Cross-investigation · Shared concern

What happens when an FDA letter turns on a contract manufacturer, not the drug?

CorMedix's DefenCath and Verrica's VP-102 each received FDA letters that, by the companies' accounts, turned on a third party's facility. One was approved with the same manufacturer; the other moved its bulk solution elsewhere.

EphemerisX Research · Published · CorMedix · Verrica Pharmaceuticals · 3 min read

Short answer

Both drugs were approved, by different routes. DefenCath was approved with finished dosage production at Rovi, the facility both of its FDA letters named, after CorMedix also lined up alternative sites. Verrica reports that its letters turned on a contract manufacturer's facility, later named as Sterling's, and moved bulk solution production to Piramal before VP-102 was approved in July 2023.

How the records connect

Two regulatory records, one question. The passages below show where the records converge and where they diverge; each card is a question in one company's record that quotes the same evidence.

CROSS-INVESTIGATION · SHARED CONCERNWhat happens when an FDA letter turns on a contractmanufacturer, not the drug?CORMEDIXHow did CorMedix describe the FDA's second letter?6 shared passagesWhich manufacturer was DefenCath approved with, and whathappened to the alternatives?6 shared passagesHow did CorMedix describe the FDA's first letter?2 shared passages+6 more in CorMedix →VERRICA PHARMACEUTICALSWhat changed between Verrica's second and third FDA letters?5 shared passagesHow did VP-102 get from a third FDA letter to approval in July2023?5 shared passagesWhat is the securities class action against Verrica about?5 shared passages+4 more in Verrica Pharmaceuticals →

What the evidence shows

CorMedix: the facility is named in the letters. The FDA's February 2021 letter says that in records provided by Rovi Pharma Industrial Services S.A. (FEI 3016688535) manufacturing facility, the FDA noted objectionable conditions FDA · Feb 26, 2021 · p. 8. The August 2022 letter: our field investigators conveyed deficiencies to the representatives of the facilities. Satisfactory resolution of these deficiencies is required before this application may be approved FDA · Aug 4, 2022 · p. 2. CorMedix's press release on that letter describes deficiencies at the contract manufacturing organization (CMO) and the supplier of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) heparin 8-K · Aug 9, 2022, and says the heparin supplier received a warning letter as a result of manufacturing deficiencies for a non-heparin API 8-K · Aug 9, 2022. Neither press release reporting a letter (March 2021, August 2022) names Rovi, the facility both FDA letters name. 8-K · searched

Verrica: the facility is named by the company. Its September 2021 8-K says the letter identified deficiencies at a facility of a contract manufacturing organization 8-K · Sep 20, 2021 and that they do not specifically relate to the manufacturing of VP-102, but instead raise general quality issues at the facility 8-K · Sep 20, 2021. None of Verrica's five 2021 filings on the second letter (September 20 to November 29) mentions Sterling. 8-K · searched In May 2022 the company named it: the third letter came as a direct result of deficiencies identified at a general reinspection of a facility of Sterling Pharmaceutical Services, LLC 8-K · May 25, 2022. The FDA's own words on the facility are not quoted in this record: the first page of the 2021 letter has no text layer in the published file, and the record quotes the 2021 and 2022 letters only from their later, standard pages.

The inspection outcomes, as each company reported them. CorMedix in August 2022: The FDA has not yet advised the CMO of the post-inspection compliance classification 8-K · Aug 9, 2022; in April 2023, the FDA is in receipt of the close out report for inspectional observations received from its existing contract manufacturing organization (“CMO 1”), and NDA resubmission with CMO 1 can be done at the Company’s discretion 8-K · Apr 26, 2023. Verrica in November 2021: the inspection was classified as “voluntary action indicated” (“VAI”), is now closed 8-K · Nov 12, 2021; in May 2022, after the reinspection, Sterling received notice on May 19, 2022 that it is on Official Action Indicated (“ OAI ”) status 8-K · May 25, 2022. The May 25, 2022 8-K does not mention the earlier “voluntary action indicated” classification. 8-K · searched

