[House Hearing, 109 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE PERPLEXING SHIFT FROM SHORTAGE TO SURPLUS: MANAGING THIS SEASON'S
FLU SHOT SUPPLY AND PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 10, 2005
__________
Serial No. 109-1
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
99-512 WASHINGTON : 2005
_____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
DAN BURTON, Indiana TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
CHRIS CANNON, Utah WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee DIANE E. WATSON, California
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
DARRELL E. ISSA, California LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
GINNY BROWN-WAITE, Florida C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
JON C. PORTER, Nevada BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
KENNY MARCHANT, Texas ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia Columbia
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina ------
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina (Independent)
------ ------
Melissa Wojciak, Staff Director
David Marin, Deputy Staff Director/Communications Director
Rob Borden, Parliamentarian
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Phil Barnett, Minority Chief of Staff/Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on February 10, 2005................................ 1
Statement of:
Boozman, Dr. Fay W., president-elect, Association for State
and Territorial Health Officials; Dr. Robert B. Stroube,
commissioner, Virginia Department of Health; Dr. Walter A.
Orenstein, associate director, Emory Vaccine Center; and
Dr. Alan Wasserman, chairman, Department of Medicine,
George Washington University Medical Center................ 88
Boozman, Dr. Fay W....................................... 88
Orenstein, Dr. Walter A.................................. 107
Stroube, Dr. Robert B........................................ 97
Wasserman, Dr. Alan...................................... 116
Gerberding, Dr. Julie L., Director, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention; and Dr. Jesse L. Goodman, Director,
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration............................................. 18
Gerberding, Dr. Julie L.................................. 18
Goodman, Dr. Jesse L..................................... 52
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Boozman, Dr. Fay W., president-elect, Association for State
and Territorial Health Officials, prepared statement of.... 90
Davis, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Virginia, prepared statement of......................... 4
Gerberding, Dr. Julie L., Director, Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, prepared statement of.............. 22
Goodman, Dr. Jesse L., Director, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration,
prepared statement of...................................... 56
Miller, Hon. Candice S., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Michigan, prepared statement of............... 128
Orenstein, Dr. Walter A., associate director, Emory Vaccine
Center, prepared statement of.............................. 109
Stroube, Dr. Robert B., commissioner, Virginia Department of
Health, prepared statement of.............................. 100
Wasserman, Dr. Alan, chairman, Department of Medicine, George
Washington University Medical Center, prepared statement of 118
Waxman, Hon. Henry A., a Representative in Congress from the
State of California, prepared statement of................. 8
THE PERPLEXING SHIFT FROM SHORTAGE TO SURPLUS: MANAGING THIS SEASON'S
FLU SHOT SUPPLY AND PREPARING FOR THE FUTURE
----------
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2005
House of Representatives,
Committee on Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room
2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Tom Davis (chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Tom Davis, Shays, Mica, Gutknecht,
Duncan, Marchant, Dent, Waxman, Maloney, Cummings, Clay,
Watson, VanHollen, and Norton.
Also present: Representative Boozman.
Staff present: Melissa Wojciak, staff director; David
Marin, deputy staff director/communications director; Jennifer
Safavian, chief counsel for oversight and investigations; Anne
Marie Turner, counsel; Rob White, press secretary; Drew
Crockett, deputy director of communications; Susie Schulte,
professional staff member; Teresa Austin, chief clerk; Sarah
D'Orsie, deputy clerk; Corinne Zaccagnini, chief information
officer; Kristin Amerling, minority deputy chief counsel; Karen
Lightfoot, minority communications director/senior policy
advisor; Anna Laitin, minority communications and policy
assistant; Sarah Despres, minority counsel; Josh Sharfstein,
minority professional staff member; Jean Gosa, minority
assistant clerk; and Cecelia Morton, minority office manager.
Chairman Tom Davis. Good morning. A quorum being present,
the Committee on Government Reform will come to order.
I want to welcome everybody to today's oversight hearing
regarding this year's U.S. influenza vaccine supply.
This hearing will consider how public perceptions and needs
will be managed and addressed for the remainder of this flu
season and discuss what actions are being taken to begin
planning for next year's flu season.
As many of you know, this flu season has been an unusual
and difficult one. As a result of last fall's vaccine shortage,
millions of healthy people and thousands in the high-risk
population were unable to get vaccinated in a timely manner.
Phones to doctors' offices, clinics, and hospitals rang off the
hook with questions of where to seek flu vaccine, and hundreds
of clinics were either forced to turn away or cancel
altogether.
Public health authorities responded immediately,
demonstrating coordination and cooperation between Federal,
State, and local public health officials and private providers.
Officials scrambled to identify and prioritize groups for
vaccination and redistribute vaccine to areas where none
existed. They were also able to procure additional vaccine from
foreign sources to help compensate for the loss of Chiron's
vaccine. The two remaining Food and Drug Administration
licensed flu vaccine manufacturers increased production
capabilities to maximize the number of doses produced for the
season.
Recently the Nation's flu vaccine shortage turned into a
surplus, with approximately 4.4 million doses remaining to be
administered. The current surplus has led to confusion among
Americans, with immunization recommendations varying from State
to State and uncertainties of where ample supplies of vaccine
exist.
As the peak of the flu season approaches, it appears demand
for the flu vaccine has all but disappeared and the public has
lost motivation to get vaccinated. Only a few months ago our
senior citizens were waiting for hours in long lines to get
vaccinated, and now there are no lines at all. We can't afford
for Americans to underestimate the seriousness of the flu or
take the importance of vaccination against the flu lightly. An
unconcerned public will only provide to make future flu seasons
more difficult. Vaccines are life-saving devices, and
administering them is an easy way to prevent contracting and
spreading a disease.
In previous committee hearings we had discussed proposed
solutions to fixing the supply side of the equation. We have
considered whether new mechanisms and incentives are necessary
to guarantee that an adequate number of safe and effective flu
vaccines are produced and delivered annually. Today we also
need to consider the demand side of the equation. Without a
steady demand from a public that is confident the flu vaccine
will be available to them each year, precious vaccine will be
thrown out at the end of each flu season.
Questions continue to mount, and hopefully some will be
answered. How did we go from a shortage of vaccine to a surplus
in just a matter of months? What happened to demand for
vaccine? Are new public awareness campaigns or programs needed
to increase and stabilize demands for the flu vaccine? What are
we doing now to minimize the amount of vaccines thrown away at
the end of this flu season? As we approach next year's flu
season, will the message on who should be vaccinated change
again?
We also need to consider if new mechanisms and incentives
are necessary to guarantee that an adequate number of safe and
effective flu vaccines are produced and delivered annually.
I look forward to our witnesses' testimony today and a
constructive dialog on this matter.
I said this before and reiterate today that we all share
the same goal at the end of the day: a public health system
prepared to deal with the annual influenza season. Let us not
let the efforts to respond to this season's flu shot shortage
be in vain. Everyone should continue to seek immunization, as
it is not too late and the flu season has yet to peak.
As you will hear our witnesses testify, there are still at
least two more months of the flu season. As a result I am
pleased to announce that today in Rayburn 2247 from 1 to 3
p.m., the George Washington Medical Faculty Associations will
be sponsoring a flu shot clinic. This clinic is open to anyone
and the shot is free of charge. I would encourage those who
chose to forego receiving the flu shot because of the shortage
to take advantage of this important opportunity.
The committee thanks the George Washington Medical Faculty
Associates for offering to sponsor the clinic and for its
continuing motivation to protect the public by encouraging flu
vaccinations.
We have an excellent roster of witnesses today and I want
to thank all of them for appearing before the committee. I look
forward to their testimony.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Tom Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.002
Chairman Tom Davis. I would now like to yield to Mr. Waxman
for an opening statement.
Mr. Waxman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you, Chairman Davis, for your continued interest in the
flu vaccine and the need to assure a stable vaccine supply for
the United States. Because of your leadership, our oversight on
flu has been more sustained than that of any other committee of
Congress.
When we held our last hearing in November, it was a time of
crisis. There was not enough vaccine to protect the most
vulnerable Americans. There were lines of panicked citizens in
grocery stores and pharmacies, and local health officials did
not have a clear understanding of who had vaccine in their
communities.
During that hearing we heard from administration officials
about emergency plans to cope with the shortage. The
administration also expressed a commitment to taking steps to
make sure our public health system is better prepared in the
future.
Today we are meeting at a time when there is no crisis.
While there is still not enough vaccine to immunize the entire
high-risk population, there appears to be enough to meet
demand. Furthermore, at least for the moment it seems that this
flu season has not been particularly severe.
This moment provides an important opportunity to make plans
to avoid future shortages. The challenges are no secret. We are
forced to rely on too few companies to produce vaccines,
leaving us vulnerable to the kind of shortage we experienced
this year with the flu vaccine. We have not been able to
maintain adequate stockpiles of important pediatric vaccines.
And, finally, there are major gaps in immunization coverage
because of inadequate Federal support of State and local
immunization efforts.
It is a mystery what happened to this administration's
resolve. Earlier this week the President presented his fiscal
year 2006 budget to Congress. This budget cuts the Center for
Disease Control's budget by over $500 million and slashes
funding for public health preparedness at the State and local
level by almost $130 million. The budget eliminates the
preventive services block grant, which has been used to support
immunization activities. And while the budget provides for some
increase in funding for State and local efforts on flu
immunization, it provides no new funding for States that cannot
now provide other lifesaving pediatric vaccines. The budget
also fails to propose any solution to the problem of
maintaining adequate stockpiles.
This budget ensures for another year that there will be
children who will go without access to critical vaccinations
such as a lifesaving vaccine against the most common cause of
childhood meningitis.
In place of vital public health programs, the President
wants to boost funding for so-called ``abstinence only''
education programs by 40 percent. Many of these programs teach
erroneous and false information to thousands of teenagers,
including that tears and sweat can transmit HIV infection.
These programs also teach gender stereotypes as scientific
fact: for example, that boys need respect and value
accomplishments while girls need financial support and value
relationships. Well, public health threats are frightening and
real. We need to confront them with the best possible science
and policy. We also cannot afford to have anything less than
strong oversight over vaccine manufacturing by the Food and
Drug Administration.
Today's ``USA Today'' contains a detailed analysis of what
went wrong at the flu vaccine plant at the center of this
year's shortage. Experts who reviewed documents released
publicly by this committee found a history of serious problems
with the vaccine, including contamination, improper filtering,
and potency failures. ``USA Today'' also reported that the
facility had a history of failing to investigate its errors
appropriately and then failing to tell FDA about the problems
promptly. Yet, despite this record and despite the fact that
our country was depending on the facility for half of our flu
vaccine, FDA's oversight lapsed.
In June 2003, FDA rejected the initial recommendations of
its own inspectors to pursue official enforcement action
against the facility. ``USA Today'' quotes a former senior
executive at GlaxoSmithKline, ``If you look at what is in FDA's
own documents, it is stunning they didn't get a warning letter
or something worse'' after the 2003 inspection. Instead, the
company received a letter stating FDA would not return to the
plant for full inspection for 2 years. ``USA Today'' concluded
that problems persisted from 2003 to this year when British
regulators shut the facility and triggered the shortage.
This year's flu vaccine shortage is not just a wakeup call
for those of us concerned about vaccine supply; it is a wakeup
call for an agency and for an administration that appears to
give companies the benefit of the doubt at every turn. The next
FDA commissioner must change this approach and empower expert
and dedicated FDA scientists and inspectors to do their jobs
well.
I look forward to the hearing today. I plan to use the
information presented at this hearing to design legislation to
fix the gaps in our vaccine system before the next crisis hits.
I look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and our
colleagues, and hearings such as this serve such a valuable
role. I want to thank the witnesses for coming in. I look
forward to their testimony.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Henry A. Waxman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.008
Chairman Tom Davis. Any other Members wish to make opening
statements? Yes, Mr. Cummings.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you, too, for holding this critically important hearing
to discuss the current status of our Nation's influenza supply.
As we are all aware, in October 2004 Chiron Corp., one of
the three flu vaccine manufacturers licensed by the Food and
Drug Administration, announced that the company would be unable
to supply the United States with the flu vaccine we anticipated
for the 2004-2005 flu season. Chiron was expected to provide us
with some 46 to 48 million doses of flu vaccine, representing
approximately 50 percent of the nationwide supply. One
facility's failure to meet product sterility standards in
Liverpool, England, did a great deal to expose the fragility of
our flu vaccine system.
As one might expect, such a shortage in flu vaccines and
the resulting long lines and lotteries that followed in some
areas garnered much-deserved attention. Inquiries into who knew
what and when, what was done to prevent and mitigate the flu
vaccine shortage, and who should be held accountable have been
thoroughly debated within this very committee. In fact, I
personally asked many of these questions, myself.
While we may continue to disagree about the answers to
those central questions, we must agree to look forward in the
best interest of the Nation and achieve our ultimate objective
of ensuring that the American people have ready access to a flu
vaccine that is safe, affordable, and effective. To that end,
Mr. Chairman, every year 36,000 people die and over 200,000
more are hospitalized from complications arising from the flu,
so let us never forget the importance of getting it right this
time around for the upcoming flu season.
