Ich, Who and Supac Guidelines
Ich, Who and Supac Guidelines
Ich, Who and Supac Guidelines
GUIDELINES
ICH GUIDELINES
INTRODUCTION:
The objective of such harmonisation is a more economical use of human, animal and
material resources, and the elimination of unnecessary delay in the global
development and availability of new medicines whilst maintaining safeguards on
quality, safety and efficacy, and regulatory obligations to protect public health.
Prior to 1960s there were not many controls over introduction of new drugs and also
over the assurance of the quality by the manufacturer over his established drug
products. Some stray tragic incidents in some countries like USA and India triggered
the introduction of exacting drug laws to ensure the quality, safety and efficacy of the
drug.
Around 1970s the pharmaceutical industry started getting global but the registration
of medicines remained a national responsibility. Although the laws of all the countries
were based on the same fundamental obligations to evaluate the quality, safety and
efficacy the detailed technical requirements differed from country to country. So the
companies had to duplicate many time consuming and expensive test procedures, in
order to market new products, internationally. All this resulted in unnecessary
expenses and long delays in introducing new drugs.
So a necessity to harmonize or make uniform, the testing procedures and regulatory
requirements of different countries was felt and the result is the birth of ICH in April
1990..
Initiation of ICH
The birth of ICH took place at a meeting in April 1990, hosted by the EFPIA in
Brussels. Representatives of the regulatory agencies and industry associations of
Europe, Japan and the USA met, primarily, to plan an International Conference but
the meeting also discussed the wider implications and terms of reference of ICH.
The ICH Steering Committee which was established at that meeting has since met at
least twice a year, with the location rotating between the three regions.
F o r m a t o f Ap p l i c a t i o n s
A target for the first phase of ICH activities was to remove redundancy and
duplication in the development and review process, such that a single set of data
could be generated to demonstrate the quality, safety and efficacy of a new
medicinal product. The long-term goal of developing a harmonised format has led to
the creation of the ICH Guideline M4, The Common Technical Document (CTD).
The CTD provides a harmonised format and content for new product applications.
The Electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) was developed
subsequently by the M2 Expert Working Group. This specification document allows
for the electronic submission of the CTD from applicant to regulator and provides a
harmonised technical solution to implementing the CTD electronically. The eCTD
has begun to be implemented across the ICH partner and observer
regionsGuidelines
Objectives of ICH:
TOPICS OF ICH:
Step 2 of the ICH process is reached when the ICH Steering Committee agrees,
based on the report of the EWG, that there is sufficient consensus on the technical
issues for the draft guideline or recommendation to proceed to the next stage of
regulatory consultation. The consensus text approved by the Steering Committee is
signed off by the Steering Committee as the Step 2 Final Document.
Under Step 3 of the ICH process, the Step 2 Guideline is subjected to regulatory
consultation in the 3 ICH regions according to national/regional procedures.
Comments received from regulatory consultation are considered by the EWG for
incorporation into the final Step 4 Harmonised Tripartite Guideline which will be for
regulatory implementation (Step 5) in the 3 ICH regions
Please find below a list of the Step 2 ICH Guidelines currently undergoing regulatory
consultation in the 3 ICH regions:
C a t e g o r i e s o f I C H H a r m o n i s a t i o n Ac t i v i t i e s
The ICH harmonisation activities fall into 4 categories (see Table below). The original
Formal ICH Procedures involved a step-wise progression of guidelines. This process
has evolved to include maintenance activities (Maintenance Procedure), as an
essential part of the ICH procedure.
ICH is a joint initiative involving both regulators and industry as equal partners in the
scientific and technical discussions of the testing procedures which are required to
ensure and assess the safety, quality and efficacy of medicines.
The focus of ICH has been on the technical requirements for medicinal products
containing new drugs. The vast majority of those new drugs and medicines are
developed in Western Europe, Japan and the United States of America and
therefore, when ICH was established, it was agreed that its scope would be confined
to registration in those three regions.
ICH is comprised of Six Parties that are directly involved, as well as three Observers
and IFPMA. The Six Parties are the founder members of ICH which represent the
regulatory bodies and the research-based industry in the European Union, Japan
and the USA. These parties include the EU, EFPIA, MHLW, JPMA, FDA and
PhRMA.
The Observers are WHO, EFTA, and Canada (represented by Health Canada). This
important group of non-voting members acts as a link between the ICH and non-ICH
countries and regions.
ICH is operated via the ICH Steering Committee, which is supported by ICH
Coordinators and the ICH Secretariat.
ICH PARTIES:
ICH is administered by the ICH Steering Committee which is supported by the ICH
Secretariat. The ICH Steering Committee (SC) was established in April 1990, when
ICH was initiated. The Steering Committee, working with the ICH Terms of
Reference, determines the policies and procedures for ICH, selects topics for
harmonisation and monitors the progress of harmonisation initiatives. The Steering
Committee meets at least twice a year with the location rotating between the three
regions.
Since the beginning, each of the six co-sponsors has had two seats on the ICH
Steering Committee (SC) which oversees the harmonisation activities. IFPMA
provides the Secretariat and participates as a non-voting member of the Steering
Committee.
The ICH Observers, WHO, Health Canada, and the European Free Trade
Association (EFTA) nominate non-voting participants to attend the ICH Steering
Committee Meetings.
1) QUALITY:
2) SAFETY:
3) EFFICACY:
4) MULTIDISCIPLINARY;
Safety, Efficacy and Multidisciplinary are not covered here..as we are much
concerned with Quality Guidelines.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GUIDELINE
This guideline is intended to provide recommendations on how to use stability data
generated in accordance with the principles detailed in the ICH guideline ―Q1A(R)
Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products‖ (here after referred as the
parent guideline) to propose a retest period/shelf life in a registration application.
This guideline describes when and how extrapolation can be considered when proposing
a retest period for a drug substance or a shelf life for a drug product that extends beyond
the period covered by ―available data from the stability study under the long-term storage
condition‖ (hereafter referred to as long-term data).
1.2 BACKGROUND
The guidance on the evaluation and statistical analysis of stability data provided in the
parent guideline is brief in nature and limited in scope.
The parent guideline states that regression analysis is an appropriate approach to
analyzing quantitative stability data for retest period or shelf life estimation and
recommends that a statistical test for batch poolability be performed using a level of
significance of 0.25.
