By: Jeff Cohen
The use of compounded peptides, particularly GLPs (glucagon-like peptides), presents a complex and nuanced landscape for licensed clinicians. While these treatments offer potential benefits, they are not without risks. Clinicians must navigate a web of regulatory, legal, and ethical challenges, including:
- FDA Shortage Declarations and Reversals
The FDA’s declared shortage of GLPs initially opened the door for the compounded GLP industry. However, in the fall of 2024, the FDA announced the shortage had ended, signaling its intent to curtail the use of compounded GLPs. - Regulatory Pushback on Specific Compounded Peptides
The FDA has actively urged state medical boards to restrict clinicians from using compounded peptides like retratrutide and cargrilintide. - Legal Actions by Pharmaceutical Giants
Major pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk, have filed lawsuits against clinical enterprises utilizing compounded GLPs, further complicating the legal landscape. - FDA Category 2 Bulk Drug Substances
Many popular compounded peptides, such as AOD, BPC-157, and Epitalon, are listed on the FDA’s Category 2 bulk drug substances list, marking them as “suspect” chemicals. - State-Level Regulatory Scrutiny
Some state regulators are actively investigating and pursuing clinicians who use or recommend compounded peptides, adding another layer of risk.
Licensed clinicians face heightened exposure to these issues simply by virtue of their professional licensure. To navigate this challenging environment, they must take proactive steps to understand and mitigate their risks. Key measures include:
A. Understanding the Legal and Regulatory Landscape
Clinicians should engage in thorough discussions to fully grasp the laws, options, and risks—not just those related to the FDA but also state-level regulations and broader legal implications.
B. Ensuring Comprehensive Professional Liability Coverage
It’s critical to confirm that professional liability insurance includes regulatory defense, not just medical malpractice coverage. The use of compounded peptides can attract scrutiny from both state and federal regulators.
C. Utilizing Tailored Informed Consent
Clinicians should employ highly specific, well-crafted informed consent documents tailored to the peptides they recommend. These documents should clearly outline the risks and regulatory status of the treatments.
D. Verifying Product Quality
Unlike FDA-approved branded products, compounded peptides lack the same level of regulatory oversight. Clinicians must ensure the quality of the products they use and be prepared to counter the perception that their use of compounded products is driven by financial motives.
E. Maintaining Clinical Leadership
Above all, clinicians must apply the same rigorous clinical leadership to the use of compounded peptides as they do to every patient encounter. This includes proper diagnosis, prescribing, treatment, and documentation.
Clinicians interested in prescribing compounded peptides must dedicate the time and effort to thoroughly investigate the associated liability and regulatory nuances. By doing so, they can make informed decisions and implement strategies to mitigate risks. As the old adage goes: Measure twice, cut once.