Looking forward, we need to ensure that we have a diversity
of suppliers that can meet our flu vaccine needs so that we are
not overly reliant on any one of them. We need to explore what
the Federal Government can do to provide meaningful incentives
to encourage and retain the production of flu vaccines. Some
have suggested tax credits and patent extensions for companies
that manufacture vaccines, and we should probably explore those
options.
In the upcoming flu season, we must also address any
uncertainty that may exist in the public about the availability
of flu vaccines and any confusion about who should be
vaccinated. I was troubled to read in a recent survey conducted
by the Harvard School of Public Health entitled, ``Experiences
with Obtaining Influenza Vaccination Among Persons in Priority
Groups During a Vaccine Shortage,'' that over 50 percent of
high-risk adults believed that they would not successfully
receive a flu vaccination and therefore never tried to get one.
The fact that we are experiencing flu surplus today is not
necessarily good news. We must ask how many vulnerable seniors
and other high-risk individuals attempted to get vaccinated but
were unable to do so due to demanding waits and distribution
problems.
We should also ask how many Americans are still not
vaccinated that need to be. While I am somewhat pleased that we
can report a flu vaccine surplus today, it seems too
bittersweet to celebrate in light of the fact that so many
Americans needlessly suffered due to poor planning for the flu
season.
We must also be mindful that the Federal Government cannot
assume today's vaccine surplus safeguards the Nation from
another potentially devastating shortage. Our Nation must be
prepared to safeguard our citizens by providing them with
either the proper treatment for disease or a means to prevent
infection in the event of an outbreak.
If the American people are to expect excellence of our
public health preparedness, then we must provide the proper
means by which this can be accomplished. With that said, I was
troubled to see that the administration's budget for fiscal
year 2006 proposes cuts in funding to the Centers of Disease
Control and Prevention and the Health Resources and Services
Administration for State and local public health preparedness.
It should also be noted that, while the budget would
positively increase funding for pandemic influenza programs, it
also proposes an overall cut of approximately 7 percent or $530
million to the CDC.
Our citizens depend on us to ensure that adequate vaccines
or other medicines are available to protect them.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.
Once more, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing. I yield back the balance of my time.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
Do any other Members wish to--Mr. Mica.
Mr. Mica. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you for
continuing this series of hearings that we began when there was
a so-called ``shortage,'' and now we are facing a surplus. I
sometimes wonder what the public thinks when they hear all
this. First they are told not to get vaccinations. First they
are told that the supply is limited. We have women, children,
people at health risk, elderly who don't know which way to go.
And now we are told there is a surplus.
One of the great things about serving for a number of years
in Congress is--and I am to 12 on this committee and in my
service--that you see things from the long-term perspective. I
remember--again, I repeat this--when we held hearings on lack
of childhood vaccination, immunization vaccines, and we have
heard the drug companies bashed then, that the problem was the
drug companies and that they were charging too much. Then we
heard the accusations against the insurers. Well, certainly
they are price gouging and making huge profits on vaccination,
vaccines. Soon we had no drug companies or almost no one in the
United States producing these vaccines, and soon we had no one
insuring. So our next round when we found out there was an
alleged shortage was to blame the bureaucrats, blame the
agencies, because certainly they should have anticipated all of
this.
It was interesting. Over the weekend I attended a
conference and heard the head of our State and local medical
society. I heard their speeches and their plea was for
physicians not to leave the State of Florida and for physicians
really not to even leave their profession. I was thinking this
is sort of a microcosm of what we are creating for health care.
We are forcing providers and people who produce things like
vaccine offshore or out of our States or jurisdiction.
I think you have to go back and look at the basic things
that have created this situation: still tort medical
malpractice; liability reform for manufacturers, whether it be
vaccines or other products; the regulation of the industry and
some of the things that we have artificially imposed. Why would
you manufacture if you can't make a profit?
I was pleased to hear the previous speaker, who I respect,
Mr. Cummings, say maybe it is time to look at incentives and
some other things. That is certainly what we need to do. But we
need to get to the core of the problem so that we are not
flying people to Great Britain or to France or some place else
to see what the problem is; that we actually manufacture and we
have incentives to produce vaccines, to provide medical
services in this country.
I think we have to look at some solutions. We are going to
hear from the bureaucrats, and God bless the CDC. I think they
have done as good a job as they could. But the way we are
operating is wrong, and the lack of again reliance on domestic
production or domestic medical services or domestic medical
professionals, having them here in the United States and
available is the only long-term solution. I am anxious to hear
from them. We do need to plan ahead, but we do need to look a
that core of the problem.
Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
Do any other Members wish to make opening statements? The
gentlelady from the District of Columbia?
Ms. Norton. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you and Ranking
Member Waxman for focusing in on this hearing. I think it is
very important to do so, because I think what we have had is a
loss of confidence in the two agencies that have been
responsible, and part of our job is to help restore confidence
across America when up became down and down became up. People
were asking what happened, and they expect us to find out what
happened. The reason I want to know what happened is because if
you don't know what happened you don't know how to keep it from
happening again.
I think that the two agencies, FDA is already undergoing
great scrutiny and huge bipartisan criticism which may, indeed,
be related, or at least not unrelated, to the failure to act
when they could have acted at the manufacturing level overseas.
It calls into question the competence of the agency, their
diligence in pursuing any hints of problems.
Then, of course, the public turned to the CDC, which showed
it didn't have a clue about what to do, had no worst case
scenario, and were no further along than Members of Congress
who asked them questions as they tried literally to cobble
together a way to deal with a crisis that was absolutely
predictable. Half your supply is overseas. Guess what?
Something could happen to it. What would you do? Very
troublesome.
In a real sense, it was like the anthrax scare, except that
who could have predicted that? But you would have thought that
the anthrax scare would have helped us prepare for this kind of
emergency, which, indeed, was predictable.
Mr. Chairman, I am concerned because of larger issues
raised here and that have been raised in the Homeland Security
Committee. We don't do a lot on health systems, but I don't see
any evidence that we are able to deal with unanticipated health
emergencies. This was a test case. We failed it. For those of
us who think it doesn't matter, this is an epidemic. I don't
know what the number of deaths are, but we do know that tens of
thousands of people die every year from flu, so it was
important.
The problems at the plant in England are so deep.
Inspections still have to go on, and apparently we still don't
know whether it will be able to produce, so I am sure we must
have a plan as to what to do next year.
I want to embrace what my colleagues have said about
incentives. Nobody expects that the pharmaceutical industry is
any different from any other industry: they go for the highly
profitable drugs. We have known for a long time that there is
little or no profit in flu. Why haven't we done something about
it? It is our responsibility on this side of the podium, and it
is the responsibility of the agencies and of the administration
to push us to do something about it. If this crisis doesn't do
that, I don't know what will.
I believe the most important thing the two witnesses could
tell us today would be what their worst case scenarios are
given a set of circumstances and whether they have taken
themselves through worst case scenarios so that, indeed, they
are prepared for whatever comes along. That is what the
American people expect from their public health system.
I appreciate that both of you have come, and I particularly
appreciate the chairman calling this early hearing.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
Mr. Duncan.
Mr. Duncan. Mr. Chairman, very briefly, I don't have a
formal opening statement but I just would like to say this: now
that this shortage has turned into a surplus, you know, we have
certainly found out that the way to get everybody to take their
flu shots is to tell them that they can't have one. Human
nature--people always want something they don't have or can't
have. We certainly found that is true, even in regard to flu
shots. I know the Knox County Health Department, my largest
county, gave out more than double their ordinary number of flu
shots this year.
Leading from that, we need to make sure in all of this that
I know we are going to do everything possible to make sure
there is no shortage next year, but I am wondering if, in doing
that, when people think there is no shortage will the numbers
drop off once again that get these flu shots. I think that is
something we need to take into consideration when we are going
through all this.
Thank you. This is very important, and I appreciate very
much that you are continuing to hold hearings on this. Thank
you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
We are going to move now to our first panel of witnesses:
Dr. Julie Gerberding, who is no stranger to this committee, is
Director of the CDC; and Dr. Jesse Goodman, the Director of the
Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research at FDA, will
discuss efforts taken at the Federal level to manage the flu
vaccine situation this season with focus on the most recent
strategies announced by CDC in January. They will also describe
their efforts to coordinate distribution recommendations with
local and State authorities and what steps are being taken in
preparation for next year's flu season. Additionally, Dr.
Goodman will provide the committee with a status report
regarding the implementation of Chiron's remediation plan and
how FDA is working with both British health authorities and
Chiron to ensure Chiron is capable to manufacture for next flu
season.
Let me thank both of you for reacting to this crisis.
Whatever mistakes people think that could have gone on before,
it certainly doesn't lie with the two of you. You have been
most cooperative, and we have taken a deficit into a surplus.
Maybe we will send you over to OMB next at the administration.
But I personally appreciate the efforts that you have made on
this and we look forward to your testimony and answering some
questions. Thank you both for, I think, taking something that
potentially could have been worse. I think we have been lucky
so far with a mild flu season, but turning this around and
reacting. We can have a talk about what happened and why, but
most importantly where we are going next year.
As is our policy, we swear you in first.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you both for being here. You know
the rules. Your entire statement is in the record and the
questions will be based on your entire statement. Take about 5
minutes. You have the lights in front of you--orange after 4
minutes, red after 5. I won't cut you off, but we want to leave
time for questions and the next panel.
Again, thanks for your efforts and thank you for being with
us this morning.
Dr. Gerberding, we will start with you.
STATEMENTS OF DR. JULIE L. GERBERDING, DIRECTOR, CENTERS FOR
DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION; AND DR. JESSE L. GOODMAN,
DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR BIOLOGICS EVALUATION AND RESEARCH, FOOD
AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
STATEMENT OF DR. GERBERDING
Dr. Gerberding. Thank you. We really do appreciate your
continued interest in this issue. It has been a very
challenging flu season for all of us, and I think very
frustrating for the people who have been unable to get vaccine.
I have a map here showing the current distribution of
influenza in the United States. As you can see, there are many
red States. Those are States that are now showing widespread
flu activities.
Chairman Tom Davis. So red States are not the good States
in this thing? I mean, Mr. Waxman would agree with that, but I
just want to get that on the record.
Dr. Gerberding. I am not going to comment on that.
The activity----
Chairman Tom Davis. Who chose what is red and blue on this?
I am just kidding. Go ahead.
Dr. Gerberding. We really wanted to confuse the political
process.
What we are seeing is that there is an increase in
widespread flu activity across our Nation week by week by week.
This morning we checked and we know that there is widespread
flu activity in Virginia and we do not know yet whether the
season has peaked, so there still is a need to immunize people
against this infection.
We have three big challenges. One is that flu, itself, is
unpredictable. We can't say at the beginning of the year what
this map is going to look like or how fast the flu is going to
spread across the country.
On the next graphic I also remind people about the
evolution of flu viruses. We don't know from year to year what
virus will emerge. We don't know what strain will be causing
the majority of disease. And of course now we are also worried
about the avian influenza in Asia. So we are dealing with a
very unpredictable virus and one that remains a biological and
sociological challenge.
We have a second big challenge, and that, of course, is the
unpredictable nature of the vaccine supply, itself. That is, in
part, because we are still using antiquated manufacturing
methods that impart enormous risk to the manufacturers. We also
do not have a stable market and historically we have had low
prices for the vaccine and low rates of reimbursement.
Last, we have the challenge of the unpredictable demand for
vaccine, and that is something, as you pointed out, the
shortage certainly drives demand. We saw last year that a
severe flu season drove demand, at least at the beginning of
the season. But we also know that no matter where we are in flu
season and how much we encourage immunization, it is very
difficult to create demand late in the season, and that is what
has created this national shortage of vaccine, but a local
mismatch between supply and demand, and in some cases excess
vaccine beyond the demand of the population.
So what can we do about that? Well, first, we can't change
the virology of the virus, per se, but we can innovate. There
are a number of innovations that have occurred even in the last
year that will help us get a better handle on flu.
I will just point out that the laboratory capability for
flu detection has expanded dramatically throughout our public
health system this year, our ability to detect H-5 strains, the
avian strain, but in addition CDC is conducting enormous
amounts of research related to characterization of the virus,
conducting the reverse genetics to look for novel ways to
create vaccine strains, doing studies to look for drugs, and
trying to understand why older people are more vulnerable and
less successfully immunized against the flu.
We have also initiated a system to track in real time the
emergence of vaccine in cities using biosense, which is an
electronic surveillance system including data from the
Department of Defense medical facilities and the VA medical
facilities. This year for the first time we were able to see
flu emerge on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis much earlier
than we could through some of our traditional tracking
mechanisms.
We also for the first time got proprietary information from
Aventis, now known as sanofi pasteur, to tell us who is
receiving the vaccine, where it was being utilized, and how we
can do a better job of reapportioning and reallocating that
vaccine to treat people's needs. So while we can't change the
virus, we can improve our abilities to detect and respond to
it.