Alternative manufacturers. CorMedix added Alcami, which will serve as an alternative manufacturing site for DefenCath 8-K · Aug 9, 2022, and later Siegfried, which it intends to utilize Siegfried as a back-up CMO 8-K · Mar 30, 2023. Verrica, which had listed Limited commercial CMOs with facilities for handling highly potent and highly flammable liquid products 8-K · Sep 29, 2021, reported in August 2022 that it has begun working with Piramal Pharma Solutions to manufacture bulk solution for VP-102 8-K · Aug 11, 2022, and that the FDA indicated a willingness to work collaboratively on the amount of stability data required from an alternative CMO 8-K · Aug 11, 2022.

Approval. CorMedix's 10-K: The Company received FDA approval of DefenCath with finished dosage production from its European based CMO Rovi Pharma Industrial Services 10-K · Mar 5, 2026, and it also qualified Siegfried Hameln as an alternate finished dosage manufacturing site 10-K · Mar 5, 2026. The 2025 10-K does not mention Alcami. 10-K · searched Verrica's 10-K: On July 21, 2023, YCANTH (VP-102) (cantharidin) 0.7% topical solution was the first product approved by the FDA for the treatment of molluscum 10-K · Mar 11, 2026. The 2026 10-K names neither Sterling nor Piramal, and does not mention human factors, a Type A meeting or a CRL. 10-K · searched Which site made VP-102's bulk solution at approval is not in this record; the FDA approval letters for both products are not among its documents.

In both records the third-party facility was later the subject of a securities class action, as each 10-K describes it. CorMedix's concerns communications from the FDA related and directed to the Company’s contract manufacturing organization and heparin supplier 10-K · Mar 5, 2026; Verrica's amended complaint concerns manufacturing deficiencies at the facility where our contract manufacturer produced bulk solution for the YCANTH (VP-102) drug device 10-K · Mar 11, 2026. The outcome of either case is not in this record. Which manufacturer was DefenCath approved with, and what happened to the alternatives? How did VP-102 get from a third FDA letter to approval in July 2023?

Follow the thread

Questions this raises

Comparing these records raises new questions. They are not yet investigated.

  • How long did each facility issue take to resolve, from the first letter to approval?
  • Did either company disclose which facility made its approved product?

The documents, by date

FDA Complete Response Letter, February 26, 2021FDA letter · Feb 26, 2021CorMedix Form 8-K, filed March 1, 20218-K · Mar 1, 2021Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed September 20, 20218-K · Sep 20, 2021Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed September 29, 20218-K · Sep 29, 2021Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed November 12, 20218-K · Nov 12, 2021Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed May 25, 20228-K · May 25, 2022FDA Complete Response Letter, August 4, 2022FDA letter · Aug 4, 2022CorMedix Form 8-K, filed August 9, 20228-K · Aug 9, 2022Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed August 11, 20228-K · Aug 11, 2022CorMedix Form 8-K, filed March 30, 20238-K · Mar 30, 2023CorMedix Form 8-K, filed April 26, 20238-K · Apr 26, 2023CorMedix Form 10-K, filed March 5, 202610-K · Mar 5, 2026Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 10-K, filed March 11, 202610-K · Mar 11, 2026

The passages quoted

FDA Complete Response Letter, February 26, 2021 · page 8

During a review of records requested under Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act section 704(a)(4), provided by Rovi Pharma Industrial Services S.A. (FEI 3016688535) manufacturing facility, the FDA noted objectionable conditions. These objectionable conditions will be conveyed to the representative of the facility within 10 business days of issuance of this Complete Response letter. Satisfactory resolution of these objectionable conditions is required (e.g., preapproval inspection and/or adequate facility responses addressing these conditions) before this application may be approved.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed March 1, 2021

Neither press release reporting a letter (March 2021, August 2022) names Rovi, the facility both FDA letters name.

Searched the whole document for: Rovi. None found.

Open the document →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed September 20, 2021

None of Verrica's five 2021 filings on the second letter (September 20 to November 29) mentions Sterling.

