane risk
management program. The S.M.A.R.T. ™
program links prescriber qualification of patients to dispensing of Accutane
through use of yellow stickers placed on prescriptions, and uses voluntary
patient and pharmacy surveys to assess compliance. Components of the S.M.A.R.T.
™ program include patient informed consent forms, a prescriber checklist,
Letter of Understanding for prescribers, yellow qualification stickers,
Medication Guide dispensed with each prescription, instruction guide for
prescribers, instruction guide for pharmacists, FDA Letter to Pharmacy boards,
Dear Accutane Prescriber Letter, Dear Pharmacist Letter, separate patient
brochures for women and men, carton dispensing instructions, and updated
package insert, patient package insert, container and carton labels.
To
participate in the S.M.A.R.T. ™ program, prescribers sign the Letter of
Understanding (LOU) indicating that they are knowledgeable about the diagnosis
and treatment of acne, prevention of unplanned pregnancy, risk of
teratogenicity with Accutane, and use of the S.M.A.R.T. ™ program, and that
they agree to use the procedures of the S.M.A.R.T. ™ program. Upon receipt of the signed LOU, the Sponsor
provides the prescriber with yellow qualification stickers. The prescriber obtains informed consent from
the patient, counsels the patient, provides educational materials and
encourages enrollment in the voluntary Accutane Survey. Before affixing the qualification sticker to
the patient’s Accutane prescription, the prescriber “qualifies” the patient by
verifying that
·
the
patient has had two appropriately timed, negative pregnancy tests with a
sensitivity of at least 25 mIu/mL
before receiving the initial Accutane prescription and a repeat pregnancy test
monthly thereafter AND
·
the
patient has committed to use 2 forms of effective contraception simultaneously
unless absolute abstinence is practiced or the patient has had a hysterectomy,
OR
·
the
patient is male
Pharmacists
are to dispense Accutane only if a valid qualification sticker is in place and
only within one week of the qualification date, and refills and dispensing of
greater than 30 days supply are not allowed.
Discussion and Assessment of the SMART Program and the Goals of Dr. Woodcock’s October 6, 2000 Letter
The
S.M.A.R.T. ™ program fulfills the first of the five criteria delineated in the
October 6, 2000 letter, a heightened educational program including written
informed consent, but does not fulfill the remaining four criteria. Nonetheless, due to the compelling need to
provide enhanced risk management as well as unresolved issues regarding patient
privacy protection with registries, S.M.A.R.T. was agreed to as offering
significant improvements over the existing risk management program. The
approval letter to the sponsor stated that the Agency would review the adequacy
of S.M.A.R.T., and the Sponsor was instructed to develop a back-up program for
mandatory registration of patients, prescribers, and pharmacies.
The
second criterion in the October 6, 2000 letter, complete registration of all
patients receiving Accutane, was intended to provide the denominator (total
number of users of Accutane) for ascertainment of the pregnancy rate. The Sponsor submitted an alternative
proposal to estimate the denominator from pharmacy databases. Combined with projected increases in survey
enrollment, the Sponsor proposed that the alternative methodology would allow
them to provide both an adequate numerator (discussed below) and denominator
with better patient confidentiality.
The third criterion specified registration and certification of all prescribers. The Sponsor objected that they did not have the authority to certify prescribers. The FDA and the Sponsor subsequently agreed upon a voluntary prescriber registration for the S.M.A.R.T.™ program based upon the prescriber’s self-attestation of relevant competencies. Additionally, S.M.A.R.T.™ provides information for prescribers on each component of the program. The responsibility for obtaining the continuing medical education necessary for achievement of the competencies listed in the LOU rests with the prescriber.
The
fourth criterion, a comprehensive program to track fetal exposures to Accutane,
including a formal mandatory pregnancy registry, would have provided the
numerator for the ascertainment of pregnancy rate. Discussions regarding implementation of a mandatory pregnancy
registry raised issues about patient privacy and HIPAA compliance. The Sponsor proposed that by increasing
enrollment in the voluntary survey to >60%, they would be able to
accurately extrapolate a numerator (and denominator) to ascertain the pregnancy
rate among patients treated with Accutane.
To achieve the higher enrollment, the Sponsor targeted education to
raise prescriber awareness about the survey and increased reimbursement for
patient participation three-fold (to $30).
The
fifth criterion required linkage of dispensing of Accutane to female patients
to verification of adequate pregnancy testing.
The S.M.A.R.T. program asks the pharmacist to verify that the patient
has been qualified. By affixing and
dating a yellow qualification sticker to the patient’s Accutane prescription,
the prescriber indicates that a female patient has undergone pregnancy testing
of appropriate timing and sensitivity.
The participation of pharmacists is voluntary. The report of non pregnant status is not laboratory certified but
based solely on the physician attestation on the sticker.
In
the October 31, 2001 approval letter for the S.M.A.R.T.™ program, the FDA
instructed the Sponsor to, “…submit a comprehensive report on the S.M.A.R.T.
Program, including information on the metrics achieved during the first full
year of implementation….”[2] Specific performance benchmarks were not
stated in the approval letter; rather, the Sponsor was informed that “…[t]he
adequacy of S.M.A.R.T. will be a review issue for re-evaluation on a continuing
basis.”[3] performance
benchmarks were discussed with and communicated to the Sponsor in earlier
meetings, however. Specifically,
acceptance of the Sponsor’s alternatives to the mandatory patient and pregnancy
registries was contingent upon achievement of the Sponsor’s own threshold of >
60% enrollment in the voluntary survey of the of female patients.[4],[5] The Sponsor was informed that use of
qualification stickers, “…should be extremely high (near 100%), since it is a
surrogate for outcome measures that cannot be reliably assessed without a
mandatory patient registry.”[6] Regarding fetal exposures, although
elimination of all exposures is the goal of the risk management program, it was
understood that achievement of this might not be possible. Hence no threshold for the number of fetal
exposures (greater than zero) that would be “acceptable” during the first year
of S.M.A.R.T.™ implementation was prespecified.
On
November 8, 2002, the first generic version of isotretinoin was approved for
marketing. Two additional generic
formulations have subsequently been approved, and other applications are
pending. The market for isotretinoin
has become a multi-source environment.
Each of the generic Sponsors have been required to provide an
isotretinoin teratogenicity risk management plan identical in all essential
elements to the S.M.A.R.T.™ program.
Although S.M.A.R.T.™ refers specifically to the isotretinoin
teratogenicy risk management plan instituted by Hoffman La-Roche, the risk
management plans for each isotretinoin product, the innovator as well as the
generics, contain the same essential elements and are considered interchangeable.
[1] Letter from Janet Woodcock, M.D., Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA, to Russell Ellison, M.D., Chief Medical Officer and VP, Medical Affairs, Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc, dated October 6, 2000.
[2] Letter from Jonathan K. Wilkin, M.D., Director, Division of Dermatologic & Dental Drug Products, CDER, FDA, to Johanna Waugh, BSc., Hons, Group Director, Drug Regulatory Affairs, Hoffman-La Roche Inc., dated 30 October 2001.
[3] Ibid, letter from JKW dated 30 October 2001.
[4] Fascimile from Indira Kumar Hills, Division of Dermatologic & Dental Drug Products, CDER, FDA, to Joanna Waugh, BSc., Hons, Group Director, Drug Regulatory Affairs, Hoffman-La Roche Inc., dated August 14, 2001.
[5] Submission from Robyn B. Konecne, Pharm.D., Hoffmann-La Roche, to NDA 18-662, dated March 26, 2001 (stamp date March 28, 2001).
[6] Ibid., fascimile from IKH, dated August 14, 2001.