On the next graphic I have illustrated the changes in
funding for flu. I know this doesn't show up well, but I think
you can see that trends over time do show a steady and dramatic
increase culminating in the President's 2006 budget with a
request for $197 million for influenza. That is an
unprecedented budget request, and it includes dollars to
purchase vaccine, it includes purchase of drugs for the
stockpile, it includes expansion of the vaccine for a
children's program to include 5,500 immunizationsites that
aren't currently covered, and a number of other steps to
support CDC and the NIH research and science enterprises.
So we are making investments to help stabilize the supply.
We know that the manufacturers need a modern production
facility capability, and we know that manufacturers need a
market.
Over the last decade, the recommendations about who should
receive vaccine have steadily increased so that now we
recommend vaccine to about 188 million Americans. This in
itself incentivizes manufacturers. We have also raised the
reimbursement rate for administration at CMS from less than $4
to more than $18, and we have increased the price we pay for
vaccine to more than $10 through our Medicare program. So some
of these efforts underway will certainly help stabilize the
market, and we think help incentivize. That, with the advent of
our capability to purchase vaccine and guarantee part of the
market, at least, is something that the manufacturers tell us
is very important in their progress.
The last challenge is the challenge of demand. This has
been very difficult. I have detailed our communication efforts
in my written testimony, but we do still need to work very hard
to reach out to all cultures and all people and explain the
need for vaccine.
Let me end with a picture of what our achievements have
been this year. I think it is very important to notice that,
compared to last year, the vaccine coverage rates across the
United States in some cases are better for high-risk groups.
For example, we have immunized about 50 percent of children
between the ages of 6 and 23 months of age, compared to a very
low immunization rate last year. Of course, it in part is due
because we didn't recommend vaccine for this group last year.
Also, compared to last year we have improved the coverage of
high-risk children and we have improved the coverage of health
care workers for flu vaccine. We haven't quite achieved the
same level of immunization of our population over 65, but we
have come close. About 60 percent of those individuals have
received the vaccine.
Importantly, our targeting worked in that immunization of
the non-risk people was less than half that it was last year,
and we thank those people who stepped aside. So, despite having
50 percent of the doses we thought we needed to begin the year,
we have achieved almost the same coverage of high-risk groups
this year as we did last year. This represents a public health
success and is in large part due to our public health system,
our clinicians, and the vaccine manufacturers, and particularly
the heroic people who stepped aside to let the high-risk people
go first. So we thank all of those individuals, as well as the
team at CDC and NIH and FDA for their efforts.
Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Gerberding follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.038
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Goodman, thanks for being with us.
STATEMENT OF DR. GOODMAN
Dr. Goodman. My pleasure, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and
members of the committee, I am Dr. Jesse Goodman. I am the
Director for the Center for Biologics and Evaluation at FDA. I
am also an infectious disease specialist and I think we share
many common goals here today.
I do appreciate the opportunity to be here today with Dr.
Gerberding and to update you on FDA's efforts to address
influenza vaccine needs and what we are doing to prevent the
kinds of problems we have had this year from recurring.
I do want to assure the American public also that the
safety, effectiveness, and availability of vaccines are among
FDA's highest priorities.
As we have emphasized in previous testimony, influenza
vaccine manufacturing is complex and challenging and the market
is very fragile, in part because increasing demand has been
coupled by a decline in the number of manufacturers. For the
2004-2005 season, only three licensed manufacturers began
production. As you know, on October 5, 2004 the British
Medicines and Health Care Regulatory Agency, MHRA, suspended
Chiron's license without prior notice to FDA.
FDA also concluded that the safety of Chiron's vaccine
could not be assured. As soon as we learned Chiron's vaccine
would not be available, we worked with great urgency and close
cooperation with CDC and the private sector--and I want to
emphasize this was really a public/private effort--to explore
all viable options to get additional doses. With sanofi pasteur
and MedImmune we got approximately 5 million additional doses
of U.S.-licensed vaccine, increasing the availability of supply
to 61 million doses. I think that helped us come close to the
kind of coverage results of previous years.
Because there was a concern, though--and we were all very
worried, because this is still a lot less vaccine than we have
had in previous years, and because of that concern we sought
additional vaccine licensed in other countries that, if needed,
could be made available under investigational new drug
applications.
We immediately sent teams to facilities of potential
sponsors in multiple countries to evaluate their manufacturing
processes, and we reviewed a huge volume of manufacturing and
clinical data, all within a few weeks. These efforts resulted
in FDA being able to approve INDs that permitted the potential
use of 4 million from GlaxoSmithKline and 1 million doses from
Berna Biotech if we needed them.
These interactions and those with other influenza vaccine
manufacturers who also were highly cooperative provided
valuable information, and they have created and strengthened
relationships that we think importantly will lead to successful
U.S. licensure of new vaccines.
I want to also say that is one of the constructive outcomes
of the challenges we have faced and that I am extremely proud
of all this hard work from over 50 FDA employees, as well as
our colleagues at HHS and CDC who worked very collaboratively
for long hours, often on weekends and during vacations, to help
meet this challenge. We took this quite seriously, because we
share all your concerns.
I wanted to mention that it is often overlooked that
pneumococcal pneumonia is one of the most important and common
serious complications of influenza, and it, itself, is
preventable through use of inexpensive yet, even more than flu
vaccine, under-utilized vaccine. In cooperation with HHS, Merck
tripled its production of its vaccine from 6 to more than 17
million doses, and availability of that vaccine can help
further protect Americans from that complication.
Well, you want to know about what our plans are, what we
are doing, what the plans are for 2005 and future years. First,
we are doing everything we can to improve supply for future
years. We are doing this with a dual-track strategy. Because
Chiron is a major issue, our first track refers to trying to
help Chiron be able to produce again. We are doing everything
we can to facilitate that effort of its correcting its
manufacturing problems.
In a dramatic change from where we were in October, FDA and
MHRA, the British regulatory agency, now have an agreement with
Chiron that allows full information sharing. We have used that
agreement to collaboratively review Chiron's remediation plans
and activities, and we are providing continuing and extensive
feedback to both Chiron and MHRA in all directions. We are
working together and actively communicating, in addition, on
inspection activities.
Only after passing MHRA and FDA inspections will Chiron be
able to provide vaccine to the U.S. market. In the spring, when
critical stages of manufacturing are taking place, we plan a
comprehensive inspection to verify whether Chiron has
adequately addressed its problems. While much work remains to
be done, I am pleased to report that it appears that Chiron is
making progress.
While working with Chiron, it is important to emphasize
that we are also working on a second track to facilitate
overall greater capacity and diversification in the U.S.
influenza vaccine supply, something several of the Members
identified as important in their remarks. It is important to
recognize--and you have also remarked on this, but I want to
emphasize it--that the demand for vaccine, the demand and other
economic issues are the primary factors that determine whether
a manufacturer will seek and maintain a license in this
country, the strength of our manufacturing infrastructure here,
and the amount of vaccine that manufacturers will produce.
One important and often overlooked strategy that CDC and us
are in full agreement on is to encourage vaccination throughout
the flu season, including January and February. To increase the
total doses available, manufacturers can produce vaccine over a
longer time period, and that becomes available during these
months. Because influenza cases usually continue well after
November and December when most people are seeking
immunization, later vaccination is beneficial. We need to
better communicate this important public health message, and
the clinic that you have sponsored today is a great way to do
that.
In addition, we have also been doing everything we can to
stimulate foreign license manufacturers to provide or, where
needed, develop the safety and effectiveness data to get U.S.
licensure. We have actively engaged with several interested
companies. We have informed manufacturers that we are willing
to consider creative approaches to licensing, such as
accelerated approval based on surrogate markers like the
patient's immune response to the vaccine.
Finally, while we are doing all we can to have licensed
vaccines for next year's needs, the experience and
relationships we have built this year will help us if we again
need to obtain additional vaccine under INDs.
I just want to conclude with a few remarks on something I
think is very important, which is we have challenged ourselves
to identify other lessons learned from this year's influenza
season and how we can use this experience to prevent similar
events in the future. It is not all under our control, but we
are making significant changes in response to our sort of
after-action and continuing analysis. One is that we plan to
conduct inspections of influenza vaccine manufacturers on an
annual basis. Another is this need to share more information.
We are completing or have completed agreements that allow
information sharing with numerous foreign regulatory agencies.
We have also initiated a vulnerability analysis of other
licensed products that we regulate that are critical to public
health to identify other areas where actions to support supply
might be needed, and we have increased efforts at global
regulatory collaboration on approvals and standards.
I think it is very important, because I know you are
interested in pandemic flu, to know that the insights gained
from these experiences are critical in informing us on pandemic
preparedness. This is something we all care a great deal about,
given the eventual likelihood of pandemic and the outbreaks of
avian flu Julie mentioned in Asia. It is very, very important
to emphasize that more widespread vaccination during periods
before pandemics has not only its direct health benefits but it
increases vaccine production capacity and it will help America
and the global community better prepare for an influenza
pandemic.
As Julie mentioned, the administration is making the
largest investment ever made by the Federal Government in these
areas. I do want to mention a couple of specific things that
were not in her testimony.
In November 2004, HHS awarded a contract to sanofi pasteur
to help ensure year-round availability of increased egg supply
in case it is needed for the pandemic or for this kind of
future vaccine shortage. Research supported by HHS through the
National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease will help
us move from egg-based production technology to newer
technologies. While much work remains, these newer technologies
provide important alternatives that could potentially shorten
the time needed to produce vaccines.
We welcome the continued support of Congress for this work,
and we view preparedness as a critical responsibility and an
opportunity. I see this as a teachable moment. What have we
learned? What do we need to do to prepare for the future?
In conclusion, when an adequate vaccine supply supplemented
by effective anti-viral medicines is available, we can greatly
decrease our vulnerability and provide protection against
influenza. We recognize the need to work with multiple
partners, including manufacturers, to increase supply and move
toward more modern, dependable methods of production. All of
the steps we have described will not only help address our
current challenges, but help protect us from flu every year and
prepare us for future seasons or in the event of a pandemic.
All of us welcome the opportunity to work with Congress to
accomplish these shared public health goals.
Thanks very much.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much, Dr. Goodman.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Goodman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.057
Chairman Tom Davis. Let me start with you. ``USA Today''
had an article discussing how a couple years ago some batches
of the flu vaccine might have lost their potency too soon. I
know that you can't talk about specifics because it is against
the law for you to do that, but could you explain generally
about potency and what it would mean to an individual who had
received a shot that was less potent?
Dr. Goodman. I would be happy to. Every year we actually
assist the manufacturers by providing standards and the agents
needed to assess potency. The major thing there is it helps the
manufacturer of the vaccine. They have to decide how much of
each component to mix into the vaccine, so we help get them to
the appropriate amount.
But then, in addition, they are required to perform testing
on the vaccine to show how its stability is maintained over
time, that it doesn't lose large amounts of that potency so
that a person might not have the protective response you would
want them to have. We require them to monitor that and report
those events to us.
We also require other testing. For instance, we test every
new large lot ourselves for potency, but the stability testing
is then what happens thereafter.
In this case there was a problem. The company noted
diminishments in excursions from the specified stability
limits. This is information that our inspectors found during
that inspection they performed a complete analysis of, and they
determined that this is a concern, particularly that they were
not reported to us, but that, given the way this vaccine is
rapidly utilized and the nature of the excursions and all the
other information available to them, they did determine that
they did not believe this was at that time a threat to the
effectiveness of the vaccine. But that is still saying we were
concerned and told them to correct that.
Chairman Tom Davis. Should there have been a recall of
those flu shots?
Dr. Goodman. That possibility was certainly examined, but,
again, because it was believed that these changes, while of
concern and outside of their specification--I want to emphasize
we were not happy with these, but the analysis was that these
would not affect the efficacy of the vaccine at that point in
such a way as to make a recall needed. I should also point out
that would not affect safety of the vaccine.
Chairman Tom Davis. What does FDA do to ensure a
manufacturer properly tests and reports its findings to FDA?
Dr. Goodman. Things that we think are critical are
specified in the license, itself, of the manufacturer. In fact,
there are a broad number of tests that manufacturers are
required to do as part of their license and as part of the
quality assurance, and these occur at multiple, multiple steps
during manufacturing, and then also with the final product.
If problems develop they have certain procedures. For
example, for certain procedures they have to reject that
vaccine for the U.S. market if certain kinds of test results
are obtained. For others they are supposed to notify us within
a certain amount of time or perform an analysis of those
results and decide whether in their judgment the vaccine is
acceptable. So all those are things that are required.
In addition, we do testing, as I mentioned, on the bulk
lots and at other parts and final vaccine and other parts of
the process as we deem needed. In this case, the manufacturer
did not report these excursions in stability to us in a timely
manner as required, and they were cited for that.
Chairman Tom Davis. OK. Thank you very much.
