Suppliers and packagers for fidaxomicin

fidaxomicin

Listed suppliers include manufacturers, repackagers, relabelers, and private labeling entitities.

Applicant	Tradename	Generic Name	Dosage	NDA	NDA/ANDA	Supplier	Package Code	Package	Marketing Start
Actavis Labs Fl	FIDAXOMICIN	fidaxomicin	TABLET;ORAL	208443	ANDA	Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc.	0480-2596-34	20 TABLET, FILM COATED in 1 BOTTLE (0480-2596-34)	2025-07-15
Apotex	FIDAXOMICIN	fidaxomicin	TABLET;ORAL	219559	ANDA	Apotex Corp.	60505-4833-2	1 BOTTLE in 1 CARTON (60505-4833-2) / 20 TABLET, FILM COATED in 1 BOTTLE	2026-02-03
Torrent	FIDAXOMICIN	fidaxomicin	TABLET;ORAL	220374	ANDA	Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited	13668-745-21	20 TABLET, FILM COATED in 1 BOTTLE (13668-745-21)	2026-01-27

FIDAXOMICIN suppliers: global API and finished-dose sourcing map for generics, licensing, and manufacturing planning

Last updated: May 23, 2026

Who supplies fidaxomicin API and where is it manufactured?

Fidaxomicin is a narrow-spectrum macrocyclic antibiotic (FDA label: DIFICID) whose upstream supply is concentrated among a small set of developers and manufacturers capable of high-spec fermentation, macrolide purification, and controlled solid-state isolation.

Typical supply chain roles

• API manufacturers: fermentation, crystallization, and API grade specifications (assay, impurities, polymorph/solvates where applicable).
• Drug product manufacturers (contract): film-coating, blistering, packaging, and QA release against cGMP for tablets.
• Distributors/agents: commercial supply into pharma and generics, often with temperature-controlled logistics and CoA management.

Business relevance

• API sourcing drives cost, lead time, impurity profile risk, and regulatory defensibility for ANDA/505(b)(2) formulations built on fidaxomicin API.
• Drug product build requires validated blending and coating with consistent dissolution, especially for a fixed-strength tablet.

Which companies supply fidaxomicin finished tablets (DIFICID) and generic equivalents?

Fidaxomicin finished dosage supply tends to track the originator’s launch model and later distribution through multiple wholesalers and manufacturing networks for tablets and packaging.

Originator finished product

• DIFICID is marketed by Merck Sharp & Dohne (US commercial). Finished-dose supply is executed via Merck’s labeled manufacturing network and contract partners used for packaging/labeling.

Generic finished-dose supply

• Generic and authorized generic supply (where launched) depends on:
  • whether the dossier uses Merck/authorized-grade API or a contract API source
  • whether the drug product manufacturer can meet dissolution and impurity specs against the approved reference

Actionable angle for sourcing

• For any plan to qualify supply for R&D or manufacturing, the key commercial question is whether the supplier can provide fidaxomicin API with consistent impurity and physical form controls and full regulatory documentation (CoA, batch traceability).

What are the main fidaxomicin API suppliers used in industry submissions?

High-intent submissions for fidaxomicin generally require:

• consistent lot release and impurity reporting aligned to the approved reference
• validated analytical methods (HPLC/impurity panel) and stability support
• documentation for excipient compatibility in tablet formulations

In practice, generic companies often qualify one or two API sources to control risk around lot-to-lot variation.

How do distributors and contract manufacturers source fidaxomicin when API is constrained?

When API availability tightens, buyers typically move to:

• multi-source qualification (primary plus backup API)
• higher minimum order quantities to secure fermentation scheduling
• longer lead times for drug substance and packaging materials

This matters for fidaxomicin because:

• the API is fermentation-derived and purification-driven
• API supply disruptions can directly delay NDA/ANDA timelines tied to stability batches and commercial lots

What documentation should a fidaxomicin supplier provide for FDA and EMA compliance?

For R&D, licensing, and regulatory readiness, a fidaxomicin supplier should provide:

• API CoA with assay and impurity profile per specification
• DMF or relevant regulatory dossier linkage where applicable (US Drug Master File referenced in filings)
• GMP statements and manufacturing site certifications
• Change control history (process changes, impurity normalization, crystallization conditions)
• Stability package support or confirmation of stability program alignment

For finished-dose contract manufacturers:

• batch manufacturing record templates (or summary)
• device and packaging component specifications
• validation documentation for blending, compression, coating, and dissolution

What supplier risks exist for fidaxomicin API quality and batch consistency?

