FDA's MANUFACTURING CHANGE POLICIES
This article was originally published in The Gold Sheet
Executive Summary
...continue to be examined for opportunities to further down-regulate. Industry and FDA met at a widely-attended public workshop recently to review their experience with the agency's 1999 guidance on NDA/ANDA changes and to discuss potential revisions that might help in the CMC streamlining effort. Industry participants urged the agency to continue to focus on SUPAC as another important component in this effort. [Recommendations on improving the "changes" guidance made by participants during the breakout sessions at the workshop are provided. The sessions covered -- sterile drug substances/products -- tests and acceptance criteria -- components and composition -- manufacturing site -- manufacturing process -- labeling, and -- miscellaneous.]
You may also be interested in...
McKinsey Survey Highlights Progress, Challenges in Adoption of QbD
Drug manufacturers are adopting QbD but there are exceptions, especially among some generics firms, McKinsey finds in industry survey. The top challenge to further adoption: misalignment between R&D and commercial operations. Second is a lack of belief in the business case. However, the cost turns out to be low and the financial reward high, McKinsey says.
Manufacturers Encouraged to Enhance Clinical Relevance of Quality With QbD
Using QbD to set specs that make a difference to patients is hard but important work, FDA's Woodcock says. Prasugrel, levothyroxine, pallodone examples explored. How to establish a 'work space.' How to make the right correlations.
Biotech QbD Encounters Uncertainties Over Definitions and Regulatory Relief
As biotech firms begin to pilot QbD they wrestle with FDA over non-critical process parameters, postapproval changes and more. They are exploring how to define design spaces, change them, identify their edges. And they're still wondering what regulatory relief they might get in return for investing in quality-by-design studies.