Dr. Gerberding, CDC has been telling the public that it
isn't too late to get vaccinated, as the flu season can last
through April. If we are stuck with a surplus every year, why
doesn't the CDC consider extending the flu shot campaign
through at least February or March to avoid throwing away
vaccine? Would this help, or does it just vary with the flu
season?
And another question: how many deaths have we had this year
due to flu in the United States? Can anybody tell me?
Dr. Gerberding. The truth is we are working very hard to
try to continue to encourage vaccine. One of the things we have
done is make the emergency supply of CDC's vaccine on loan to
the manufacturer available to clinicians, and if they don't use
it they can get a rebate, as an effort to get them to reach out
and get the vaccine, especially for these high-risk people. So
every year we put out information and communications around
late-season vaccine, but it is human nature, apparently, not to
be interested in that immunization, despite what we think is a
pretty gold standard campaign.
We have to work on that. We have to do the formative
research to find out why and change our communication strategy
accordingly, and we need to also work with clinicians and the
public health system to make this a visible priority.
In terms of the number of deaths overall from flu, it is
too early for us to have that accurate information. Influenza
per se is not a reportable disease. We do know that there have
been at least four pediatric deaths from influenza this year,
which is less than we saw last year but still unnecessary and
tragic.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
Mr. Waxman, you have 5 minutes.
Mr. Waxman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I get into the topic for today I just want to tell
Dr. Gerberding my appreciation for the work that the CDC did in
coming to terms with the obesity issue and reviewing the matter
internally, convening further discussions, making pledges to
changes so similar problems wouldn't occur in the future. I
just want to commend you for the work your agency did on that.
Dr. Gerberding. I am very grateful to hear that, and I will
take that back to Atlanta, as well. Thank you.
Mr. Waxman. Thank you.
I want to ask you about immunization funding, because we
have seen an increase of $1.5 billion over the last decade,
largely due to the congressionally mandated vaccines for
children program, but there is another immunization program
that is called the 317 program. This is run by the States, and
the States are supposed to make up for those who don't qualify
for the vaccines for children program to make sure they are
eligible for vaccines, as well as some adults.
I think this is an important program, and I am sure you
share that concern, as well.
Dr. Gerberding. Absolutely.
Mr. Waxman. A number of States are telling us that they
can't ensure that all kids get the vaccines they need, and we
are going to hear today from the health commissioner of
Virginia who has testified a number of times to this committee
that his State cannot provide the life-saving prevnar vaccine.
Is it true that by expanding the 317 program we could ensure
that all children in the United States get all their shots?
Dr. Gerberding. It is very difficult to do that on the
basis of 317. What is proposed but not yet approved is that we
expand the eligibility for the VFC so that we could immunize
these under-insured kids in facilities that are run by State
and local health delivery programs. Right now those kids have
to go outside of the system and they can't afford to pay for
the vaccine so they essentially don't get it. So the proposal
is that we add to the VFC eligibility to achieve this kind of
coverage. If that proposal doesn't pass or isn't approved, then
we would certainly need to rely on 317 to continue that effort.
Mr. Waxman. I guess my concern is I think we are not
funding adequately the 317 program, and that will provide a gap
where some people who could be covered by it are going to fall
through it. I just hope we can find more funding for that
effort.
Dr. Gerberding. Thank you.
Mr. Waxman. Before I go to Dr. Goodman, there is another
very peculiar issue that you are dealing with with the
stockpiling of childhood vaccines. There is some SEC issue that
is preventing some of the companies--this may be too esoteric
an issue, but I just hope that this issue is being approached
with some urgency, because it looks like the money that was
allocated for the stockpile is not going to be used because the
companies are not going to be able to do this because the SEC
is not allowing them.
I guess the only point I would make there is that we have
to do something to straighten this out. It seems absurd to let
it go on and start making assumptions that we are never going
to get that stockpile for those vaccines, which will assure
that we have the supply for.
Dr. Gerberding. Thank you. That is a revenue recognition
issue and it is complicated. We have to figure a way through
that, and I know the companies are eager to do that, too. Thank
you.
Mr. Waxman. Dr. Goodman, I have been critical of the FDA.
At our last hearing this certainly came out, and I think the
``USA Today'' article also was pretty damning of the FDA's
inaction in light of the FDA's own inspectors coming back in
2003 and saying they were learning about problems at that
Chiron facility and recommending that some action, enforcement
action, be taken.
Just to review the facts, the plant had a terrible record
of compliance with FDA regulations, even a history of failing
to report problems to the agency. This potency issue is one of
the problems they evidently failed to report to the agency. The
plant was making half our flu vaccine supply. And in June 2003,
the inspectors found serious problems again and recommended
enforcement action, yet FDA decided not to conduct a full
inspection for another 2 years. We learned at the last hearing
FDA refused to even request to meet with the company to provide
guidance on how to improve, and then eventually the plant was
shut down by the British.
I reviewed this because I think we need to learn from this,
and I appreciated your testimony that the FDA is taking that
constructive approach. I think there is a silver lining. If FDA
is able to increase its enforcement and if the agency can
empower its inspectors and scientists, then FDA can prevent
situations like this from developing in the first place, but it
is going to take a commitment from FDA leaders like you and
whoever the new Commissioner will be. I want to underscore that
point.
You don't disagree with me, do you?
Dr. Goodman. No. I don't think, unless you have specific
questions, it would be constructive for me to go over the old
ground. I know Dr. Crawford answered your questions about that
before. But I would just reiterate we are--and I can speak for
him and myself--totally committed to doing everything we can to
get high-quality manufacturing and also to get the appropriate
kind of inspectional enforcement activities. I am working
closely with John Taylor, the head of Office of Regulatory
Affairs. We have considered this issue very carefully of
whether the annual inspections I talked about, which is a real
change, may be helpful. We think if it may be, given the
dwindling number of manufacturers and how vulnerable this all
is, that even if it just may be and we can approach it in a
very preventive manner it is a good thing to do.
Mr. Waxman. Let me just say I appreciate that approach and
I think it is constructive and I think there are certainly good
intentions on everybody's part, but I was very disappointed in
Dr. Crawford's testimony. I don't think he took responsibility
for FDA's pretty much hands-off approach, just trusting the
company and not going out there to the British plant, itself.
But I don't think we have time to go over all the past record.
It may not be all that helpful. I just do want to register my
concern.
Dr. Goodman. I appreciate that. One comment I would make,
without wanting to re-engage the whole thing, is that in 2003
when the inspectors went in there they did find significant
issues and concerns. A number of the ones that were of most
concern were from 2001 and 2002, and when they were in there on
the ground a number of those problems had been corrected. The
initial recommendation of the inspectors was as you discussed,
but the normal FDA--they did follow the normal FDA process.
They came back, discussed those internally, looked at the
company's response, looked at the company's record, met with
the scientists in the center and the additional scientific
specialists, and they did make that decision.
Mr. Waxman. But rejected the recommendation of the
inspectors to do more.
Dr. Goodman. Again, I would just characterize it as
actually the inspectors, themselves--this is my understanding,
because I have asked about that. I think it is a legitimate
question. Everybody looked at all the data, and my
understanding is they unanimously agreed, including the
inspectors, that there were a number of important observations,
but this wasn't a situation where they had a safety concern at
that time or--and I think it is important to say, and I have
heard this from the people who were on the ground that the
situation that we found in 2004 going in there was different by
order of magnitude and from a situation where, with an
extensive inspection such as in 2003, you would find
significant observations, you would want to make improvements
in quality. We would expect those changes. But in 2004 it was
very quantitative and qualitative. The basic systems weren't
working.
Mr. Waxman. My time is up. I just want to make one sentence
here. From 1999 to 2001, FDA sent 36 warning letters to
biologic manufacturers for manufacturing violations. From 2002
through 2004 FDA has sent six. This is a decline of over 80
percent. I think we need to do more, not less. That is why I
believe we ran into the problem we did. You may disagree with
me, but that is my view.
Dr. Goodman. Well, I appreciate your input.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
Mr. Gutknecht.
Mr. Gutknecht. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First I will ask the question the chairman wanted to ask
and didn't get a chance. First, will the CDC follow the lead of
some of the States and drop the remaining restrictions on who
should or can be vaccinated?
Dr. Gerberding. The decisions about the high priority
groups are made in collaboration with the Advisory Committee on
Immunization Practices, and though we see coverage rates that
are close to what we normally perceive, we still have millions
of very high-risk people who haven't been vaccinated. So from a
national perspective, we have been consistent from day one. The
highest priority still has to be our seniors and the people who
are at very high risk from death or severe complications.
But at a local level where some providers have it and
others don't, it is the local health officer or the State
health officer who has to make the decision in their
jurisdiction what is the most common sense way to make the best
use of the vaccine. We don't want to waste it. So we are really
encouraging them to use what they have if they need it. If they
can't get the high-risk people, then give it to whoever wants
it.
Mr. Gutknecht. So that was kind of a no. It was a good
answer, but I think the answer is no, you are not going to
follow the lead of the States.
Second, doesn't that create confusion among the public
about who should be vaccinated and who shouldn't?
Dr. Gerberding. The dilemma is that there are areas where
there still is a vaccine shortage. We have surveyed all the
States, and there are specific jurisdictions where they need
vaccine and they can't get it. So for us to say it is wide open
for whoever wants it nationally really creates an additional
burden on those places that are still desperately seeking
vaccine.
So we have tried to equalize that by moving vaccine from
one State to another or one jurisdiction to another, but it is
not feasible to do that with the kind of precision that would
allow us to give a single recommendation for the Nation. So our
dilemma is how do we support making sensible use of the vaccine
and still protect those areas that have shortages and are even
still talking about using the investigational vaccine if they
can't get what they need through the manufacturer.
So we still have a shortage, and that I think is something
that--I know the committee is talking about a surplus, and
there are areas where we have excess vaccine, but fundamentally
we don't have enough.
Mr. Gutknecht. Just for my own benefit, when you move
vaccine around or when it was shipped here from Germany, how
did they ship it?
Dr. Gerberding. When we move it from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction it is generally either Federal Expressed or moved
through some kind of a courier that meets the FDA's
requirements for chain of custody, if you will. And likewise,
when we move it from the international sources to the United
States, it goes through a similar process to assure that the
cold temperature is maintained and that we document the
appropriate transport and storage procedures.
Mr. Gutknecht. So importing these vaccines from Germany
caused no concern for health?
Dr. Gerberding. Well, I will let Jesse answer that question
because it is really an FDA requirement.
Mr. Gutknecht. Actually, you don't have to answer that.
That was a facetious question.
Dr. Goodman. Well, I think I should answer it because it is
a good question, too. Vaccines and some of the other biologics
are particularly sensitive to, for example, cold, other storage
conditions, handling, so what we want to do--and this is true
with licensed vaccine or the unlicensed vaccine under the IND
because, of course, Chiron's vaccine would have been imported
into the United States because it would have been finished in
England.
What we do is we have very detailed--the manufacturer
actually has to submit to us detailed protocols that they have
validated that show that the temperature is maintained, that
the storage conditions are suitable, for example, for shock,
that the temperature is monitored. Just like those stability
testing that Congressman Waxman asked me about, if there are
significant deviations they need to report those, and in
certain cases they cannot use that vaccine.
Mr. Gutknecht. I just wanted to get on the record that it
is possible to move drugs and/or vaccines across State and
national borders safely as long as you follow the right
protocols.
Dr. Goodman. And it is well controlled.
Mr. Gutknecht. And you can do it with FedEx. That is on
another subject for another day, which we will pursue perhaps
in this committee and others.
The other issue I want to get to--and I am sorry my time is
almost exhausted here, but I am very concerned about viruses
that are migrating from one species, particularly from poultry
to pigs, for example, and then to human beings. I want to know
how much research you are doing.
I have a very parochial interest in this. There is a small
lab in my District that is doing some amazing things on
vaccines for pigs. Literally you can send them a sample
overnight FedEx and the next morning they will analyze what
particular virus that is and they will send the next day out
the right vaccine for that for your herd of animals. In many
respects, they have technology at this little lab that is all
world.
My interest in this is trying to bring some other
researchers in because I am concerned. I mean, I don't like to
use the term ``pandemic'' and I am not a scientist, I am not a
doctor, I don't play one here in the Congress, but I am
concerned that we are not doing enough in the event that there
were some new strain of virus that did begin to jump from
animals to human beings.
I am curious in terms of what the CDC is doing on that and
what we can do to advance that particular kind of research.
Dr. Gerberding. Thank you for your question. I would
actually look forward to learning more about the facility in
your District so we can followup with you on that.
The problem you are describing is one that we refer to as
``zoonotic infections.'' Actually 12 out of the last 13 new
infections in people have arisen from animals, so it is an
extremely high priority for CDC. In fact, we just recruited the
dean of the school of veterinary medicine from the University
of Michigan to CDC to help us, in part, with our strategies and
our innovations in this area because we think it is so
important.