However, the parent guideline includes few details and does not cover situations where
multiple factors are involved in a full- or reduced-design study.
2. GUIDELINES
2.1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The design and execution of formal stability studies should follow the principles outlined
in the parent guideline.
A systematic approach should be adopted to the presentation and evaluation of stability
information, which should include, as necessary, physical, chemical, biological and
microbiological test characteristics.
All product characteristics likely to be affected by storage, e.g. assay value or potency,
content of products of decomposition, physicochemical properties (hardness,
disintegration, particulate matter, etc.), should be determined; for solid or semi-solid oral
dosage forms, dissolution tests should be carried out.
Test methods to demonstrate the efficacy of additives, such as antimicrobial agents,
should be used to determine whether such additives remain effective and unchanged
throughout the projected shelf-life.
Analytical methods should be validated or verified, and the accuracy as well as the
precision (standard deviations) should be recorded. The assay methods chosen should
be those indicative of stability.
The tests for related compounds or products of decomposition should be validated to
demonstrate that they are specific to the product being examined and are of adequate
sensitivity.
1. Tabulate and plot stability data on all attributes at all storage conditions and evaluate
each attribute separately.
2. No significant change at accelerated conditions within six (6) months.
3. Long-term data show little or no variability and little or no change over time.
1. Batches tested
2. General information
3. Container/closure system
4. Literature and supporting data
5. Stability-indicating analytical methods
6. Testing plan
7. Test parameters
8. Test results
9. Other requirements (post-approval commitments)
10. Conclusions
Result sheets must bear date and responsible person signature / QA approval
Batch number
Date of manufacture
Site of manufacture
2.3 EXTRAPOLATION
Extrapolation is the practice of using a known data set to infer information about future
data.
Extrapolation to extend the retest period or shelf life beyond the period covered by long-
term data can be proposed in the application, particularly if no significant change is
observed at the accelerated condition.
2.4 DATA EVALUATION FOR RETEST PERIOD OR SHELF LIFE ESTIMATION FOR
DRUG SUBSTANCES OR PRODUCTS INTENDED FOR ROOM TEMPERATURE
STORAGE
*Note: The following physical changes can be expected to occur at the accelerated condition
and would not be considered significant change that calls for intermediate testing if there is
no other significant change:
Softening of a suppository that is designed to melt at 37ºC, if the melting point is clearly
demonstrated,
Failure to meet acceptance criteria for dissolution for 12 units of a gelatin capsule or gel-
coated tablet if the failure can be unequivocally attributed to cross-linking.
However, if phase separation of a semi-solid dosage form occurs at the accelerated
condition, testing at the intermediate condition should be performed. Potential interaction
effects should also be considered in establishing that there is no other significant change.
whether long-term data for the attribute are shelf life should not exceed the period
The proposed retest period The proposed retest period or shelf life can be
3 months beyond the period more than 6 months beyond, the period covered
2.5 DATA EVALUATION FOR RE-TEST PERIOD OR SHELF LIFE ESTIMATION FOR
DRUG SUBSTANCES OR PRODUCT INTENDED FOR STORAGE BELOW ROOM
TEMPERATURE
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 OBJECTIVES OF THE GUIDELINE
This guideline describes outlines the stability data package for a new drug substance or
drug product that is considered sufficient for a registration application in territories in
Climatic Zones III and IV.
1.2 BACKGROUND
A product’s shelf life should be established according to climatic conditions in
which the product is to be marketed.
Storage conditions recommended by manufacturers on the basis of stability
studies are meant to guarantee the maintenance of quality, safety and efficacy
throughout the shelf-life of product.
Temperature and humidity determine the storage conditions and so they greatly
affect the stability of drug product.
Climatic conditions in countries where the product is to be marketed should be
carefully considered during drug development phase. So the world has been
divided into four climatic zones based on prevalent annual climatic conditions.
This document is an annex to the parent guideline and recommends the long-term
storage condition for stability testing of a new drug substance or drug product for a
registration application in territories in Climatic Zones III and IV.
2. GUIDELINES
2.1 CONTINUITY WITH THE PARENT GUIDELINE
The following sections of the parent guideline can be considered common to any territory in
the world and are not reproduced here:
Stress testing ,Selection of batches ,Container closure system ,Specification ,Testing
frequency ,Storage conditions for drug substance or product in a refrigerator ,Storage
conditions for drug substance or product in a freezer ,Stability commitment ,Evaluation
,Statements/labeling
As described in the parent guideline, an appropriate approach for deriving the water loss
rate at the reference relative humidity is to multiply the water loss rate measured at an
alternative relative humidity at the same temperature by a water loss rate ratio. (see
table below for examples).
The ratio of water loss rates at a given temperature is calculated by the general
formula (100 – reference % RH)/ (100 – alternative % RH).
ALTERNATIVE REFERENCE RATIO OF WATER LOSS
RELATIVE RELATIVE RATES AT A GIVEN
HUMIDITY HUMIDITY TEMPERATURE
65% RH 35% RH 1.9
75% RH 25% RH 3.0
Valid water loss rate ratios at relative humidity conditions other than those shown in the
table above can be used. A linear water loss rate at the alternative relative humidity over
the storage period should be demonstrated.
If it cannot be demonstrated that the drug substance or drug product will remain within its
acceptance criteria when stored at 30°C ± 2°C/65 % RH ± 5 % RH for the duration of the
proposed retest period or shelf life, the following options should be considered: (1) a
reduced retest period or shelf life, (2) a more protective container closure system, or (3)
additional cautionary statements in the labeling.
Introduction:
• The World Health Organization is the United Nations specialized agency for
health.
• It was established on 7 April 1948.
• WHO is governed by 192 Member States through the World Health Assembly.
• All countries which are Members of the United Nations may become members of
WHO.
• The Executive Board is composed of 32 members technically qualified in the field
of health.
• Members are elected for three-years.
• The Organization is headed by the Director-General, who is appointed by the
Health Assembly on the nomination of the Executive Board.
• WHO Member States are grouped into six regions.
• Each region has a regional office.