Searched the whole document for: Sterling. None found.

Open the document →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed September 20, 2021

announced that it received a complete response letter from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “ FDA ”) identifying deficiencies at a facility of a contract manufacturing organization for its New Drug Application (the “ NDA ”) for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum contagiosum. The identified deficiencies do not specifically relate to the manufacturing of VP-102, but instead raise general quality issues at the facility. The FDA did not identify any clinical, safety or product specific chemistry, manufacturing, and controls deficiencies related to the NDA.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed September 29, 2021

Limited commercial CMOs with facilities for handling highly potent and highly flammable liquid products
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed November 12, 2021

On November 5, 2021, Verrica was notified that the inspection of the CMO has been classified as “voluntary action indicated” (“VAI”), is now closed and that the VAI classification will not directly negatively impact FDA’s assessment of the Company’s NDA regarding this CMO. With the satisfactory resolution of the facility inspection, Verrica has engaged the FDA to determine the next steps toward the potential approval of VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed May 25, 2022

The May 25, 2022 8-K does not mention the earlier “voluntary action indicated” classification.

Searched the whole document for: VAI, voluntary action. None found.

Open the document →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed May 25, 2022

announced that it received a complete response letter (“ CRL ”) from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “ FDA ”) as a direct result of deficiencies identified at a general reinspection of a facility of Sterling Pharmaceutical Services, LLC (“ Sterling ”), a contract manufacturing organization for its New Drug Application (the “ NDA ”) for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum contagiosum. The CRL did not identify any other deficiencies. Sterling advised the Company that it received notice on May 19, 2022 that it is on Official Action Indicated (“ OAI ”) status. None of the issues identified by FDA during the reinspection were specific to the manufacturing of VP-102. The Company was informed by the FDA that it had completed its review of the NDA and product label, there were no open questions on the NDA review, and the VP-102 label was ready to be communicated.
Open at the source →

FDA Complete Response Letter, August 4, 2022 · page 2

During a recent inspection of the and Rovi Pharma Industrial Services S.A (FEI 3016688535) manufacturing facilities for this application, our field investigators conveyed deficiencies to the representatives of the facilities. Satisfactory resolution of these deficiencies is required before this application may be approved.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed August 9, 2022

has entered into an agreement with Alcami Corporation, a US based contract manufacturer with proven capabilities for manufacturing commercial sterile parenteral drug products, which will serve as an alternative manufacturing site for DefenCath. The Company has been working with Alcami over the past several months to transfer the manufacturing process for DefenCath into an Alcami site, and CorMedix expects to be able to submit a supplement to its NDA application around the end of the first quarter of 2023.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed August 9, 2022

CorMedix has supported the efforts of the CMO to compile robust responses and corrective action plans to inspectional observations the CMO received during the FDA’s recent pre-approval inspection of the CMO for the DefenCath NDA. The FDA has not yet advised the CMO of the post-inspection compliance classification, but CorMedix will continue to provide any needed support in the upcoming weeks as the CMO completes implementation of all necessary corrective actions.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed August 9, 2022

A second Complete Response Letter (CRL) was received from the FDA stating that the DefenCath NDA cannot be approved until deficiencies recently conveyed to the contract manufacturing organization (CMO) and the supplier of the active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) heparin during inspections are resolved to the satisfaction of FDA. There were no other deficiencies related to DefenCath cited in the CRL, and the Company expects that resolution of the site-specific compliance deficiencies will clear a pathway for FDA to approve the DefenCath NDA.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed August 9, 2022

Separately, the FDA conducted a recent inspection unrelated to DefenCath at the facility of the company’s heparin supplier, which culminated in the API supplier receiving a warning letter as a result of manufacturing deficiencies for a non-heparin API. CorMedix sought guidance from FDA as to whether these deficiencies would impact the timing of approval of the DefenCath NDA, and by way of the CRL, the FDA has now informed the company that satisfactory resolution of these deficiencies will be required before the DefenCath NDA may be approved. The Company’s heparin supplier has advised CorMedix that it has retained an independent CGMP consultant to expedite the implementation of corrective actions and resolve the warning letter as quickly as possible.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed August 11, 2022