Mr. Gutknecht. I would love to have you come out and visit
these guys, because it was one of the most amazing things that
I have seen. As I say, the research stuff, the equipment that
they have is amazing, and that they can do this that quickly.
I yield back the balance of whatever time I might have.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you, Mr. Gutknecht.
Mr. Cummings.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to followup on something that Mr. Gutknecht was
talking about. As you all were answering his questions,
particularly you, Dr. Goodman, about the transfer of medicine
drugs from one country to another, I want to make sure I heard
you correctly, because it seems like there are different things
coming out of the FDA. You said that could be done safely?
Dr. Goodman. The question that I was answering----
Mr. Cummings. Then answer my question.
Dr. Goodman. I will. OK. Your question is: can, in this
case, all drugs? Or is your question about influenza vaccine?
Mr. Cummings. Let's just deal with vaccines right now.
Dr. Goodman. OK.
Mr. Cummings. Because they seem to be very sensitive.
Dr. Goodman. Yes, I understand.
Mr. Cummings. They have shelf life. They have all kinds of
issues.
Dr. Goodman. Yes. With all that in mind, with extremely
careful controls over transportation conditions, including
monitoring, etc., and in this case there had to be extensive
FDA and company involvement. In other words, this is normal
procedures for these companies and all the resources that would
be involved in that. Two critically important things could be
dealt with and protected. Those are: is that the product you
think it is? And has it been under total custody and control?
It is almost like criminal evidence. You don't want the
consumers, the people in the District and in Maryland to get a
vaccine and have that not be flu vaccine. And then is that
vaccine still going to be safe and effective because of how it
was handled, etc.? If it is properly made, and then with
exquisite, appropriate monitored controls, and then FDA
oversight of that and all the resources that are entailed in
that, I think that particular transportation issue can be met.
I want to mention one thing here.
Mr. Cummings. Let me just say why I asked the question. I
have seniors who are sitting there right now looking at C-Span
and they are hearing all this, and I have to go back to my
District and explain this, that they can't get their
prescription drugs because FDA says they can't be done safely.
But let me move on, because I only have a minute.
Dr. Goodman. OK.
Mr. Cummings. I, too, was disappointed with Dr. Crawford's
testimony, extremely disappointed. I want to know. Let's say we
go through all the things we are supposed to go through in
making sure Chiron is doing what it is supposed to do, and
let's say we find out that we do have a major problem, what
exactly are our contingency plans?
Dr. Goodman. That is an excellent question.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you.
Dr. Goodman. We are working with CDC and HHS--and I do want
to mention that coordinating and planning function is in the
Secretary's office at HHS, but let me tell you what we are
doing in answer to that. You are absolutely right. While we are
doing all we can to get Chiron on board to produce, and if they
do and they do it in a timely manner that would be a good
situation and it might be able to restore supply to a
reasonable level.
There is a lot of uncertainty in there. Ultimately it is up
to Chiron to succeed, and it is a really complex, demanding
process. They are making huge changes. Also, our British
counterparts have to do their job and decide that it is OK,
too, and then we do. So there is a lot of unpredictability so
we need to do what we can to prepare.
Some of the things we are doing that I mentioned; we are
extensively interacting with several foreign manufacturers who
have been working with us and who have indicated their interest
in seeking U.S. licensure. We are hopeful that at least in one
case that may be possible in time for the coming year. It is
not guaranteed because again it has to meet the standards of
safety and effectiveness that your constituents and I as a
physician would expect.
The other thing, as I mentioned--and I think it was
valuable--we did go out and get additional vaccine under all
these controls and I would say spent thousands of hours
reviewing the manufacturing, the clinical records, the adverse
event records in these facilities of vaccines licensed by what
we would consider competent regulatory authorities in other
countries, and we did decide, as you know, that in at least two
cases our sponsors who were interested in providing vaccine in
an emergency, that it could meet standards to be used under
what we call an IND, where people would know they are not
getting licensed vaccine. They would have to consent, but it
could be available, and we believe it would be safe.
So we have that system in place now, and if we have signals
that Chiron or the other manufacturers we are hoping to get
onboard, if that isn't working out we would plan to engage
that.
Finally, I have to say that both the other licensed
manufactures, Aventis, now known as sanofi pasteur, and
MedImmune have been incredibly cooperative and had indicated
their willingness, if needed, to do what they can to increase
production.
There is still uncertainty. I am very concerned about the
risk. There are bad scenarios like those that played out this
year. But what I am here to say is we are all doing everything
we can to be prepared and, in the long term, to diversify this
vaccine supply, strengthen it, and prevent those problems.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Mr. Shays.
Mr. Shays. Thank you.
I have three organizations that are on the top of my list
of groups that I admire. One is the World Health Organization,
the other is the FDA, and the other is the CDC. I think you
have extraordinarily difficult jobs and I think you do it quite
well. And I also believe we are never going to get supply and
demand to be equal. We are not a communist society. We can't
make people do things that they don't want to do. And so in the
realm of things I would rather have surplus rather than a
shortage, but I don't want this surplus to be created because
we encourage people not to take a vaccine they should take.
The first question I just want to ask you is about the
avian flu. When I was at the World Health Organization this
past month, they talked about this flu basically being in 20
countries. I want to know what kind of representation--and they
said it could become a pandemic if we are not careful. I just
want to know the views that each of you have.
Dr. Gerberding. We are very concerned about the avian virus
in West Asia right now. We know at this moment it is present in
at least nine countries, and there is a new cluster of
transmission from chickens to people, although we still have
not seen efficient transmission from one person to another. The
virus has not evolved significantly over the past year, but it
could do that at any time, and when that happens there is an
increasing probability that it could adapt and become something
capable of causing a pandemic.
Mr. Shays. They basically said it was more likely than less
likely to happen; that the trend lines are in the wrong
direction.
Dr. Gerberding. The situation there is you have an amazing
juxtaposition of pigs, people, and poultry, and those are the
three ingredients for creating new strains of flu virus that
can be very effectively transmitted. We have so much virus
there in this incubator of new strains that there is a very
strong statistical probability that we will see emergence. We
can't say for sure, but we are certainly doing everything we
can to be on top of it.
Mr. Shays. In Thailand I am told there is one farm that has
5 million chickens, and I am told that a country like Ireland
no longer produces chickens because it is just so cheap to get
it from a place like Thailand. So it is something I just want
to register my concern to both of you.
Dr. Goodman, did you want to comment on that?
Dr. Goodman. I did. When the pandemic subject came up
before I wanted to mention one thing that I think we are all
involved in doing that is very positive. I mean, first of all
this is an absolutely huge threat and we are taking it very
seriously, and CDC and us and our colleagues at NIH are at
frequent communication, including the WHO, etc. We are tracking
this, but we are also trying to say what more can we do to be
better prepared.
I mentioned more vaccine production capacity. I also wanted
to mention one accomplishment of HHS that I truly think is a
bell weather and remarkable, and that is that we have begun
production of vaccines and testing of vaccines that may never
be used. The HHS let contracts to two different companies to
produce pilot lots of vaccine that might be able to help
protect against that avian flu were it to become pandemic.
Mr. Shays. Just a quick answer on this. The flu shot that
people take here, would that protect them against it?
Dr. Goodman. No.
Dr. Gerberding. No.
Dr. Goodman. That is the whole problem is that this is a
new coat on the outside of the virus that our generation of
people have never been exposed to, so when you are exposed, you
don't have the existing antibody, nor is it in our current
vaccines.
Mr. Shays. Let me quickly get an answer to this. How far
behind are we in planning for the next flu season? I have been
made aware that major vaccine distributors have refrained from
taking pre-orders because they are unable to calculate next
season's market.
Dr. Gerberding. At the moment discussions are underway
about what strains should be in the new vaccines, and that is
an important step toward predicting the timing of the
manufacturing.
Mr. Shays. Is that guesswork or is that----
Dr. Gerberding. It is based on what strains are emerging at
the end of this season here, as well as what strains are in the
southern hemisphere as we speak. So the first step is the
experts meet in Geneva at WHO to look at all the data, and then
they meet with FDA here, I think in about 2 weeks----
Dr. Goodman. Yes.
Dr. Gerberding [continuing]. To put their heads together
and pick the combination of the three strains that would go
into the vaccine.
If I can just add one very quick thing, that is that
Secretary Levitt has just been on the job for a few days as
secretary of HHS, and already I have had two opportunities to
brief him about avian flu and influenza preparedness with my
colleagues, so I can tell you that this is a very high priority
for the Department and we are all focused on it.
Mr. Shays. Thank you for all of your good work.
Dr. Gerberding. Thank you.
Dr. Goodman. Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
It is clear from both of your testimony that you are doing
the things that one would expect one to do to try to make up
for problems beyond your control, things that can be planned
for, and I appreciate that you are doing that.
I am interested far more in the meaning of this crisis for
the future of the flu vaccine and for other similar crises that
could come up. Dr. Gerberding, I remember that when this crisis
arose CDC did not even have access to the purchaser list, even
though the purchaser list of the company that had produced
vaccine, and thus initially CDC was unable to account for who
had vaccine and who did not have vaccine in the first place.
Apparently after some time Aventis did share its list with you.
Are Aventis and other such companies required to give you their
lists now as a matter of course?
Dr. Gerberding. I would ask Dr. Goodman to answer that from
the FDA perspective since they regulate that. But we are hoping
that, even if the law does not mandate it, that we would be
able to engage their cooperation in the future. We had a very
successful cooperation. They provided us with very important
market information of a highly competitive nature. We kept it
confidential, utilized it for public health purposes, and I
think established some real trust between the public health
system and the manufacturer.
I will let Dr. Goodman talk about the regulatory
perspectives.
Dr. Goodman. Yes. We don't actually control who they
distribute or to whom, and as Dr. Gerberding said, that is an
important part of their marketing strategy and it is protected
information. So I think you identify an issue that in a public
health crisis as occurs can be a challenge.
Dr. Gerberding could comment more because she was involved
in those difficult distribution issues, but when faced with
this problem my impression is that they have been forthcoming
and shared information. But I think this is an issue. You have
a system where the private distribution system is efficient
under normal circumstances, and then when it is stressed by
extraordinary circumstances it is a challenge to figure out how
you deal with that.
Dr. Gerberding. I would add that I can imagine in our
scenario planning situations where we would very much like to
have additional proprietary information about other products,
so it is a gap in our capability of managing a public health
emergency.
Ms. Norton. Even through your regulatory authority, even
saying in the event of a finding by the FDA or the CDC or
whoever is the appropriate authority, the list had to be turned
over, then surrounding those lists with the appropriate
protections in advance seems to me would be helpful.
Again, my concern is with worst case scenarios. The fact is
that Aventis did not immediately say, ``Here is my list.'' They
did eventually give it, but the fact is that should have been
forthcoming instantly. And you were left there, Dr. Gerberding,
without any basis to proceed because you didn't even know where
the vaccine was. This vaccine is going to continue to be in the
private sector. This is the United States of America. It is the
kind of gap I would have expected by now you would have begun
to move on.
I would like to ask you, since I think that one is obvious,
what exercises have you gone through in the nature of worst
case scenarios? I have read both of your testimony. They do
indicate that you are doing the proper planning. My concern is
with unanticipated health emergencies and with restoring the
confidence of this committee and of the public that, given
anthrax, now given flu, if there is an unanticipated emergency
these are the kinds of things we do.
I hate to use this analogy, but that is how the military,
for example, prepares for the unforeseen. That is how the, God
help them, Secret Service and security officials prepare for
the unforeseen. Well, some of us regard health emergencies as
more likely and at least as important, so I would like to know
if you have a regimen of what to do----
Mr. Duncan [presiding]. Let me just say, Ms. Norton, we
have a vote, so make this answer very, very short if you can
please.
Dr. Gerberding. The answer is we are constantly exercising
scenarios. Just this week we had an anthrax scenario. This is a
part of our preparedness planning for terrorism as well as for
avian influenza and other health events. So on an ongoing basis
around the tabletop and around the country we are engaged in
scenario-based exercises. That is one of the backbones of
preparedness.
Mr. Duncan. I would like to ask just a couple of quick
questions. I am assuming that the United States has a much
higher vaccination rate than most other countries, and
particularly the countries in southeast Asia, and I am
wondering what that comparison is, if you know. And second, how
much higher is the rate of flu in some of those countries where
they have almost no or very low vaccination rate.
Dr. Gerberding. We have three things: we have the best
ability to measure vaccination, we have the most vaccine, and
we have the highest vaccination rates. Totally in the world we
produce each year about 300 million doses of vaccine, and we
had 61 million of those doses in the United States this year,
so you can see we really do have very high rates compared to
the developing world.
Mr. Duncan. Is the rate of influenza much, much higher in
those countries?
Dr. Gerberding. It is difficult to say because the
surveillance systems aren't there with the kind of high-tech
capabilities we have here, but flu is a ubiquitous problem in
all societies, and it certainly is a problem in Asia.
Mr. Duncan. As far as we know, the flu shots that people
have gotten this year, are they for the strains of flu that are
out there?
Dr. Gerberding. It is a good match this year.
