Prescription Longevity
Many
Medicines Are Potent Years Past Expiration
Dates
By LAURIE P. COHEN Staff Reporter of THE
WALL STREET JOURNAL
http://www.mercola.com/2000/apr/2/drug_expiration.htm
Do drugs really
stop working after the date stamped on the
bottle?
Fifteen years ago, the U. S. military
decided to find out. Sitting on a $1
billion stockpile of drugs and facing the
daunting process of destroying and
replacing its supply every two to three
years, the military began a testing program
to see if it could extend the life of its
inventory.
The testing, conducted by the U. S. Food
and Drug Administration, ultimately covered
more than 100 drugs, prescription and
over-the-counter. The results, never before
reported, show that about 90% of them were
safe and effective far past their original
expiration date, at least one for 15 years
past it.
In light of these results, a former
director of the testing program, Francis
Flaherty, says he has concluded that
expiration dates put on by manufacturers
typically have no bearing on whether a drug
is usable for longer.
Mr. Flaherty notes that a drug maker is
required to prove only that a drug is still
good on whatever expiration date the
company chooses to set. The expiration date
doesn't mean, or even suggest, that the
drug will stop being effective after that,
nor that it will become harmful.
Marketing
Issue
"Manufacturers put expiration dates on for
marketing, rather than scientific,
reasons," says Mr. Flaherty, a pharmacist
at the FDA until his retirement last year.
"It's not profitable for them to have
products on a shelf for 10 years. They want
turnover."
The FDA cautions that there isn't enough
evidence from the program, which is
weighted toward drugs needed during combat
and which tests only individual
manufacturing batches, to conclude that
most drugs in people's medicine cabinets
are potent beyond the expiration date.
Still, Joel Davis, a former FDA
expiration-date compliance chief, says that
with a handful of exceptions -- notably
nitroglycerin, insulin and some liquid
antibiotics -- most drugs are probably as
durable as those the agency has tested for
the military. "Most drugs degrade very
slowly," he says. "In all likelihood, you
can take a product you have at home and
keep it for many years, especially if it's
in the refrigerator."
Manufacturers' View
Drug-industry officials don't dispute the
results of the FDA's testing, within what
is called the Shelf Life Extension Program.
And they acknowledge that expiration dates
have a commercial dimension. But they say
relatively short shelf lives make sense
from a public-safety standpoint, as
well.
New, more-beneficial drugs can be brought
on the market more easily if the old ones
are discarded within a couple of years,
they say. Label redesigns work better when
consumers don't have earlier versions on
hand to create confusion. From the
companies' perspective, any liability or
safety risk is diminished by limiting the
period during which a consumer might misuse
or improperly store a drug.
"Two to three years is a very comfortable
point of commercial convenience," says Mark
van Arandonk, senior director for
pharmaceutical development at Pharmacia
& Upjohn Inc. "It gives us enough time
to put the inventory in warehouses, ship it
and ensure it will stay on shelves long
enough to get used." But companies
uniformly deny any effort to spur sales
through planned obsolescence.
Why Not Longer?
Now that the FDA has found that many drugs
are still good long after they have
supposedly expired, why doesn't it advocate
later expiration dates for consumer drugs?
One reason is that the consumer market
lacks the military's logistical reasons to
keep drugs around longer.
Frank Holcombe, associate director of the
FDA's office of generic drugs, says that in
many cases a manufacturer could extend
expiration periods again and again, but to
support those extensions, it would have to
keep doing stability studies, and keep more
in storage than it would like.
Mr. Davis adds: "It's not the job of the
FDA to be concerned about a consumer's
economic interest." It would be up to
Congress to impose changes, he says.
As things stand now, expiration dates get a
lot of emphasis. For instance, there is a
campaign, co-sponsored by some drug
retailers, that urges people to discard
pills when they reach the date on the
label.
And that date often is even earlier than
the one the maker set. That's because when
pharmacists dispense a drug in any
container other than what it came to them
in, they routinely cut the expiration date
to just one year after dispensing. Some
states even require pharmacists to do
this.
Meanwhile, poor countries -- under urging
from the World Health Organization -- often
reject drug-company donations of
much-needed medicines if they are within a
year of their expiration dates.