Verrica has begun working with Piramal Pharma Solutions to manufacture bulk solution for VP-102 at their Sellersville, Pennsylvania site. Verrica will continue to work closely with Piramal and the FDA to facilitate a timely technology transfer and production quality at the facility.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 8-K, filed August 11, 2022

Verrica announced that it held a Type A Meeting with the FDA regarding the path forward for the resubmission and potential approval of the NDA for VP-102 for the treatment of molluscum. The FDA indicated a willingness to work collaboratively on the amount of stability data required from an alternative CMO for the bulk solution of VP-102 at the time of resubmission as well as options for post-approval use of bulk solution previously manufactured.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed March 30, 2023

CorMedix announced an agreement to validate manufacturing of DefenCath at Siegfried AG’s site in Hameln, Germany, which has previously been inspected by FDA. The Hameln site previously manufactured Neutrolin®, which was sold in Europe as a medical device. The Company intends to utilize Siegfried as a back-up CMO.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 8-K, filed April 26, 2023

At the Type A meeting, the FDA informed CorMedix that it is in receipt of the close out report for inspectional observations received from its existing contract manufacturing organization (“CMO 1”), and NDA resubmission with CMO 1 can be done at the Company’s discretion. The FDA may conduct a pre-approval inspection at the facility as part of the NDA review process.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 10-K, filed March 5, 2026

The 2025 10-K does not mention Alcami.

Searched the whole document for: Alcami. None found.

Open the document →

CorMedix Form 10-K, filed March 5, 2026

In general, the purported bases for these claims are allegedly false and misleading statements and omissions related to the NDA submissions to the FDA for DefenCath, subsequent complete response letters, as well as communications from the FDA related and directed to the Company’s contract manufacturing organization and heparin supplier.
Open at the source →

CorMedix Form 10-K, filed March 5, 2026

The Company received FDA approval of DefenCath with finished dosage production from its European based CMO Rovi Pharma Industrial Services. In addition, the Company also qualified Siegfried Hameln as an alternate finished dosage manufacturing site and is in the process of scaling production at the facility.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 10-K, filed March 11, 2026

The 2026 10-K names neither Sterling nor Piramal, and does not mention human factors, a Type A meeting or a CRL.

Searched the whole document for: Sterling Pharmaceutical, Piramal, human factor, Type A meeting, CRL. None found.

Open the document →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 10-K, filed March 11, 2026

On July 21, 2023, YCANTH (VP-102) (cantharidin) 0.7% topical solution was the first product approved by the FDA for the treatment of molluscum in adult and pediatric patients two years of age and older. We commercially launched YCANTH (VP-102) in August 2023 in the United States for the treatment of molluscum.
Open at the source →

Verrica Pharmaceuticals Form 10-K, filed March 11, 2026

On June 6, 2022, plaintiff Kranthi Gorlamari, or Plaintiff, filed a putative class action complaint captioned Gorlamari v. Verrica Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against 69 Table of Contents us and certain of our current and former officers and directors, or Defendants. On January 12, 2023, the Plaintiff filed an amended complaint alleging that Defendants violated federal securities laws by, among other things, failing to disclose certain manufacturing deficiencies at the facility where our contract manufacturer produced bulk solution for the YCANTH (VP-102) drug device and that such deficiencies posed a risk to the prospects for regulatory approval of YCANTH (VP-102) for the treatment of molluscum. The amended complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages and other relief on behalf of Plaintiff and all other persons and entities which purchased or otherwise acquired our securities between May 19, 2021 and May 24, 2022, or the Putative Class Period.
Open at the source →

Prepared from public FDA letters and SEC filings: every quoted passage is matched to the original document, and every “not in” statement comes from a search of the whole document, before it is published. Questions, summaries and connecting sentences are EphemerisX’s wording. Not investment advice. How this research works → · Ask the FDA and SEC Ephemeris →