Mr. Duncan. A good match.
Dr. Gerberding. The Fujian strain has been the dominant
strain, and that is the strain that the vaccine is targeted to.
Mr. Duncan. And you said earlier you will put three strains
in the vaccine for next year, but I remember from another
hearing--how many strains are there? There is a large----
Dr. Gerberding. There is an infinite number of flu strains.
It is constantly evolving. But each year we pick two A
influenza strains and a B strain based on our scientific
evidence that suggests what the most likely circulating strains
will be.
Mr. Duncan. All right. We are going to have to be in a very
brief recess. Chairman Davis will be back in just a very few
minutes. We will be in recess.
[Recess.]
Chairman Tom Davis [presiding]. Our meeting will come to
order.
Dr. Gerberding and Dr. Goodman, let me just say thanks for
staying here, but I think I am going to do everybody a favor at
this point and allow you to go and move to the next panel. You
have been very, very helpful.
If there is anything you would like to add before you go
that maybe you didn't get to say or answer?
Dr. Gerberding. Just thank you. Thank you for your
interest.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much. Thanks for the job
you are doing.
Dr. Goodman. I would second that thank you. This is an
important subject. We are very committed to working with you.
Chairman Tom Davis. All right. We will get you a better
microphone next time. Thank you.
We are going to move to our second panel now. I want to
thank these witnesses for appearing. We have invited our second
panel. We have Dr. Fay Boozman. We also have Dr. Robert
Stroube, the Virginia State Health Commissioner. He is here to
discuss Virginia's response to the shortage turned surplus over
the past few months. Dr. Walter Orenstein is associate director
of the Emory Vaccine Center, who will discuss recommendations.
And last but not least, Dr. Alan Wasserman, chairman of the
Department of Medicine at George Washington University Medical
Center, who is here to provide an academic perspective into
issues surrounding the annual influenza vaccine. He will also
share with us his experience last month when GW sponsored a
free flu clinic at the Foggy Bottom Metro Station and they
couldn't give away all their shots.
Before we swear in, Mr. Boozman, would you like to make an
introduction, the gentleman from Arkansas, our colleague from
the Third District.
Mr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to
have my brother here with us, Dr. Fay Boozman.
Chairman Tom Davis. Obviously, your younger brother, right?
Mr. Boozman. Obviously.
Chairman Tom Davis. And former State Senator.
Mr. Boozman. I thought that you would say, ``Isn't this
your Dad?'' But my brother and I, I am an optometrist and my
brother is an ophthalmologist, and we practiced together for
many, many years. We were in an area that is one of the
fastest-growing areas in the country, so whatever you did, you
were successful at, and we were blessed in that way.
His background is such he was a pediatrician before he
became an ophthalmologist. After practicing for many, many
years he got interested in public service and became the Health
Department director for the State of Arkansas for Governor
Huckabee. True to form, he went back and got his master's in
public health from Tulane. I guess he is probably one of the
longest-serving continuous public health directors in the
country right now. Evidently they don't last very long.
It really is a pleasure to have him here, both panels
talking about such an important topic.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Tom Davis. That is the best you can do for your
brother?
We are happy to have all of you here. Dr. Stroube has
survived a long time in Virginia, and before that in Fairfax
County, my home county, where he grew up and had our public
health. We are happy to have all of you here.
Dr. Wasserman, thank you for being here from G.W. I want to
thank the medical faculty associates for being able to offer
the flu shots this afternoon. I hope you can give them away
here, Dr. Wasserman. Thank you.
It is the policy of this committee that we swear everyone
in, so please rise with me and raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Boozman, I will start with you and
we will work our way down. We have lights there. The orange
light means 4 minutes are up, red light means 5. Your entire
written statement is in the record and questions will be based
on that.
Were you in the House or the Senate in Arkansas?
Dr. Boozman. Senate.
Chairman Tom Davis. So you know how to talk. If we can keep
it to 5 minutes here, we usually have a tough time, but do your
best. Say what you need to say and then we will get on to
questions. Thank you very much for being here today. Your
brother is doing a good job, by the way.
STATEMENTS OF DR. FAY W. BOOZMAN, PRESIDENT-ELECT, ASSOCIATION
FOR STATE AND TERRITORIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS; DR. ROBERT B.
STROUBE, COMMISSIONER, VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; DR.
WALTER A. ORENSTEIN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, EMORY VACCINE CENTER;
AND DR. ALAN WASSERMAN, CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE,
GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER
STATEMENT OF DR. FAY W. BOOZMAN
Dr. Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the House Government Reform Committee. I am Fay
Boozman, director of the Arkansas Department of Health, and I
am honored to be testifying before you today on behalf of the
Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.
I want to thank the chair and the Members for convening
this hearing on this very important public health topic.
Let me begin by noting that from the start there has been
tremendous cooperation among Federal, State, and local public
health agencies. The experience this year is a classic example
of how our Nation's governmental public health system can and
should work.
In October 2004 Arkansas and every other State and
territory faced an unanticipated public health challenge when
we learned that we would receive only half of our flu vaccine
orders. Over the next few days we worked with our partners to
formulate a plan to deal with this shortage. We used the health
alert network to contact health providers throughout the
States, telling them about the situation, asking them to
provide us with information about how much vaccine they had
ordered, how much they had on hand, and how much they needed
for their high-risk patients.
The Arkansas Department of Health typically purchases about
40 percent of flu vaccine supply in Arkansas, which meant that
from the start we controlled a substantial portion of the
vaccine that had been delivered to the State. I need to point
out that in many cases most flu vaccine is purchased by the
private sector, so some of my colleagues initially had much
less control over the vaccine supply in their States and the
distribution of that than I did.
In Arkansas we decided to exercise our mass vaccination
plan which we developed with the CDC bioterrorism preparedness
funds to distribute our supply of vaccine. November 3rd was the
day that we chose to do that. We enlisted the help of media
outlets and health care professionals to get the word out.
Thousands of people called our newly created 1-800 hotline or
logged onto our Web site to get information about where to go
for the shots. Thankfully, the plan worked. On November 3rd in
a matter of hours we administered over 53,000 doses of vaccine
to high-risk individuals in 83 clinics.
Despite everyone's best efforts, we may experience future
vaccine shortages. A national plan should be developed that
would provide guidelines for Federal, State, and local health
departments to follow when Federal Government determines that a
shortage exists. For example, when Health and Human Services
determines that a shortage exists, it should immediately create
a secure data system that provides each State department with
reliable and up-to-date information about vaccine orders and
supplies in the States. The sooner public health officials have
that information, the sooner they can work with their local
health departments and health care providers to get information
out to combat the public panic.
ASTHO agrees that we should provide incentives to
manufacturers to stay in or enter the U.S. market. Under a
vaccine for adult program similar to vaccines for children
program now in place, the Federal Government would purchase flu
vaccine and supply to States for use by uninsured, high-risk
adults for whom flu vaccine is recommended. That would help
needy Americans get vaccine while creating a market entry
incentive by growing and stabilizing the flu vaccine market.
Last but not least, we need to increase the CDC's 317
national immunization program funding so that State and local
departments can build adult immunization infrastructure, as
recommended by the Institute of Medicine in its Calling the
Shots Report.
CDC immunization funding should be sufficient to allow
States and local health departments to purchase flu and other
recommended vaccines for all under-insured children,
adolescents, and adults.
I wish to thank this committee for its continuing interest
in this important issue. The public health community is
committed to ensuring that all individuals in need of vaccine
receive it. We look forward to working with you to ensure that
we have the resources and tools to do our job of protecting the
public's health.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Boozman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.064
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Stroube, thank you for being back
with us.
STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT B. STROUBE
Dr. Stroube. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, my
name is Dr. Robert Stroube. I am the State Health Commissioner
for Virginia. I am honored to be testifying before you today. I
would like to thank the chair and the committee members for
convening this hearing and for the amount of time you have
devoted to this critical issue.
Since news broke that British regulators suspended the
license of flu vaccine manufacturer Chiron last October, State
and local public health officials have been working to ensure
the best use of available vaccine. Initially that meant
prioritizing vaccine availability to individuals at greatest
risk for developing serious complications from the flu. More
recently it has included responsible relaxation of vaccine
recommendations to include individuals outside the original
high-risk groups to ensure the use of the remaining doses.
VDH had ordered 90 percent of its total flu vaccine from
Chiron, approximately 110,000 doses. However, the Health
Department provides a very small proportion of flu vaccine that
is typically provided to the public. During our typical year,
we provide about 70,000 doses of vaccine. Most of the vaccine
is through the private sector.
In response to the vaccine shortage, we immediately
implemented the ACIP's recommendations regarding the
prioritization of flu vaccine. In addition, every effort was
made to educate the medical community about the recommendations
and urge compliance. A message was sent out to health care
providers through our health alert network. We issued press
releases, including information about the vaccine shortage, and
encouraged prioritization of available flu vaccine.
State and local health departments received hundreds of
phone calls from concerned citizens and numerous media
interviews were conducted. We diligently worked to provide the
best information available. From the beginning of the flu
vaccine shortage, CDC has worked closely with Aventis to
allocate and distribute all the remaining doses of vaccine.
In the weeks and months following, VDH received four
shipments of redistributed vaccine, with each targeting a high-
risk population. In November we received 80,000 doses of flu
vaccine. The decision was then made to distribute the vaccine
to each health district based on its population. Local health
districts in Virginia developed flu vaccine distribution plans
tailored to meet the needs of their high-risk populations in
their area.
As the first doses of flu vaccine from the CDC allocations
began to arrive in late October and early November, the health
districts began to implement their plans. Individuals not
included in the priority groups were asked to defer vaccination
in order to preserve the limited amount of vaccine. We received
approximately 77,000 doses in mid-November, and this was
primarily given to long-term care facilities across the State.
This enabled nursing homes and assisted living facilities to
vaccinate their vulnerable residents.
In mid-November we began to request vaccine through CDC's
Web-based secure data network. This network allowed State
public health officials the ability to order flu vaccine on
behalf of private health care providers directly from CDC. As a
result, we were able to distribute approximately 98,000 doses
to Virginia's doctors and pharmacists.
By the end of November, CDC and Aventis had distributed
about 255,000 doses in Virginia. We sought to reach as many
high-risk populations as possible, providing flu vaccine to
health departments, long-term care facilities, and private
doctors. By late December it appeared that the majority of
high-risk persons in most parts of Virginia who wished to be
vaccinated had obtained vaccine.
A late December inventory revealed an ample supply of flu
vaccine in many parts of the State. To help ensure that
available flu vaccine did not go to waste, I authorized the
expansion of vaccine recommendations to include individuals age
50 to 64 and household contacts of those in high-risk
categories. This took effect on January 10th. The expansion was
in agreement with the revised ACFB recommendations. Even with
expansion, there was little interest by private providers in
placing an order for Virginia's fourth allocation of vaccine of
approximately 55,000 doses. By the time the CDC orders were due
to CDC on January 13, only 30,000 doses had been requested.
In late January, CDC began to support the expansion of
vaccine eligibility for States and localities with ample
supplies; on January 26, authorized district health directors
to lift their flu restrictions in the localities if they
thought the demand for vaccine within priority groups had been
met.
On January 27, CDC made VFC vaccine available to health
departments for non-VFC children and adults in localities where
demand for flu vaccine among eligible children had been met.
Local health departments were then authorized to redistribute
this vaccine to other public facilities, free clinics,
community health centers, and private nonprofit facilities.
Despite VDH's effective response to unexpected shortage of flu
vaccine, the continuing problems with flu vaccine availability
caused great difficulties for our State in planning for the
next flu season. We do not know what the availability of flu
vaccine will be next year. Will there be enough for everyone,
or high-risk groups only? If there is a continuing shortage,
what will be the role of State and local health departments in
vaccine distribution? Will things be done as in previous years
with private sector handling most of the distribution? Or do we
need to build on this year's ad hoc system using State and
local health departments to coordinate distribution?
Historically in Virginia the private sector has
administered the great majority of flu vaccine. This crisis led
to much government intervention in the distribution and
administration of vaccine. We wonder will the private sector
return to its former level of involvement.
In Virginia the trend has been for large businesses such as
WalMart, drug chains, grocery store chains to provide much of
the vaccine. Long lines, traffic congestion, unfavorable
publicity this season may make them wary of continued
participation. Private health care providers have been less
active in flu administration over the last few years, and
shortage may make them even less willing to deliver vaccine
through their practices.
The public has received many mixed messages about flu
vaccines as the crisis developed. There were public campaigns
urging widespread immunization, then campaigns to ask people
not at high risk to defer vaccine. There was a severe shortage
of vaccine, then a surplus of vaccine, with changing
recommendations.
Fortunately, to date we have had a light flu season;
however, this confusion has led to the belief in some of the
public that there was less vaccine but we have less flu and
maybe we didn't really need the vaccine in the first place. How
willing are they going to be to take flu vaccine in future
years?