It isn't
known how much of the $120 billion-plus
spent annually in the U. S. on prescription
and over-the-counter medicines goes to
replace expired ones. But in a poll done
for The Wall Street Journal by NPD Group
Inc. of Port Washington, N. Y., 70% of
1,000 respondents said they probably
wouldn't take a prescription drug after its
expiration date; 72% said the same of an
over-the-counter remedy.
"People think that, upon expiration, drugs
suddenly turn toxic or lose all their
potency," says Philip Alper, professor of
medicine at University of California at San
Francisco. In his own practice, Dr. Alper
says, "I frequently hear -- from patients
who can't afford medicine -- that they have
thrown away expired drugs." He says
companies should be required to test drugs
for longer periods and set later expiration
dates when results warrant.
Some manufacturers first began putting
expiration dates on drugs in the 1960s,
although they didn't have to. When the FDA
began requiring such dating in 1979, the
main effect was to set uniform testing and
reporting guidelines. As now required by
the FDA, so-called stability testing
analyzes the capacity of a drug to maintain
its identity, strength, quality and purity
for whatever period the manufacturer picks.
If the company picks a two-year expiration
date, it needn't test beyond that.
Testing for a two-year expiration doesn't
initially entail holding a drug for two
years. Rather, the drug is tested by
subjecting it to extreme heat and humidity
for several months, then chemically
analyzing each ingredient's identity and
strength. (After the date is set and the
drug is marketed, testing continues for the
full two years.)
The FDA also uses chemical analysis in
testing for possible shelf-life extension;
it doesn't test on human subjects. Testing
conditions are such that any medicine that
meets, say, the standards for a two-year
expiration date probably lasts longer, the
FDA and drug companies agree.
Still Good
Consider aspirin. Bayer AG puts two-year or
three-year dates on aspirin and says that
it should be discarded after that. Chris
Allen, a vice president at the Bayer unit
that makes aspirin, says the dating is
"pretty conservative"; when Bayer has
tested four-year-old aspirin, it remained
100% effective, he says.
So why doesn't Bayer set a four-year
expiration date? Because the company often
changes packaging, and it undertakes
"continuous improvement programs," Mr.
Allen says. Each change triggers a need for
more expiration-date testing, he says, and
testing each time for a four-year life
would be impractical.
Bayer has never tested aspirin beyond four
years, Mr. Allen says. But Jens Carstensen
has. Dr. Carstensen, professor emeritus at
the University of Wisconsin's pharmacy
school, who wrote what is considered the
main text on drug stability, says, "I did a
study of different aspirins, and after five
years, Bayer was still excellent. Aspirin,
if made correctly, is very stable."
Only one report known to the medical
community linked an old drug to human
toxicity. A 1963 Journal of the American
Medical Association article said degraded
tetracycline caused kidney damage. Even
this study, though, has been challenged by
other scientists. Mr. Flaherty says the
Shelf Life program encountered no toxicity
with tetracycline and typically found
batches effective for more than two years
beyond their expiration dates.
Plea From the Air Force
The program dates to a U. S. effort begun
in 1981 to increase military readiness by
buying large quantities of drugs and
medical devices for the armed forces. Four
years later, more than $1 billion of
supplies had been stockpiled. The General
Accounting Office audited Air Force troop
hospitals in Europe and found many supplies
at or near expiration. It warned that by
the 1990s, more than $100 million would
have to be spent yearly on
replacements.
The Air Force Surgeon General's office
asked the FDA if it could possibly extend
the shelf life of these drugs. The FDA had
the equipment for stability testing. And
because it had approved the drugs' sale in
the first place, it also had manufacturers'
data on the testing protocols.
Testing for the Air Force began in late
1985. In the first year, 58 medicines from
137 different manufacturing lots were
shipped to the FDA from overseas storage,
among them penicillin, lidocaine and
Lactated Ringers, an intravenous solution
for dehydration. After testing, the FDA
extended more than 80% of the expired lots,
by an average of 33 months.
In 1992, according to the FDA, more than
half of the expired drugs that had been
retested in 1985 were still fine. Even now,
at least one still is.