• Regional offices are in-
• Africa, America, Southeast Asia, Europe, Eastern Mediterranean, Western Pacific
Functions of WHO:
1) For registration purposes, test samples of products should contain fairly stable
active ingredients and should be from two different production batches.
Accelerated studies:
For less stable drug substances, if limited stability data are available: then
duration of the accelerated studies for zone II should be increased to 6 months.
40±2 75±5 3
Real-time studies:
For registration purposes, the results of real time studies of at least 6 months'
duration should be available at the time of registration.
Every 3 months in the first year, every 6 months in the second year, and then
annually
Analytical methods:
Stability report:
Provides details of the design of the study, as well as the results and
conclusions.
Purpose of Sampling:
Prequalification
Acceptance of consignments
In-process control
Inspection for customs clearance, deterioration, adulteration
Starting materials
Primary and secondary Packaging Materials
Intermediates
Pharmaceutical products
Controls to Be Applied To the Sample:
Container used to store a sample shouldn’t interact with the sampled material
nor allow contamination, should protect from light, air, moisture, etc., as req.
by the storage directions for the material sampled
Samples should be stored in accordance with the storage conditions as
specified for the respective API, excipient or drug product
Closures and labels should be preferably of such a kind that unauthorized
opening can be detected.
Samples must never be returned to the bulk.
Starting Material:
The ―n plan‖
1) is uniform &
According to this plan, original samples are taken from N sampling units selected at
random
n-plan is not statistically based and should be used only as a guiding principle.
The ―r plan‖
1) is non-uniform &
FORMULA: r = 1.5√N
According to this plan samples are taken from each of the N sampling units of the
consignment and placed in separate sample containers & tested.
If the results are in agreement, r final samples are formed by appropriate pooling of
the original samples.
If these results are in agreement, the r samples are combined for the retention
sample.
Inspection of…..
o pharmaceutical manufacturers
o drug distribution channels (products)
Guidelines for pre-approval inspection
Quality system requirements for national GMP Inspectorates
o Intended to promote harmonization of pharmaceutical inspection
practices among WHO Member States
Objectives:
Routine inspection:
o Full inspection of all applicable components of GMP
Concise inspection:
o Eligibility: Manufacturers with a consistent record of compliance with
GMP.
o It is on limited number of GMP requirements selected as indicators of
overall GMP performance. It is generally done unannounced.
Follow-up inspection:
o It is done to monitor the result of corrective actions.
o It is normally carried out from 6 weeks to 6 months after the initial
inspection, depending on the nature of the defects and the work to be
undertaken.
Special inspection:
o Necessary to undertake spot checks following complaints or recalls
related to suspected quality defects in products.
o Special visits may also be made to establish how a specific product is
manufactured as a prerequisite for marketing approval or issuance of
an export certificate. The inspection should preferably be
unannounced.
Investigative inspection:
o This type of inspection is used to assess the performance of a new
establishment whose scope of operation was previously unknown. It
should also be unannounced.
Comparative BA ( BE ) studies
Comparative pharmacodynamic studies in humans
Comparative clinical trials
In vitro dissolution tests
(i) All active and inactive ingredients are exactly in the same proportion between
different strengths
(ii) For a high potency API (up to 10 mg per dosage), where the amount of the
API in the dosage form is relatively low, the total wt of the dosage form
remains nearly the same for all strengths (within ± 10% of the total wt), the
same inactive ingredients are used for all strengths, and the change in
strength is obtained by altering the amount of the API and one or more
inactive and inert ingredients.
• Subjects
- Number
- Health status
- Age, weight, height
- Ethnicity
- Gender
- Special characteristics e.g. poor metabolizers
- Smoking
- Inclusion/exclusion criteria specified in protocol
• Randomization
• Blinding
• Sampling protocol
• Washout period
• Administration of food and beverages during study
• Recording of adverse events
Bioequivalence standards (acceptance ranges):
• The 90% confidence interval of the relative mean AUC of the test to reference
product should be between 80-125%.
• The 90% confidence interval of the relative mean CMAX of the test to
reference product should be between 80-125%. Since CMAX is recognized
as being more variable than the AUC ratio, a wider acceptance range may be
justifiable.
• These standards must be met on log-transformed parameters calculated from
the measured data
• If the measured potency of the multisource formulation differs by more than
5% from that of the reference product, the parameters may be normalized for
potency.
• TMAX may be important for some drugs
Non-parametric methods can be used when the log transformed data is not
normal
Pharmacodynamic studies:
Not recommended: for oral product for systemic action due to high within-
subject variability
Uses:
Technical information:
It is a user-friendly system that allows the entry, updating, retrieval and printing of
information stored in a related database.
SIAMED has been used with the following network operating systems:
LANtastic 6.0,
Novell DOS,
Windows 95 and
NT4 and Novell NetWare 3.11
Information on companies,
The Protocol:
Clinical trial should be carried out in accordance with a written protocol agreed upon
and signed by the investigator and the sponsor.
It is the accepted basis for clinical trial ethics & must be fully followed and respected
by all parties.
Ethics committee:
It ensure the protection of the rights and welfare of human subjects participating in
clinical trials, as defined by the current revision of the Declaration of Helsinki and
national and other relevant regulations, and to provide public reassurance, by
previewing trial protocols, etc.
Informed consent:
Confidentiality:
• The present guidelines supplement both the WHO guide on GMP and the
guidelines on GCP for trials on pharmaceutical products . The application of the
principles of GMP to the preparation of investigational products is necessary for
several reasons:
• To assure consistency between and within batches of the investigational
product & thus assure the reliability of clinical trials.
Requesting a certificate:
Objectives:
Main Principles:
The first WHO draft text on good manufacturing practices (GMP) was prepared in
1967.
6. Product recalls
- Contract giver
- Contract acceptor- cannot pass it on to a third party without prior approval of a
contract giver.
8. Self inspection and quality audits
10. Training
13. Equipment- Be suitable for its intended use; facilitate thorough cleaning;
minimize the risk of contamination of products and containers during
production; and facilitate efficient and, if applicable, validated and reliable
operation.
14. Materials
15. Documentation
- Test requirements- the materials have been tested for conformity with
specifications for identity, strength, purity and other quality parameters.
7. Retention of records and reference samples- of the API, and where necessary
of intermediate products, should be retained for at least 1 year beyond the
expiry date of the finished product or for a specified period if there is no expiry
date.
