UNSPSC 51372318: Allylprodine

This classification denotes an analgesic agent with the molecular formula C18H25NO2, a preparation that US FDA regulates as an active ingredient or moiety under Unique Ingredient Identifier 4343OEZ18O, chemically known as 4-piperidinol, 3-allyl-1-methyl-4-phenyl-, propionate (ester), hydrochloride, dl but generally known as allylprodine, which bears US NIH Compound Identifier 32938. European Medicines Agency schedules Allylprodine in its eXtended EudraVigilance Medicinal Product Dictionary or XEVMPD under Index SUB05340MIG.

UNSPSC 51372318 Allylprodine, a Commodity code, does not reflect the actual work being solicited under this classification in recent state and local procurement. The three identified opportunities span naloxone and drug deactivation systems procurement, therapeutic pharmacy initiative direct-to-manufacturer prescription programs, and generic multi-source pharmaceuticals and over-the-counter products—none of which involve allylprodine specifically or align with the opioid analgesic compound this code nominally represents. State and local governments are using this code to tag broad pharmaceutical procurement, particularly community health initiatives, pharmacy benefit management programs, and wholesale pharmaceutical supply agreements rather than purchases of the specific active pharmaceutical ingredient the code names.

Recent activity comes from Seminole County, Florida (IFB for naloxone and drug deactivation systems, due July 26, 2023), the Texas Health and Human Services Commission (RFI on direct-to-manufacturer prescription programs, due April 3, 2026), and the Minnesota Multistate Cooperative Purchasing Alliance administering a multi-state RFP for generic pharmaceuticals and OTC products (due March 26, 2026, effective July 1, 2026). The issuing bodies mix state health agencies, county public health departments, and cooperative purchasing vehicles serving multiple jurisdictions. The geographic spread includes Florida, Texas, Minnesota, and Oregon. The mismatch between the code's chemical specificity and the breadth of actual pharmaceutical procurement under it suggests either systematic tagging error or that state procurement systems are using this code as a catch-all for pharmaceutical product categories outside their classification scheme. Firms pursuing pharmaceutical supply contracts at state and local level should verify the actual product specification in the RFP or IFB rather than relying on UNSPSC coding alone.