Such results came as a revelation for Army
Col. George Crawford when he took over
military oversight of the program in 1997.
He is a pharmacist, but "nobody tells you
in pharmacy school that shelf life is about
marketing, turnover and profits," he says.
(The drug makers don't agree that it is,
however.)
How It Works
The military's base for the program is a
dingy barracks room in Fort Detrick, Md.
There, a group headed by Air Force Lt. Col.
Greg Russie, who recently took over from
Col. Crawford, tracks drugs that are near
expiration at defense facilities all over
the world, selecting many for retesting.
They are shipped to the FDA, which sends
them to its laboratories.
The FDA's lab in Philadelphia recently
tested five automatic injectors containing
an antidote to chemical poisoning, which
were purposely held for three months in
conditions even hotter and more humid than
the FDA requires in consumer testing of
drugs. The FDA tested the drug contained in
the injectors, pralidoxime chloride, by
separating its ingredients and measuring
the strength and quality of each, then
applying a computer model to determine
whether a shelf-life extension was
warranted.
The injectors' original expiration date was
November 1985. The FDA had retested them
periodically ever since, each time
approving their continued use. The batch,
made by Ayerst Laboratories, now part of
American Home Products Corp.'s Wyeth-Ayerst
unit, is 18 years old. It is 15 years
beyond the expiration date applied by
Ayerst. The FDA found it is still good.
A spokesman for Wyeth-Ayerst says it "uses
scientific data to establish expiration
dates" and "tries to have the longest
possible dating on products that scientific
data supports." The company is aware of the
FDA retesting program. It says it can't
comment specifically on the injectors
tested by the FDA.
A Few Fail
Shelf-life extensions are "intentionally
conservative," the FDA's Mr. Flaherty told
military brass in a 1992 speech. He says
that if the agency extended an expiration
date by 36 months, it had concluded the lot
would retain all of its safety and efficacy
for at least 72
months.
A very few drugs aren't retested. The
military has found that water-purification
tablets and mefloquine hydrochloride, for
malaria, routinely fail stability testing
beyond their expiration dates, so it has
removed them from the program.
Also excluded are large-volume intravenous
solutions, such as saline. "We don't like
to test those," says Col. Crawford. "Not
because we can't, but because it would be
politically sensitive if G. I. Joe was
lying in bed and saw it had originally
expired three years ago."
Mr. Flaherty has said that while he tested
a handful of drug batches that didn't even
make it to their expiration dates, most
drugs were "surprisingly durable." In one
instance, he says, drugs labeled for
room-temperature storage had been kept for
two years in a warehouse in Oman that
averaged 135 degrees Fahrenheit in the
daytime. Upon expiration, the drugs, which
included the local anesthetic lidocaine and
atropine, a nerve-gas antidote also used by
eye doctors to dilate pupils, "were well
within the standards for potency and other
quality characteristics," he says.
Stable Molecule
One medicine the FDA has endorsed for
extensions is ciprofloxacin hydrochloride
tablets, an antibiotic marketed by Bayer as
Cipro. One batch had an expiration date of
March 1989. More than 9 1/2 years later,
the FDA found the tablets still good; it
then extended some of them for 18 more
months and others for 24 more months.
Albert Poirier, quality-assurance director
for Bayer's pharmaceutical division, says
he isn't surprised because Cipro "is a
stable drug molecule" in tablet form. "We
go for a shelf life that will be safest for
patients," he says. "We want the drug to be
used up within three years. We wouldn't
want a patient to have it for 10 years
because they'd have an old package insert"
that might omit new information or
contra-indications and because "we'd have
no control over how they'd store the drug
during this time."
Another extended drug is Thorazine, a
tranquilizer chemically known as
chlorpromazine tablets. Batches bearing
December 1996 expiration dates -- unused
and unopened, as is the case with all drugs
evaluated in the Shelf Life program -- were
tested in July 1998 and extended for two
years. A spokesman for the maker,
SmithKline Beecham PLC, says it applies an
expiration date 24 months after
manufacture. "We think that is the
appropriate expiration date," he says. "We
don't benefit from short expiration
dates."