8. Production-Processing procedures
9. Starting materials- Some may not be tested for compliance because of the
hazards involved (e.g., phosphorus pentachloride and dimethyl sulfate). This
is acceptable when a batch certificate of analysis is available from the vendor
and when there is a reason based on safety or other valid considerations.
10. Intermediate products
11. Packaging
12. Quality control
13. Stability studies- expiry date do not usually need to be set for active
pharmaceutical ingredient, if the stability testing does not indicate a
reasonable shelf life, then the product can be labeled with an appropriate
arbitrary expiry date and should be retested on or before that date.
14. Self inspection and quality audits
15. Storage
16. Complaints defects and rejected samples.
Pharmaceutical Excipients:
1. General considerations –
• Non-conformance
• Complaint files.
3. Quality Audits
• Use of equipment -
Equipment that contains tarry or gummy residues that cannot be removed
easily should be dedicated for use with these products only.
• Cleaning programme
• Detailed cleaning procedure
• Sampling plan
• Analytical methods/cleaning limits
5. Materials
7. Good practices in production and quality control -Change control and process
validation,
• Stability studies
1. Glossary
3. Premises
. Assay
Medicinal plant material: (a) the quantity of plant material must be stated; or
(b) the quantity of plant material may be given as a range, corresponding to a
defined quantity of constituents of known therapeutic activity.
The composition of any solvent or solvent mixture used and the physical state of
the extract must be indicated
9. Quality control -Reference samples of plant materials must be available for use
in comparative tests.
10. Sampling
11. Stability tests –it must be shown that, substances present are stable and that
their content as a proportion of the whole remains constant.
1. General considerations-
1. Terminally sterilized
2. Quality control –
6. Sterilization-
Dry heat
Moist heat
Radiation
Filtration
By gases and fumigants
7. Aseptic processing and sterilization by filtration
8. Personnel.
9. Premises- Grade B areas should be designed in such a way that all operations
can be observed from outside.
10. Equipment –
3. Personnel
2. Can be relied on to observe the appropriate codes of practice and are not
subject to any disease.
3. Minimum number of personnel required should be present in clean and
aseptic areas when work is in progress.
4. Personnel should be trained in GMP, the safe handling of radioactive
materials and radiation safety procedures.
5. Training records
4. Premises and equipment-
6. Labelling-
1. Separate records for the receipt, storage, use and disposal of radioactive
materials
2. Distribution records should be kept.
3. The return of radioactive products should be carried out in accordance with
international and national transport regulations.
8. Quality assurance and quality control-
Biological Products
1. Scope:
Manufacturing procedures within the scope of these guidelines include:
3. Personnel
The staff engaged in the manufacturing process should be separate from the
staff responsible for animal care.
To ensure the manufacture of high-quality products, personnel should be
trained in GMP and GLP in appropriate fields such as bacteriology, virology,
biometry, chemistry, medicine, immunology and veterinary medicine.
All personnel engaged in production, maintenance, testing and animal care
(and inspectors) should be vaccinated with appropriate vaccines and, where
appropriate, be submitted to regular testing for evidence of active
tuberculosis.
4. Premises and equipment.
Products such as killed vaccines, including those made by rDNA techniques,
toxoids and bacterial extracts may after inactivation be dispensed into
containers. And on the same premises as other sterile biological products,
providing that adequate decontamination measures are taken after filling,
including, if appropriate, sterilization and washing.
Spore-forming organisms shall be handled in facilities dedicated to this group
of products until the inactivation process is accomplished.
Dedicated facilities and equipment shall be used for the manufacture of
medicinal products derived from human blood or plasma.
5. Animal quarters and care.
1. Introduction.
2. Personnel.
6. Returned goods
8. Product recall
MISCELLANEOUS
Pharmaceutical legislation
Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP)
National drug regulatory capacity and performance
To promote information exchange among drug regulatory authorities –
To strengthen drug procurement.
WHO also works with countries to ensure that quality assurance is built into
the entire drug supply chain.
Guidance materials have been prepared for countries in relation to product
assessment and registration, distribution of medicines, basic tests and
laboratory services.
Nine GMP training workshops were held in Africa and Asia
Its function is to- establish detailed recommendations and guidelines for the
manufacturing, licensing, and control of blood products, cell regulators,
vaccines and related in vitro diagnostic tests.
The Expert Committee on Biological Standardization meets on an annual
basis since 1947.
The Expert Committee directly reports to the Executive Board, which is the
executive arm of the World Health Assembly.
International Pharmacopoeia:
The desire for the unification of terminology and of the strengths and
composition of drugs led on to attempts to produce an international
pharmacopoeia.
The work on The International Pharmacopoeia is carried out in collaboration
with members of the WHO Expert Advisory Panel on the International
Pharmacopoeia and Pharmaceutical Preparations as well as specialists from
industry and other institutions.
The information published in The International Pharmacopoeia is collated
via a consultative procedure and may thus be regarded as being based on
international experience.
The current edition completes the list of monographs for active
pharmaceutical substances. It also includes a number of important general
texts, e.g. on the dissolution test, drug nomenclature, general specifications
for dosage forms, and many more.
The needs of developing countries are taken into account and simple,
classical physicochemical techniques are recommended that have been
shown to be sound.
Whenever possible, classical procedures are used in the analytical methods
so that the pharmacopoeia can be applied without the need for expensive
equipment.
Priority is given to drugs that are widely used throughout the world. High
priority is accorded to drugs that are important to WHO health programmes,
and which may not appear in any other pharmacopoeias, e.g. new
antimalarial drugs.
Unlike other pharmacopoeias, the International Pharmacopoeia has no legal
status.
WHO Member States can adopt it and incorporate it into national legislation,
either in part or in whole.
• Essential medicines are those that satisfy the priority health care needs of the
population.
They are selected in regard to public health relevance, evidence on efficacy
and safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness.
• Essential medicines are intended to be available within the context of
functioning health systems at all times in adequate amounts, in the
appropriate dosage forms, with assured quality and adequate information, and
at a price the individual and the community can afford.
• The implementation of the concentrationept of essential medicines is intended
to be flexible and adaptable to many different situations; exactly which
medicines are regarded as essential remains a national responsibility."
