The National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) has issued a public alert about a suspected counterfeit version of Phesgo, a cancer treatment drug.
The alert, published on the agency’s website, came after a report from a doctor at the Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH), who raised concerns about the authenticity of a batch brought in by a patient.
In its statement, NAFDAC confirmed that the drug, labeled as Phesgo® 600mg/600mg/10ml, with batch number C5290S20, had not been administered at the time of reporting. The agency noted that the product bore similarities to another previously reported counterfeit batch, C3809C51.
The statement read: “The National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control (NAFDAC) wishes to inform healthcare providers and the public of a report of a suspected counterfeit Phesgo® 600mg/600mg/10ml, labelled with batch C5290S20.
“The Marketing Authorisation Holder (MAH) Roche received a complaint from a doctor at Lagos University Teaching Hospital (LUTH-NSIA) reporting a suspected counterfeit Phesgo® 600mg/600mg, labelled with batch C5290S20.
“The product was reported to have been brought in by a patient for administration. It had not been administered at the time of the report, as it matched the previously reported counterfeit batch: C3809C51.
“Although no sample was returned to Roche for investigation, only pictures displaying parts of a Phesgo® 600mg/600mg in a 10ml folding box and a labelled vial.
“Images of the suspected product were examined by Roche and compared to the genuine samples retained for reference.
“Although no physical sample was returned to Roche for investigation, images of parts of the product specifically, a Phesgo 600mg/600mg vial and a 10ml folding box were examined.
“The suspected product’s images were compared to genuine samples retained by Roche.
“Roche’s investigation identified several significant differences between the complaint sample and genuine materials, confirming the counterfeit status of the batch.
“These included: no batch number in the MAH database, discrepancies in language, missing basilisk, incorrect bollino date, and tampered evidence labels that did not match genuine Roche materials.”
The agency added that “since no physical sample was available for chemical analysis”, the investigation was “limited to visual comparisons”.