Throughout the crisis our State and local health
departments devoted incredible amounts of our time to get to
our most vulnerable citizens the vaccine they need. CDC has
provided national leadership in a difficult and changing
environment and worked very closely with us to meet the needs
of our citizens, and we are appreciative of their efforts.
The ultimate solution is development of adequate, secure,
and stable supply of vaccine, as we have stated in previous
testimony. We appreciate the amount of time and effort your
committee has devoted to these issues, and we thank you for the
opportunity to speak today.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Stroube follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.071
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Orenstein, thank you for being with
us.
STATEMENT OF DR. WALTER A. ORENSTEIN
Dr. Orenstein. I am Dr. Walter Orenstein, association
director of the Vaccine Center at Emory University. Prior to
joining Emory in March 2004 I was the Director of the National
Immunization Program at the CDC. I want to thank the Committee
on Government Reform for the opportunity to address public
health implications of the recent influenza vaccine shortages,
assess strategies used to minimize their impact, and recommend
potential steps that may be taken to avert future shortages.
Averting future shortages includes providing incentives,
one to manufacturers to enter or stay in the U.S. market, to
providers to order and administer influenza vaccine, and to
people for whom influenza vaccine is recommended to seek and
accept vaccination.
A critical incentive for manufacturers is to decrease
financial risk for vaccine that is produced but must be
discarded each year, since last year's influenza vaccine cannot
be used for the following season. One way to accomplish this is
through a back-end guarantee program in which the Federal
Government asks manufacturers to produce more doses than they
usually would and pays the manufacturer at the end of the
season for those extra doses that go unsold on the private
market.
For example, if usual production is 80 million doses and
the Federal Government wants 90 million doses produced to cover
more of the 188 million persons for whom influenza vaccine is
already recommended, then the Government can guarantee the
companies that they will pay some discounted price for each of
the 10 million doses that may go unsold.
As a further incentive to the companies, an effort should
be undertaken to increase demand for influenza vaccine and
thereby increase the size of the market. This should include at
least three components: first, a national, State, and local
educational effort directed at both the medical community and
the public to promote use of vaccine; second, an adult
immunization grant program modeled after the successful
childhood immunization program should be undertaken, which
provides grants to States and localities to build immunization
infrastructure for immunization of adults. This would include
components such as outreach workers who can perform educational
efforts, staff who can provide technical assistance to health
care providers to improve their performance, development of
data systems to track and monitor vaccine supply and use and
measure immunization coverage, and personnel who can assist
nursing homes in conducting immunization programs.
Third, influenza vaccine should be purchased by the Federal
Government and supplied to States for uninsured, high-risk
adults for whom influenza vaccine is already recommended to
minimize financial barriers to access and increase vaccine use.
Incentives for providers include provision of free vaccine
for their uninsured patients, decreasing their financial risk
of potentially ordering vaccine that goes unused; access to
technical assistance from State and local health departments;
and provision of educational materials for their patients from
those health departments.
The major concern about the present problem is the
potential for backsliding in our efforts to prevent the
significant burden of influenza. While it is too early to tell
if this season will be mild, if it turns out to be, many of the
people who might have received the vaccine in the past but were
unable to receive it this year may have a false sense of
security that they do not need vaccine. Unfortunately,
influenza is difficult to predict, and if a mild season were to
occur this year it does not mean next year will be mild. If it
turns out the season is moderate to severe, unfortunately many
people who might have gained benefits from vaccination may
suffer, either because they did not seek it or because they
were unable to obtain vaccine.
One of the more effective strategies in reducing influenza
is to reduce exposure of high-risk persons to influenza by
vaccinating their close contacts. Many more high-risk persons
may be exposed because their contacts were not vaccinated due
to supply problems.
Given the shortage, could anything have been done
differently to minimize its burden? I think CDC did the best it
could under the circumstances. There was a need to prioritize
vaccine and priorities chosen by the experts on the Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practices were reasonable. This meant
delivering messages to others to forego vaccination.
In conclusion, the influenza virus can cause a substantial
health burden. Influenza vaccination is the best way to prevent
this burden. The shortages are a result of lack of manufacturer
incentives to enter and stay in the U.S. market. Averting
future shortages and averting the influenza burden involves
providing incentives to manufacturers to produce vaccine,
providers to order and administer it, and the general public to
seek and accept vaccine.
Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Orenstein follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.078
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Wasserman, thanks for being with
us.
STATEMENT OF DR. ALAN WASSERMAN
Dr. Wasserman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee.
At the height of influenza season last year, more than 10
percent of all deaths were related to pneumonia and influenza.
In 12 of the past 21 years, the peak month for flu activity in
the United States has been in February or March. We may get
lucky this year and see fewer cases, but the chances are the
greatest threat from influenza is still before us, and yet we
cannot give away flu vaccine.
We are only now seeing our offices filled with patients
with flu-like symptoms, and our hospitals had to close on
multiple occasions in the past week because beds are filled to
capacity with patients with flu and complications from flu. It
is not just the Pope who has been hospitalized with influenza-
induced pneumonia. And yet we cannot give away free flu
vaccine.
After treating our high-risk patients, we have been left
with approximately 3,600 doses of vaccine, and when the city
relaxed restrictions we hastily convened an all-day flu vaccine
fair at the Foggy Bottom Metro Station on February 13th. Thanks
to the local media, we were able to publicize this event
widely, with constant radio reminders that included a live
telecast onsite throughout the day. Our doctors, nurses,
interns, and residents spent the day administering free flu
shots, but in the end we were left with over half our remaining
supply.
The headline in the ``Washington Post'' had it correct,
``G.W. Stuck it to 1,889 People,'' but where were the others?
Where was the passion, the anxiety, the response that we saw in
November and December to those free sessions that were offered
before restrictions were put in place?
We stood outside for over 8 hours, and yet we couldn't give
away all our free flu vaccine. We will probably end up the year
with over 1,500 doses going unused. Therefore, we and many
health care organizations like us will be left with incurring
the cost of unused vaccines, but, more importantly, thousands
of Americans will get sick needlessly.
Now this has been a very unusual year and this is a
complicated issue involving the health of our community and our
country, but it is our hope that this committee could address
some important questions that have health care workers and
probably the public perplexed.
If vaccinating our population for influenza is such a
priority, why is there no safeguard in producing vaccine? Which
would cost more, redundancy in vaccine production with risk of
over supply, or the significant added cost to the Government in
Medicare and Medicaid payments for flu-related illnesses and
hospitalizations? Why does our country's grocery stores receive
their vaccine shipment well before most health care providers?
Is that the way we will assure that high-risk patients will be
vaccinated?
Debilitated patients, those on oxygen, and others usually
do not have the stamina to fight their way in line and stand
for hours. Is this really a public service, or a setup for
public panic?
Can we continue giving mixed messages to the public? One
year it is, ``Get your vaccine in October and November,'' and
the next year the public is told it is still OK to get a shot
in January or February.
Skepticism is very high among the public now that we are
pushing vaccine at this very late date. Some may think that we
are only doing so not to look foolish ending the season with a
surplus, while others certainly may think it is just the greedy
physician out to make the extra dollar.
To add to confusion, the District of Columbia, Maryland,
and Virginia each had different regulations, some with monetary
penalties, for flu vaccine distribution. In such inter-related
areas where patients from one jurisdiction often see physicians
in another, shouldn't uniform policies be considered?
There is much to be learned from what happened this year,
but this year is not over. People remain at risk for what could
be a virulent next 2 months. Earlier this year Members of
Congress and their staff set the example by not being
inoculated, thereby encouraging the public to refrain from
getting flu shots so there would be enough for the high-risk
group. I believe now the time has come for Congress to once
again lead the way in getting inoculated now to encourage
others to come forward while there is still time.
Throwing away vaccine and filling our hospital beds would
be a sad ending to a very difficult season.
On that note, Mr. Chairman, as you mentioned, we will be
administering free flu vaccine starting today at 1 p.m.,
upstairs in room 2247. We will be here until we run out of
vaccine. I hope that is not too long.
Thank you very much.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Wasserman follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.080
Chairman Tom Davis. Again I want to thank the generosity of
George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates for
making this available. We are going to get the word out here.
I will start questioning with Mr. Dent. Mr. Dent, are you
ready?
Mr. Dent. Thank you.
Dr. Orenstein, I represent eastern Pennsylvania just south
of the Aventis pasteur plant in Swiftwater, PA. I know you have
talked a lot about incentives. Are you satisfied with what has
been done to date to make sure that Aventis and perhaps any
other pharmaceutical manufacturers will be ready to deal with
this situation next season?
Dr. Orenstein. I think there has been some major progress
that has been done. I think very good collaborative
relationships have been developed. I think it potentially can
be done. I know we are focused very much on high-risk
individuals, but if you look at for whom the vaccine is
recommended, it is recommended for contacts of those people.
There are substantially more people who need to get vaccinated.
It is not clear to me that we have enough incentives right now
in order to really boost production.
I think in essence we ought to be considering perhaps a 5-
year plan to get to close to the 188 million Americans for whom
we already recommend vaccine. I think to me the people who can
actually answer that question best are the manufacturers,
themselves, but I am concerned that perhaps we have some but
not all the incentives we need.
Mr. Dent. I guess I am somewhat concerned, too, in that
beyond Aventis it doesn't seem that there are too many domestic
manufacturers of this particular product, and selfishly I would
certainly like to see Aventis get the business because my
constituents work in that plant where they manufacture it, it
would probably be in the public's interest and this country's
interest to diversify the base.
Thank you.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you very much.
Mr. Waxman.
Mr. Waxman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Boozman, your brother and the chairman had very nice
things to say about you, and I am pleased that you are here. I
just want to say something nice about your brother, because he
and I have been working together on legislation to protect
children from harm from contact lenses that have not been
prescribed and not appropriately placed in their eyes. He has
been a great legislative ally.
As the person in charge of the State and territorial health
officials, could you tell us about the financial difficulties
States have in providing all the routinely recommended vaccines
to children?
Dr. Boozman. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Mr. Waxman. And let me follow that up with another question
at the same time. Does the President's budget fully address the
problems that you do have at the State level?
Dr. Boozman. The problems that we are having and have had--
and we have all tried to solve them in different ways--is that
we are getting more and more vaccinations, most recently
prevnar, and the cost per child keeps going up. Now, we have
the vaccine for children's program, which enables us to give
that eligible child a full complement of vaccination, but many
children fall through that crack, and so then we are left with
the 317 side of the system to try and serve children.
For a year in Arkansas we had a two-tiered system where we
simply couldn't fill that gap. Now the way we solved that was
through the federally qualified community health centers. They
deputized our clinics, the health department's clinics, and
that made children coming in to us eligible on the vaccine for
children's side.
We have new vaccines coming even more, and so I think this
problem is going to get bigger. So the answer to your question
is: no, we don't have enough funding right now to be able to
vaccinate everybody the way we ought to. As somebody that comes
from a pretty conservative perspective, there are not many
things that Congress can spend money on that they get a better
return on.
Mr. Waxman. Absolutely.
Dr. Boozman. Every dollar that you spend--I think I saw a
figure this morning of $27 in reduced medical costs, and it was
mentioned about what it is costing for people to be in the
hospital with pneumonia and things like that.
Mr. Waxman. Certainly less expensive to prevent the disease
than to have to pay to treat a disease that could have been
prevented.
Dr. Boozman. That is exactly right.
Mr. Waxman. You testified that you would support a vaccines
for adults program modeled on the very successful vaccines for
children program. That certainly seems like a sensible idea to
me. If the Federal Government could expand and guarantee a
vaccine market like it does with pediatric vaccines, this could
be, I think, a powerful incentive for the manufacturers, the
companies to get into the business and stay in the business,
because we do have this question of what business decision they
will make if they have this uncertain market.
Do you think that this would shore up our fragile vaccine
supply?
Dr. Boozman. I think it certainly would be a great step in
the right direction, because, as you have said, it creates a
market. Our country has a history of where there is a market
people fill in. Just as Representative Dent mentioned, I think
there will be other people that see that potential and I think
other manufacturers would enter in. I think it is certainly a
first step, and see what happens. Other things may be
necessary, but that certainly to me is a very important first
step.
Mr. Waxman. We have heard from local health officials that
they can't provide important vaccines such as the hepatitis B
vaccine even to high-risk people such as people who come to
sexually transmitted disease clinics. They can't provide it
because the cost is so high. Do you think that a vaccines for
adults program should be broad enough to include all routinely
recommended vaccines for adults, including the hepatitis B
vaccine?
Dr. Boozman. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Waxman. Dr. Orenstein, you used to direct the national
immunization program at CDC. You are an expert on the vaccines
for children program. In your testimony said you would also
like a vaccines for adults program. How do you think they would
differ? And do you think this would help us set up a reliable
distribution system and expand the number of adults that will
be vaccinated?
Dr. Orenstein. What I was proposing in my testimony is a
beginning vaccines for adults program. It could be expanded to
cover other groups. The big group that I am concerned about,
just like the vaccines for children program is concerned about,
is uninsured adults. The Institute of Medicine has estimated
that somewhere around 8 million high-risk uninsured adults are
in need of influenza vaccination.