The data collected are used to generate early warning signals of potential adverse
reactions.
• More generally, the programme offers WHO Member States a tool for
developing and reporting on activities concerned with adverse drug reaction
monitoring. Additionally, the programme provides guidance and training
courses on pharmacovigilance.
• WHO also provides information on regulatory matters to Member States
through regular publications such as WHO Drug Information, the WHO
Pharmaceuticals Newsletter (monthly) and WHO Drug Alerts.
• To provide electronic information support .WHO has developed SIAMED, a
model system for computer-assisted drug registration, to help countries
harmonize regulatory systems and improve the drug registration efficiency of
their drug regulatory authority.
GUIDELINES FOR
SCALE UP AND POST APPROVAL
CHANGES
PURPOSE OF GUIDANCE
This guidance provides recommendations to sponsors of new drug applications
(NDA's), abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA's), and abbreviated antibiotic
applications (AADA's) who intend, during the postapproval period, to change: 1) the
components or composition; 2) the site of manufacture; 3) the scale-up/scale-down
of manufacture; and/or 4) the manufacturing (process and equipment) of an
immediate release oral formulation.
This guidance thus sets forth application information that should be provided to
CDER to assure continuing product quality and performance characteristics of an
immediate release solid oral dose formulation for specified postapproval changes.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
A. Batch
A specific quantity of a drug or other material produced according to a single
manufacturing order during the same cycle of manufacture and intended to have
uniform character and quality, within specified limits [21CFR 210.3(b)(2)].
B. Contiguous Campus
Continuous or unbroken site or a set of buildings in adjacent city blocks.
C. Dissolution Testing
Case A: Dissolution of Q = 85% in 15 minutes in 900 milliliters (mL) of 0.1N
hydrochloride (HCl), using the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) <711> Apparatus
1 at 100 revolutions per minute (rpm) or Apparatus 2 at 50 rpm.
Case B: Multi-point dissolution profile in the application/compendia medium at 15,
30, 45, 60, and 120 minutes or until an asymptote is reached for the proposed and
currently
accepted formulation.
Case C: Multi-point dissolution profiles performed in water, 0.1N HCl,and USP buffer
media at pH 4.5, 6.5, and 7.5 (five separate profiles) for the proposed and currently
accepted formulations. Adequate sampling should be performed at 15, 30, 45, 60,
and 120 minutes until either 90% of drug from the drug product is dissolved or an
asymptote is reached. A surfactant may be used with appropriate justification.
D. Drug Product
A drug product is a finished dosage form (e.g., tablet, capsule, or solution) that
contains a drug substance, generally, but not necessarily, in association with one or
more other ingredients [21 CFR 314.3(b)]. A solid oral dosage form includes tablets,
chewable tablets, capsules, and soft gelatin capsules.
E. Drug Substance
An active ingredient that is intended to furnish pharmacological activity or other direct
effect in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of a disease, or to
affect the structure of any function of the human body, but does not include
intermediates used in the synthesis of such ingredient [21 CFR 314.3(b)].
F. Equipment
Automated or non-automated, mechanical or non-mechanical equipment used to
produce the drug product, including equipment used to package the drug product.
G. Formulation
A listing of the ingredients and composition of the dosage form.
H. Justification
Reports containing scientific data and expert professional judgment to substantiate
decisions.
J. Operating Principle
Rules or concepts governing the operation of the system.
K. Pilot Scale
The manufacture of either drug substance or drug product by a procedure fully
representative of and simulating that used for full manufacturing scale.For solid oral
dosage forms this is generally taken to be, at a minimum, one-tenth that of full
production, or 100,000 tablets or capsules, whichever is larger
L. Process
A series of operations and/or actions used to produce a desired result.
M. Ranges
The extent to which or the limits between which acceptable variation exists.
N. Same
Agreeing in kind, amount; unchanged in character or condition.
O. Scale-up
The process of increasing the batch size.
P. Scale-down
The process of decreasing the batch size.
Q. Similar
Having a general likeness.
S. Validation
Establishing through documented evidence a high degree of assurance that a
specific process will consistently produce a product that meets its predetermined
specifications and quality attributes. A validated manufacturing process is one that
has been proven to do what it purports or is represented to do. The proof of
validation is obtained through collection and evaluation of data, preferably beginning
from the process development phase and continuing through the production
phase.Validation necessarily includes process qualification (the qualification of
materials, equipment, systems, buildings, and personnel), but it also includes the
control of the entire processes for repeated batches or runs.
A. Level 1 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 1 changes are those that are unlikely to have any detectable impact on
formulation quality and performance.
Examples:
a. Deletion or partial deletion of an ingredient intended to affect the color or flavor of
the drug product; or change in the ingredient of the printing ink to another approved
ingredient.
b. Changes in excipients, expressed as percentage (w/w) of total formulation, less
than or equal to the following percent ranges :the total additive effect of all excipient
changes should not be more than 5%
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements and stability testing.
Stability testing: one batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution Documentation
None beyond application/compendial requirements.
c. In Vivo Bioequivalence Documentation
None.
3. Filing Documentation
Annual report (all information including long-term stability data).
B. Level 2 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 2 changes are those that could have a significant impact on formulation quality
and performance. Tests and filing documentation for a Level 2 change vary
depending on three factors: therapeutic range, solubility, and permeability.
Therapeutic range is defined as either narrow or non-narrow. Drug solubility and
drug permeability are defined as either low or high. Solubility is calculated based on
the minimum concentration of drug, milligram/milliliter (mg/mL), in the largest dosage
strength, determined in the physiological pH range (pH 1 to 8) and temperature (37 +
0.5oC). High solubility drugs are those with a dose/solubility volume of less than or
equal to 250 mL. (Example:Compound A has as its lowest solubility at 37 + 0.5oC,
1.0 mg/Ml at pH 7, and is available in 100 mg, 200 mg and 400 mg strengths.
This drug would be considered a low solubility drug as its dose/solubility volume is
greater than 250 mL (400 mg/1.0 mg/mL=400 mL). Permeability (Pe, centimeter per
second) is defined as the effective human jejunal wall permeability of a drug and
includes an apparent resistance to mass transport to the intestinal membrane. High
permeability drugs are generally those with an extent of absorption greater than 90%
in the absence of documented instability in the gastrointestinal tract, or those whose
permeability attributes have been determined experimentally).