Some other drugs the FDA has extended at
least two years beyond their expiration
dates are diazepam, sold as Valium;
cimetidine, sold as Tagamet; phenytoin,
sold as Dilantin; and the antibiotics
tetracycline and penicillin.
Big Savings
On a cost-benefit basis, the program's
returns have been huge. The first year, the
Air Force paid the FDA $78,000 for testing
and saved 59 times that sum by not needing
to replace the drugs. After other services
joined, the military from 1993 through 1998
spent about $3.9 million on testing and
saved $263.4 million on drug expense,
according to Lt. Col. Russie.
Says Mr. Flaherty: "We've cost the
pharmaceutical companies hundreds of
millions of dollars in sales of new stuff
to the Department of Defense."
More than 12 years ago, Messrs. Flaherty
and Davis explained the program to
drug-company chemists at a meeting of the
American Association of Pharmaceutical
Scientists in Woodbridge, N. J., going into
detail about how the FDA decided whether to
extend a given expiration date. Mr. Davis
concluded by noting how much the U. S. had
saved by extending shelf lives instead of
"destroying large quantities of
still-useful medical products... ."
Mr. Flaherty says the FDA was keenly aware
that if its methodology was flawed, or its
results incorrect even once, its
credibility would be attacked. Yet FDA
officials say that during the program's 15
years, drug makers have never objected to
any of its procedures or findings. "They
may not have liked what we were doing, but
they weren't able to challenge it," he
says.
The Message to Civilians
While the military is finding it can keep
most drugs longer, civilians hear quite a
different message. For instance, a campaign
called the National Expired and Unused
Medication Drive has collected and
destroyed 36 tons of drugs since 1991, says
its founder, Kathilee Champlin. Ms.
Champlin, of Colorado Springs, Colo., says
her interest derives from experience
working with the elderly and seeing how
hard it was for them to keep track of all
their medications. She says she wasn't
aware of any FDA program to extend drugs'
shelf lives.
Her group has gained sponsorship from the
some big drug retailers, including Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. It sponsors the campaign to be
"a good corporate citizen," says Frank
Seagrave, vice president of pharmacy
merchandising. "We believe that people
should dispose of unused prescription
medicines a year after they get them," he
says, adding that Wal-Mart sometimes gives
people a free bottle of vitamins if they
bring in expired drugs.
Johnson & Johnson's Janssen
Pharmaceutica unit, a drug maker, also
sponsors Ms. Champlin's campaign. "We think
it's important to educate the public about
the risk of taking drugs that are expired
and to raise public awareness," says a
spokesman for Janssen. Both Wal-Mart and
J&J say that supporting the campaign to
discard expired drugs has nothing to do
with their sales efforts.
Many pharmacists also play a role in shelf
lives. The U. S. Pharmacopeia, a
not-for-profit scientific group that
develops standards for the drug industry,
urged in 1985 that pharmacists set
expiration dates at no more than one year
if they were dispensing drugs in a bottle
other than the manufacturer's original
packaging. "New containers may let in more
moisture and heat than the container the
manufacturer used for the stability study,"
accelerating the drug's degradation, says
the USP General Counsel Joseph
Valentino.
The recommendation became a USP requirement
in 1997. As a result, "the majority of
pharmacists shorten the manufacturers'
expiration dates" on prescription drugs to
one year or less, says Susan Winckler, an
official of the American Pharmaceutical
Association. In fact, in 17 states,
pharmacists now are legally required to do
so. Ms. Winckler says shortening the dates
makes sense because many people store drugs
in moist bathrooms. She says the one-year
rule is "motivated by product integrity and
not by profit."
Even the FDA has sometimes pushed for
throwing out drugs at their expiration
date. Last October it co-sponsored, with
the National Association of Chain
Drugstores and others, a campaign that
urged women not to use medications beyond
the expiration dates because, as the
brochure put it, "they may not work." Mr.
Davis says this shows just how obscure the
military Shelf Life Extension Program is.
"Many people at the FDA have absolutely no
idea this program exists," he
says.
http://www.mercola.com/2000/apr/2/drug_expiration.htm