I think having a vaccines for adults program that would
provide vaccine to doctor's offices, potentially other sites
that are more convenient, such as grocery stores, goes a long
way to reducing the financial challenges.
We made a statement when we covered influenza vaccine by
Medicare that reducing the financial barriers to access was
really critical. For the uninsured, who may very well be in
some of these high-risk groups or contacts of high-risk groups,
I think we also need to reduce that problem.
The other advantage that takes place with the vaccines for
children program, and I hope with the vaccines for adults
program, it establishes a public-private partnership. If you
bring vaccine to the table and you give it to a physician, it
allows you to work more effectively with that physician at
trying to work on their immunization performance. That has been
a big boon, I think, in terms of the vaccines for children
program in helping to cement that kind of relationship.
Mr. Waxman. What vaccines should be included?
Dr. Orenstein. I think the initial one I focused on is
influenza. I think certainly others could be added over time. I
think the one you raise is a very important one. Hepatitis B
now is primarily a problem among high-risk adults, many of whom
we access in STD clinics, in HIV clinics, and a variety of
other places. We don't have the vaccine to provide it. That
might be one other group to consider.
Mr. Waxman. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
Dr. Boozman, millions of doses of flu vaccine are thrown
away every year at the end of the season. Have States ever
considered extending the annual shot campaign, which usually
takes place in the fall, through January or February to
maximize the amount of Americans vaccinating?
Dr. Boozman. Yes, sir, we have. The problem is--and Dr.
Gerberding alluded to this--is that the demand just falls off.
No matter, it seems like, what we do, we are conditioned almost
that in October and November you get your flu shot, and after
that you don't--again, no matter what we say. We have tried----
Chairman Tom Davis. Maybe at this time of year they think
they have made it.
Dr. Boozman. They think they have made it. And, again, the
testimony that you have just heard, this is the time we are the
most worried about is right now. But in the past we have hoped
that we could get people covered so that they can go into this
time of the year without.
The rock and the hard place this year was we didn't have
vaccine and so we pushed and got the high risk. I think we have
a better cover of high risk. In Arkansas anyway we have better
coverage of high-risk people than we have ever had. But then
you have a little vaccine left over and you are afraid to open
it up too much because you get a run.
Chairman Tom Davis. I guess, Dr. Stroube, you have the same
problem in Virginia--that there is just little interest by
private providers in placing an order after our fourth
allocation?
Dr. Stroube. Yes. And they are scared that they are going
to get stuck with the vaccine and people aren't wanting it any
more. I know my wife hasn't even gotten a vaccine. I haven't
been able to talk her into getting one and she is at high risk,
and she has deferred, even though she shouldn't have. I am
going to have to take a dose home and shoot her, myself.
Chairman Tom Davis. I am not going to touch that one, but
good luck. If you need a place to stay, you know where I am.
Dr. Stroube. She is from Fairfax County, too.
Chairman Tom Davis. Exactly.
Well, let me ask you also, Dr. Stroube, we have had
problems--and also Dr. Wasserman--Dr. Wasserman talked about
confusion of patients living in the different regions, that we
really weren't very regionally coordinated at this point. Is
there anything we can do to try to get better regionally
coordinated? A lot of Virginia patients have doctors in
Maryland and vice versa. Anything we can do on a regional
basis? And I will ask Dr. Wasserman the same thing.
Dr. Stroube. What we tried to do was go by what the ACIP
and CDC were saying so it would be a uniform message that we
would match up with the country. I was under pressure from
different areas and different situations to do different
things, and I resisted that. I think the more all the States
follow the national guidelines, the better off you are.
Now, some of the issues had this with the regulatory part.
In Virginia we didn't have a regulation that said that you had
to give it only to high risk. We did it only by public
information and getting information out to the doctors, and
other places went ahead and made it actually a violation of the
rules and regulations if you gave it to people outside. So
there is probably some need there for uniformity.
Chairman Tom Davis. OK. Dr. Wasserman, have you got any
thoughts on that?
Dr. Wasserman. Well, there has to be some standardized
policy. We had some jurisdictions that were assigning monetary
penalties to physicians if they gave it to the wrong patients,
and they had a surplus of vaccine, and therefore they couldn't
use it for fear of being fined.
Chairman Tom Davis. That is what happens when the
government gets involved legislatively. You lose your
flexibility, I think. You can get the wall of unintended
consequences. But you have a lot of Virginia patients at MFA
and a lot of Maryland patients that come down.
Dr. Wasserman. That is correct. Is it fair for only
Virginia patients that come to us to be able to get it and not
the Virginia patients that stay in Virginia? It just seems to
me that we are so closely knit here that there has to be some
way to coordinate.
Chairman Tom Davis. Is there a consensus this has been a
fairly mild year by flu standards across the country?
Dr. Wasserman. Up to now, but if you look at the recent
papers, look at the recent reports, CNN just reported yesterday
the Governor of Maryland has asked the public to stop calling
9-1-1 because of the overwhelming calls because of flu. I mean,
we are just starting to see a greater peak now than we have
ever seen, so this may turn out to be mild and it may not. I
think the next couple of weeks will tell.
Dr. Stroube. It is similar in Virginia. We are beginning.
This week we went to widespread flu for the first time this
year.
Chairman Tom Davis. So this is a good time to get your
shot, actually.
Dr. Stroube. Sure.
Chairman Tom Davis. Dr. Orenstein, you state in your
written testimony that you believe CDC did its best under the
circumstances earlier this year, but you still recommend
establishing an education effort at the national, the State,
and the local levels. How would the educational effort you
envision add to the work of CDC to inform the public?
Dr. Orenstein. I think what it would do is develop a cadre
of people, a cadre of materials, and an ability on a year-round
basis to continue to educate.
One of the great hurdles is dealing with the medical care
community. The coverage rates in the medical community have
only been about 43 percent, I think was the last data that I
saw from CDC. A few years ago it was only 38 percent. We have
some real re-education to do, and that I think is where the
grant program will be helpful, because these are the kinds of
people who would go into hospitals and give grand rounds to
work with Dr. Wasserman and others in terms of trying to
champion it among his staff. One of the most effective
interventions that has occurred was in Rochester a number of
years ago where staff from the health department went in and
reviewed doctors' records and set up a target population for
them to reach in vaccination. That significantly improved their
coverage.
So the educational effort is not simply a media campaign,
although that is probably an important part of it. It involves
a whole series of kinds of education efforts.
Chairman Tom Davis. Thank you.
Ms. Watson.
Ms. Watson. I am sorry that I wasn't here for panel one,
but with panel two what are we doing to be able to plan for
future flu seasons? And are we doing enough here in our country
to manufacture the flu vaccine so we don't have to depend on
foreign suppliers? Anyone on the panel who feels they can
tackle that?
Dr. Orenstein. I can talk about the manufacturing issue and
perhaps one of the health officers will talk about the other.
Ms. Watson. OK.
Dr. Orenstein. I think at the moment it is going to be very
difficult to try and get a U.S. manufacturing base back.
Ms. Watson. Explain.
Dr. Orenstein. What we have had is we had in 2000 three
U.S. manufacturers and one foreign manufacturer. Two dropped
out of the market. I think to try and bring the two that
dropped out back might be very difficult at this point because
you would have to redo their plants, you would have to give
substantial investments. There is some hope with some foreign
manufacturers coming into the U.S. market. GlaxoSmithKline has
a plant in Germany, and they have announced interest in coming
into the U.S. market. I.D. Biomedical has a plant in Canada.
They are interested in coming in.
I think if we provide incentives there may be more
manufacturers that come in, but we have to provide substantial
incentives. I think the 188 million person market, which is
what potentially is there, if it could begin to move forward in
that way, more companies would come in. I think we are getting
the interest from the two European manufacturers--Canadian and
European manufacturer--purely because they see a much bigger
market here.
Ms. Watson. Anyone from CDC at the table? Well, maybe I can
ask this of the chair. Why is it that we could not put in CDC's
budget a line that would start to promote the manufacturing
here in this country? You said we had four and two have dropped
out. Why couldn't we pump up American manufactures of the flu
vaccine? Do you have any idea?
Chairman Tom Davis. I can just say on the CDC side, CDC's
budget has gone up nine-fold, I think, nine times since 2001,
but it is really the FDA that would be responsible for that,
and I think that as a result of this year no one had planned on
the Chiron plant being closed down, which supplied about 45
percent of what was going on, and now we are looking for other
folks. But it is a risky business, as you know. You produce
vaccines, and you may end up producing stuff that can't be
sold. It is not a high margin material. Once you produce it,
you don't make a lot on each dose the way you do with a
prescription drug or something like that.
Ms. Watson. Let me ask this: can the vaccines that are in
the surplus supply now be held over to another season?
Chairman Tom Davis. You can hold them over, but they won't
be any good because you get a different strand every year. That
is the difficulty with this.
Ms. Watson. It seems to me some of the big pharmaceutical
manufacturers here in this country would maybe take this on as
one of their divisions, so if it is a slow year 1 year and they
lose money it can be compensated for in another division. But I
think we need to be able to monitor the development of the
vaccine right here in this country because it was a supply that
we were counting on Chiron that had some problems. I don't know
how we anticipate this, but I think that if we had it, if we
had the supply--and I would say at least if it is not the
majority supply, a supplemental supply--constantly being
developed here by our manufacturers we would be able to guard
against the foreign manufacturers who run into problems in
their research labs. This is something that I am just throwing
out.
Chairman Tom Davis. Right. FDA in their testimony earlier
talked about how they are trying to find more product and make
sure that we get more product coming in. A lot of these
facilities are done overseas because it is, frankly, cheaper to
produce them that way. Why would you overpay for something if
you can produce it and keep it as clean? And for the most part
there is no evidence that vaccines that are produced wholly or
partly abroad have any less power or potency.
Ms. Watson. My concern in this particular era is always
going on the cheap, and I have that concern in other products
that are produced abroad and we consume here in this country.
We have very little control over the process of production. So
I want to start the debate of not always looking for the
cheapest way out. I think this flu vaccine problem heightens
our motivation to start looking at is cheaper always better and
should we not invest in quality when it comes to a life-saving
or a life-sustaining product like a flu vaccine?
I just throw that out, Mr. Chair, as food for thought and
as continuing debate.
Chairman Tom Davis. Nothing like a crisis to get everybody
to put their thinking caps on and see what can happen on this.
Ms. Watson. Exactly.
Chairman Tom Davis. I think you gentlemen have worked under
extraordinary circumstances. You said, if anything, we have
done a better job than we thought. We found supply that we
didn't think we would find. Now the people that were demanding
flu shots, we can't get people to take them. There is still
time to tell. In a couple months we could still hit the peak.
Let me just ask this question. Can you tell from what is
happening in other parts of the world how virile and tough the
flu shot could be by what is happening in other countries, or
are they just so different when it comes up here there is no
way of telling? Do you know what I am saying?
Dr. Orenstein. Last year with the Fujian strain we were
hearing about outbreaks in other parts of the world that were
moderate to severe, and so that gave us a picture that we were
probably going to get a moderate to severe year in the United
States, which we wound up having.
There is some potential that what goes on there will have a
similar impact here, but it is still not 100 percent
predictability. As Dr. Wasserman said, I think this still could
turn out to be a problematic year. We just don't know yet. It
is still fairly early. Most flu seasons peak in February. In
fact, we have had flu seasons peak in March, April, and even
May, so that has potential to occur, but it is difficult to
predict.
What is really important in looking at what happens
overseas is to look at which strains are emerging so that we
can determine what ought to go in the vaccine. Last year we
were behind on that, and so we had--although the vaccine was
effective, we had a mismatch.
Chairman Tom Davis. Right. I guess if anything, if I have
any quarrel with today's testimony it wasn't from this panel.
It was the first panel, where they had the States that had the
most significant infestation of flu as red States. But you
would have liked that, Ms. Watson.
I think everybody has closed ranks pretty much. This has
been and hopefully stays a mild year so that the damage won't
be too great. We can use this as a learning experience and
maybe avert something worse at a later time.
Thank you all for being here. I think it has been very,
very helpful to us.
In closing I want to remind everyone of the free flu shot
clinic today in the Rayburn Building, 2247, from 1 to 3 p.m.,
and it is open to the public. You don't have to be a Capitol
Hill employee. You don't have to be a Member of Congress.
Basically, the last time George Washington University Medical
School was giving away flu shot they couldn't give enough away
at the subway station at Foggy Bottom. So it is open to the
public today in Rayburn 2247 from 1 to 3 p.m.
Thank you. I again want to thank the witnesses for their
testimony. I want to thank the committee staff that worked on
this hearing.
I ask unanimous consent that the statement of Mark Mlotek
of Henry Schein, Inc. be included in the hearing record.
Hearing no objection, it is so ordered.
This hearing is now adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
[The prepared statement of Hon. Candice S. Miller and
additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T9512.082