Examples:
a. Change in the technical grade of an excipient. (Example:Avicel PH102 vs. Avicel
PH200.)
b. Changes in excipients, expressed as percent (w/w) of total formulation, greater
than those listed above for a Level 1 change but less than or equal to the following
percent
ranges (which represent a two fold increase over Level 1 changes):
The total additive effect of all excipient changes should not change by more than
10%.
.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements and batchrecords.
Stability testing: 1 batch with 3 months accelerated stability data in supplement and 1
batch on long-term stability.
b. Dissolution Documentation
Case A: High Permeability, High Solubility Drugs
Dissolution of 85% in 15 minutes in 900 mL of 0.1N HCl. If a drug product fails to
meet this criterion, the applicant should perform the tests described for Case B or C
(below).
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
C. Level 3 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 3 changes are those that are likely to have a significant impact on formulation
quality and performance. Tests and filing documentation vary depending on the
following three factors: therapeutic range, solubility, and permeability.
Examples:
a. Any qualitative and quantitative excipient changes to a narrow therapeutic drug
beyond the ranges noted in SectionIII.A.1.b.
b. All other drugs not meeting the dissolution criteria under Section III.B.2.b.
c. Changes in the excipient ranges of low solubility, low permeability drugs beyond
those listed in Section III.A.1.b.
d. Changes in the excipient ranges of all drugs beyond those listed in Section
III.B.1.b.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements and batch records.
Significant body of information available:
One batch with three months accelerated stability data reported in supplement; one
batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
Significant body of information not available:
Up to three batches with three months accelerated stability data reported in
supplement; one batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution Documentation
Case B dissolution profile as described in Section III.B.2.b.
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
SITE CHANGES
Site changes consist of changes in location of the site of manufacture for both
company-owned and contract manufacturing facilities and do not include any scale-
up changes, changes in manufacturing (including process and/or equipment), or
changes in components or composition. Scale-up is addressed in Section V of this
guidance. New manufacturing locations should have a satisfactory current Good
Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) inspection.
A. Level 1 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 1 changes consist of site changes within a single facility where the same
equipment, standard operating procedures (SOP's), environmental conditions (e.g.,
temperature and humidity) and controls, and personnel common to both
manufacturing sites are used, and where no changes are made to the manufacturing
batch records, except for administrative information and the location of the facility.
Common is defined as employees already working on the campus who have suitable
experience with the manufacturing process.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
None beyond application/compendial release requirements.
b. Dissolution Documentation
None beyond application/compendial release requirements.
B. Level 2 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 2 changes consist of site changes within a contiguous campus, or between
facilities in adjacent city blocks, where the same equipment, SOP's, environmental
conditions (e.g., temperature and humidity) and controls, and personnel common to
both manufacturing sites are used, and where no changes are made to the
manufacturing batch records, except for administrative information and the location
of the facility.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Location of new site and updated batch records. None beyond
application/compendial release requirements.One batch on long-term stability data
reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution Documentation
None beyond application/compendial release requirements.
3. Filing Documentation
Changes being effected supplement; annual report (longterm stability test data).
C. Level 3 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Level 3 changes consist of a change in manufacturing site to a different campus. A
different campus is defined as one that is not on the same original contiguous site or
where the facilities are not in adjacent city blocks. To qualify as a Level 3 change,
the same equipment, SOP's, environmental conditions, and controls should be used
in the manufacturing process at the new site, and no changes may be made to the
manufacturing batch records except for administrative information, location and
language translation, where needed.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Location of new site and updated batch records. Application/compendial release
requirements.
Stability:
Significant body of data available:
One batch with three months accelerated stability data reported in supplement; one
batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
Significant body of data not available:
Up to three batches with three months accelerated stability data reported in
supplement; up to three batches on long- term stability data reported in annual
report.
b. Dissolution Documentation
Case B: Multi-point dissolution profile should be performed in the
application/compendia medium at 15, 30, 45, 60 and 120 minutes or until an
asymptote is reached. The dissolution profile of the drug product at the current and
proposed site should be similar.
3. Filing Documentation
Changes being effected supplement; annual report (long-term stability data).
A. Level 1 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Change in batch size, up to and including a factor of 10 times the size of the
pilot/biobatch, where: 1) the equipment used to produce the test batch(es) is of the
same design and operating principles; 2) the batch(es) is (are) manufactured in full
compliance with CGMP's; and 3) the same standard operating procedures (SOP's)
and controls, as well as the same formulation and manufacturing procedures, are
used on the test batch(es) and on the full-scale production batch(es).
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements. Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records in annual report.One batch on long-term stability reported
in annual report.
b. Dissolution Documentation
None beyond application/compendial release requirements.
c. In Vivo Bioequivalence-None.
B. Level 2 Changes
1. Definition of Level
Changes in batch size beyond a factor of ten times the size of the pilot/biobatch,
where: 1) the equipment used to produce the test batch(es) is of the same design
and operating principles; 2) the batch(es) is (are) manufactured in full compliance
with CGMP'S; and 3) the same SOP's and controls as well as the same formulation
and manufacturing procedures are used on the test batch(es) and on the full-scale
production batch(es).
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements. Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records.
Stability testing: One batch with three months accelerated stability data and one
batch on long-term stability.
c. In Vivo Bioequivalence-None.
3. Filing Documentation
Changes being effected supplement; annual report (long-term stability data).
MANUFACTURING
Manufacturing changes may affect both equipment used in the manufacturing
process and the process itself.
A. Equipment
1. Level 1 Changes
a. Definition of Change
This category consists of: 1) change from non-automated or non-mechanical
equipment to automated or mechanical equipment to move ingredients; and 2)
change to alternative equipment of the same design and operating principles of the
same or of a different capacity.
b. Test Documentation
i. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements.Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records.
Stability testing: One batch on long-term stability.
2. Level 2 Changes
a. Definition of Level
Change in equipment to a different design and different operating principles.
b. Test Documentation
i. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements.Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records.