Primary supplier risk drivers:

• variability in fermentation performance affecting macrocyclic antibiotic purity
• crystallization conditions affecting physical form and impurity behavior
• upstream solvent and finishing steps affecting residual solvents and related impurities
• inadequate traceability of starting materials and process intermediates

These translate into practical commercial risks:

• failed qualification lots
• delays in stability studies and regulatory submissions
• increased QC burden in drug product release testing

How does fidaxomicin supply compare with vancomycin and other CDI antibiotics?

Fidaxomicin’s supply constraints differ from older small-molecule CDI standards:

• vancomycin and other widely used antibiotics generally have deeper supplier ecosystems
• fidaxomicin’s niche use and specialized fermentation/purification narrows the qualified supplier pool

Commercially, this creates a higher dependency on a small number of API and contract manufacturing partners.

Which regions have the most fidaxomicin manufacturing capacity (US, EU, India, China)?

Fidaxomicin manufacturing capacity is typically concentrated where:

• fermentation macrolides are produced at scale
• macrolide purification facilities meet strict impurity control
• cGMP sites support regulatory dossiers

For sourcing planning, buyers generally map:

• API manufacturing sites capable of regulatory-grade lots
• drug product packaging and release sites aligned to target market regulations (FDA for US, EMA/NCA for EU)

What does the Orange Book or FDA labeling imply about supplier networks for fidaxomicin tablets?

FDA Orange Book listings do not identify API suppliers directly. Instead, they map:

• listed drug products
• patent protection
• exclusivity periods
• regulatory status of generics and 505(b)(2) applicants

Supplier selection is therefore a dossier-level matter:

• ANDA and 505(b)(2) applicants identify their manufactured-by sites and, via DMF cross-references, their API sourcing model.

How to choose a fidaxomicin supplier for an ANDA or 505(b)(2) strategy?

For a generic or 505(b)(2) pathway, supplier selection should be evaluated on:

• API impurity and stability alignment to approved reference specifications
• compatibility with the proposed tablet excipient system
• ability to support stability and scale-up bridging batches
• responsiveness for change control impact assessments
• willingness to provide DMF linkage or regulatory support required for filing

Commercially, the suppliers that reduce timeline risk are those with:

• established quality agreements
• documented batch-to-batch consistency
• regulatory dossier infrastructure

Key tables: fidaxomicin sourcing map (what to request from suppliers)

Table 1. Supplier information package to request | Supply chain role | Minimum documents to request | Risk mitigated | |---|---|---| | Fidaxomicin API supplier | CoA, impurity panel, residual solvents, physical form notes, traceability | batch qualification failures | | API supplier regulatory | DMF linkage or regulatory dossier support; GMP statement | filing defensibility | | Contract drug product manufacturer | site cGMP and release testing methods; coating/compression validation package | batch rejection at release | | Packaging and labeling | blistering/packaging specs; component CoC | late-stage release delays | | Quality agreement terms | change control notification windows; deviation/CAPA handling | supply continuity |

Key Takeaways

• Fidaxomicin supply is concentrated compared with older CDI antibiotics, increasing the importance of multi-source qualification and impurity-controlled API sourcing.
• For generics and 505(b)(2) projects, the decisive supplier attributes are impurity profile consistency, stability support, and regulatory documentation (DMF/GMP/change control).
• Finished-dose supply depends on both API availability and the drug product manufacturer’s ability to reproduce dissolution and impurity specifications under cGMP.

FAQs

1. What does a fidaxomicin API DMF need to include for ANDA support?
2. How do you qualify fidaxomicin API polymorph or physical form for tablet dissolution performance?
3. What impurity trends typically drive fidaxomicin release testing failures across API lots?
4. Which contract manufacturers can package fidaxomicin tablets at US FDA cGMP sites?
5. How do supplier change controls affect fidaxomicin stability commitments and regulatory reporting?

References (APA)

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Drugs@FDA: Dificid (fidaxomicin). FDA.
2. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Orange Book: Dificid (fidaxomicin) listings. FDA.