Stability testing:
Significant body of data available:
One batch with three months accelerated stability data reported in
supplement; one batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
Significant body of data not available:
Up to three batches with three months accelerated stability data reported in
supplement; up to three batches on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
c. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement with justification for change;
annual report (long-term stability data).
B. Process
1. Level 1 Changes
a. Definition of Level
This category includes process changes including changes such as mixing times and
operating speeds within application/validation ranges.
b. Test Documentation
i. Chemistry Documentation
None beyond application/compendial release requirements.
2. Level 2 Changes
a. Definition of Level
This category includes process changes including changes such as mixing times and
operating speeds outside of application/validation ranges.
b. Test Documentation
i. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements. Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records.
Stability testing: One batch on long-term stability.
c. Filing Documentation
Changes being effected supplement; annual report (longterm stability data).
3. Level 3 Changes
a. Definition of Level
This category includes change in the type of process used in the manufacture of the
product, such as a change from wet granulation to direct compression of dry powder.
b. Test Documentation
i. Chemistry Documentation
Application/compendial release requirements.Notification of change and submission
of updated batch records.
Stability testing:
Significant body of data available:
One batch with three months accelerated stability data reported in supplement; one
batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
Significant body of data not available:
Up to three batches with three months accelerated stability data reported in
supplement; up to three batches on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
c. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement with justification; annual report (long-term stability data).
IN VITRO DISSOLUTION
See current United States Pharmacopeia/National Formulary, section <711>, for
general dissolution specifications. All profiles should be conducted on at least 12
individual dosage units.
Dissolution profiles may be compared using the following equation that defines a
similarity factor (f2):
f2 = 50 LOG {[1+1/n (R-T ) ] x 100}
n 2 -0.5
t=1 t t
where Rt and Tt are the percent dissolved at each time point. An f2 value between
50 and 100 suggests the two dissolution profiles are similar.
IN VIVO BIOEQUIVALENCE STUDIES
Below is a general outline of an in vivo bioequivalence study. It is intended as a
guide and the design of the actual study may vary depending on the drug and
dosage form.
A. Objective:
To compare the rate and extent of absorption of the drug product for which the
manufacture has been changed, as defined in this guidance, to the drug product
manufactured prior to the change.
B. Design:
The study design should be a single dose, two-treatment, two-period crossover with
adequate washout period between the two phases of the study. Equal numbers of
subjects should be randomly assigned to each of the two dosing sequences.
C. Selection of Subjects:
The number of subjects enrolled in the bioequivalence study should be determined
statistically to account for the intrasubject variability and to meet the current
bioequivalence interval.
D. Procedure:
Each subject should receive the following two treatments:
Treatment 1: Product manufactured with the proposed change.
Treatment 2: Product manufactured prior to the proposed change.
Following an overnight fast of at least 10 hours, subjects should receive either
Treatments 1 or 2 above with 240 mL water. Food should not be allowed until 4
hours after dosing. Water may be allowed after the first hour. Subjects should be
served standardized meals beginning at 4 hours during the study.
E. Restrictions:
Prior to and during each study phase, water may be allowed ad libitum except for 1
hour before and after drug administration. The subject should be served
standardized meals and beverages at specified times. No alcohol or xanthine- or
caffeine-containing foods and beverages should be consumed for 48 hours prior to
each study period and until
after the last blood sample is collected.
F. Blood Sampling:
Blood samples should be collected in sufficient volume for analysis of parent drug
and active metabolite(s), if any. The sampling times should be such that it should be
able to capture the Cmax and Tmax during the absorption period. Sampling should
be carried out for at least three terminal elimination half-lives for both parent drug
and active metabolite(s). Whole blood, plasma or serum, whichever is appropriate for
the analytes, should be harvested promptly and samples should be frozen at -20oC
or -70oC to maintain sample stability.
G. Analytical Method:
The assay methodology selected should ensure specificity, accuracy, interday and
intraday precision, linearity of standard curves, and adequate sensitivity, recovery,
and stability of the samples under the storage and handling conditions associated
with the analytical method.
H. Pharmacokinetic Analysis:
From the plasma drug concentration-time data, AUC0-t, AUC0-inf, Cmax, Tmax, Kel
and t1/2 should be estimated.
I. Statistical Analysis:
Analysis of variance appropriate for a crossover design on the pharmacokinetic
parameters using the general linear models procedures of SAS or an equivalent
program should be performed, with examination of period, sequence and treatment
effects. The 90% confidence intervals for the estimates of the difference between the
test and reference least squares means for the pharmacokinetic parameters (AUC0-
t, AUC0-inf, Cmax) should be calculated, using the two one-sided t-test procedure.
A. Level 1 Change
1. Definition of Level
Level 1 changes are those that are unlikely to have any detectable impact on
formulation quality and performance.
Examples:
a. Deletion or partial deletion of an ingredient intended to affect the color or flavor of
the drug product; or change in the ingredient of the printing ink to another approved
ingredient.
b. Changes in nonrelease controlling excipients, expressed as percentage (w/w) of
total formulation, less than or equal to the following percent ranges:
.The total additive effect of all nonrelease controlling excipient changes should not
be more than 5%.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements.
Stability: First production batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
None beyond application/compendial requirements
.
c. Bioequivalence documentation-None.
3. Filing Documentation
Annual report (all information including long-term stability data).
B. Level 2 Change
1. Definition of Level
Level 2 changes are those that could have a significant impact on formulation quality
and performance.
Example: Avicel PH102 vs. Avicel PH200
Examples:
a. A change in the technical grade and/or specifications of a nonrelease controlling
excipient.3
b. Changes in nonrelease controlling excipients, expressed as percentage (w/w) of
total formulation, greater than those listed above for a level 1 change, but less than
or equal to the following percent ranges (which represent a two-fold increase over
level 1
changes): The total additive effect of all nonrelease controlling excipient changes
should not change by more than 10%.
2. Test documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements and updated executed batch
records.
Stability: One batch with three months accelerated stability data reported in prior
approval supplement and long-term stability data of first production batch reported in
annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
Multipoint dissolution profiles should be obtained during the buffer stage of testing.
Adequate sampling should be performed, for example, at 15,30, 45, 60, and 120
minutes (following the time from which the dosage form is placed in the buffer) until
either 80% of the drug from the drug product is released or an asymptote is reached.
The above dissolution testing should be performed using the changed drug product
and the biobatch or marketed batch (unchanged drug product).
All modified release solid oral dosage forms: In the presence of an established in
vitro/in vivo correlation (6), only application/compendia dissolution testing need be
performed (i.e., only in vitro release data by the correlating method need to be
submitted). The dissolution profiles of the changed drug product and the biobatch or
marketed batch (unchanged drug product) should be similar. The sponsor should
apply appropriate statistical testing with justifications (e.g., the f equation) for
comparing dissolution profiles (5). Similarity testing for the two dissolution profiles
(i.e., for the unchanged drug product and the changed drug product) obtained in
each individual medium is appropriate.
c. Bioequivalence documentation-None.
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
C. Level 3 Change
1. Definition of Level
Level 3 changes are those that are likely to have a significant impact on formulation
quality and performance.
Example:
a. Changes in the nonrelease controlling excipient range beyond those listed in
Section III.B.1.b. The total weight of the dosage form may be within or outside the
approved original application range.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements and updated executed batch
records.
Stability:
Significant body of information available: One batch with three months' accelerated
stability data reported in prior approval supplement and longterm stability data of first
three production batches reported in annual report.
Significant body of information not available: Three batches with three months'
accelerated stability data reported in prior approval supplement and long-term
stability data of first three production batches reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
c. Bioequivalence documentation
A single-dose bioequivalence study (3). The bioequivalence study may be waived in
the presence of an established in vitro/in vivo correlation (6).
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
1. Definition of Level
Level 1 changes are those that are unlikely to have any detectable impact on
formulation quality and performance.
Example:
a. Changes in the release controlling excipient(s), expressed as percentage (w/w) of
total release controlling excipient(s) in the formulation less than or equal to 5% w/w
of total release controlling excipient content in the modified release solid oral dosage
form.
The components (active and excipients) in the formulation should have numerical
targets that represent the nominal composition of the product on which any future
changes in the composition of the product are to be based. Allowable changes in the
composition should be based on the original approved target composition and not on
previous level 1 changes in the composition. For products approved with only a
range for excipients, the target value may be assumed to be the midpoint of
the original approved application range.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements.
Stability: First production batch on long-term stability data reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
None beyond application/compendial requirements.
c. Bioequivalence documentation-None.
3. Filing Documentation
Annual report (all information including long-term stability data).
B. Level 2 Change
1. Definition of Level
Level 2 changes are those that could have a significant impact on formulation quality
and performance. Test documentation for a level 2 change would vary depending on
whether the product could be considered to have a narrow therapeutic range.
Example: Eudragit RS-100 vs. Eudragit RL-100.
Examples:
a. Change in the technical grade and/or specifications of the release controlling
excipient(s).
b. Changes in the release controlling excipient(s), expressed as percentage (w/w) of
total release controlling excipient(s) in the formulation, greater than those listed
above for a level 1 change, but less than or equal to 10% w/w of total release
controlling excipient content in the modified release solid oral dosage form.
The components (active and excipients) in the formulation should have numerical
targets that represent the nominal composition of the product on which any future
changes in the composition of the product are to be based. Allowable changes in the
composition are based on the original approved target composition and not on the
composition based on previous level 1 or level 2 changes. For products approved
with only a range for excipients, the target value may be assumed to be the midpoint
of the original approved application range.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements and updated executed batch
records.
Stability:
! Nonnarrow therapeutic range drugs: One batch with three months' accelerated
stability data reported in prior approval supplement and long-term stability data of
first production batch reported in annual
report.
! Narrow therapeutic range drugs: Three batches with three months' accelerated
stability data reported in prior approval supplement and long-term stability data of
first three production batches reported in
annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
All modified release solid oral dosage forms: In the presence of an established in
vitro/in vivo correlation (6), only application/compendia dissolution testing should be
performed (i.e., only in vitro release data by the correlating method should be
submitted). The dissolution profiles of the changed drug product and the biobatch or
marketed batch (unchanged drug product) should be similar. The sponsor should
apply appropriate statistical testing with justifications (e.g., the f equation) for
comparing dissolution profiles (5). Similarity testing for the two dissolution profiles
(i.e., for the unchanged drug product and the changed drug product)obtained in each
individual medium is appropriate.
c. Bioequivalence documentation
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
C. Level 3 Change
1. Definition of Level
Level 3 changes are those that are likely to have a significant impact on formulation
quality and performance affecting all therapeutic ranges of the drug.
Examples:
a. Addition or deletion of release controlling excipient(s) (e.g., release controlling
polymer/plasticizer).
b. Changes in the release controlling excipient(s), expressed as percentage (w/w) of
total release controlling excipient(s) in the formulation, greater than those listed
above for a level 2 change (i.e., greater than 10% w/w of total release controlling
excipient content in the modified release solid oral dosage form). Total weight of the
dosage form may be within or outside the original approved application range.
2. Test Documentation
a. Chemistry documentation
Application/compendial product release requirements and updated executed batch
records.
Stability: Three batches with three months' accelerated stability data reported in prior
approval supplement and long-term stability data of first three production batches
reported in annual report.
b. Dissolution documentation
Extended release: In addition to application/compendial release requirements, a
multipoint dissolution profile should be obtained using application/compendial test
conditions for the changed drug product and the biobatch or marketed batch
(unchanged drug product). Adequate sampling should be performed, for example at
1, 2, and 4 hours and every two hours thereafter until either 80% of the drug from the
drug product is released or an asymptote is reached.
c. Bioequivalence documentation
A single-dose bioequivalence study . The bioequivalence study may be waived in the
presence of an established in vitro/in vivo correlation . Changes in release controlling
excipients in the formulation should be within the range of release controlling
excipients of the established correlation.
3. Filing Documentation
Prior approval supplement (all information including accelerated stability data);
annual report (long-term stability data).
REFERENCES
USP 2000
Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical technology, Vol-19, pg. 227-235.
Drug Stability: Principles and Practices, 3rd Edition, edited by Jens T. Carstensen
and C. T. Rhodes
www.who.int/medicines
Expert Consultation for 2nd Addendum to the 3rd Edition of the Guidelines for
Drinking-water Quality, Geneva, 15–19 May 2006
Pharmainfo.net
www.fda.gov