Bulk active post approval changes
- 1. 1
- 2. This guidence provide recommendation to holders of NADAs(New animal drug application),ANADAs(Abbrivated new animal drug application),VMFs(Veterinary master files) 2
- 3. Site of Manufacture Scale of Manufature Equipment Specification Manufacturing process of intermediates in synthetic pathway leading to drug substance 3
- 4. Under section 506A of federal Food,drug and cosmetic act,the holder of an NADA or ANADA must notify FDA about each change in each condition established in an approved application beyond the variation already provided for in the application 4
- 5. PRIOR APPROVAL SUPPLEMENT SUPPLEMENT- CHANGES BEING EFFECTED IN 30 DAYS SUPPLEMENT-CHANGES BEING EFFECTED ANNUAL REPORT 5
- 6. The reporting category for a change is based on the potential for the change to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality, purity, or potency of the drug product as these factors may relate to the safety or effectiveness of the drug product. This guidance describes chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information and documentationin support of each change and provides recommendations on reporting categories. 6
- 7. The guidance applies to synthetic drug substances and the synthetic steps involved in the preparation of semisynthetic drug substances. It is limited to structurally well-characterized drug substances for which impurities can be monitored at the levels recommended. 7
- 8. (1) site, scale, and equipment changes involving the synthetic steps up to and including the step that produces the final intermediate, (2) specification changes for raw materials, starting materials, and intermediates, except the final intermediate, and (3) manufacturing process changes involving the synthetic steps up to and including the final intermediate. 8
- 9. • Synthetic peptides • Oligonucleotides • Radiopharmaceuticals • Drug substances derived exclusively by isolation from natural sources or produced by procedures involving biotechnology • Nonsynthetic steps for semisynthetic drug substances 9
- 10. Any specification change for a raw material, starting material, or intermediate derived from a biotechnology process • Changes related to testing for viruses or adventitious agents: (1) relaxing an acceptance criterion, (2) deleting a test, or (3) a change in the analytical procedure that does not provide the same or increased assurance of the identity, strength, quality, purity, or potency of the material being tested as the analytical procedure previously described 10
- 11. Changes in virus or adventitious agent removal or inactivation methods • Changes in source material, cell line, or supplier of raw materials, starting materials, or intermediates derived from a biotechnology process • Changes in source material (e.g., plant species, geographic location of plant harvesting, microorganism) or supplier of substances derived from natural sources that are the intermediates that begin the synthetic part of a semisynthetic process 11
- 12. Any modification to the method of manufacture of a drug substance carries some risk of causing adverse impact, either in the physical properties of the drug substance or in the level or nature of impurities present. The risk of adverse change is generally acknowledged to be greater when a modification occurs near the end of a drug substance manufacturing process rather than the beginning. Also, certain kinds of modifications (e.g., equipment or site changes) are viewed as less likely to result in adverse change than others (e.g., changes in the synthetic route). 12
- 13. The final intermediate was chosen as the break point in this attempt to categorize risk because (1) it is typically the most well characterized material in the synthetic scheme, except for the drug substance itself, and (2) physical properties of the drug substance usually will not be affected by changes made up to that point. 13
- 14. A holder of an approved application must Assess The Effects of the changes before distributing a drug product made with the manufacturing change (according to section506A of the act).A central tenet is that a given change in drug manufacturing process can be adequately assessed by compairing pre and post change materials(i.e. Of same or better quality).when equivelence can’’t be demontrated,applicants should submitt a prior approval supplement and 14
- 15. Should consider appropriate tests for qualification of impurity,demonstration of bioequivelence,assessment of stablity. Two major fectors for determining equivelence in drug substance are the:- Impurity profile Physical property 15
- 16. The impurity profile will beconsideredequivalent after a given change if three consecutive postmodification batches of either an isolated intermediate or the drug substance are evaluated and the test data for each batch demonstrate that: 16
- 17. • Each existing impurity is within its stated limit or, if not stated, is at or below the upper statistical limit of historical data. 17
- 18. • Total impurities are within the stated limit or, if not stated, are at or below the upper statistical limit of historical data. • Each existing residual solvent is within its stated limit or, if not stated, is at or below the upper statistical limit of historical data. • New residual solvents, in either an intermediate or the drug substance, are at or below the levels recommended10 in the VICH guidance GL18 Impurities: Residual Solvents, when finalized. 18
- 19. • Equivalence of the impurity profile can be established by testing any isolated intermediate following the change, including the final intermediate or the drug substance. Equivalence should not be established by combining results from multiple intermediates. 19
- 20. • The batches of the intermediate or drug substance used for testing should be synthesized using exclusively the material that has been subjected to the change(s) (i.e., without blending with prechange material). 20
- 21. • When a manufacturing change is made to an outsourced intermediate, either the vendor or the customer can establish equivalence. However, in addition to assessing equivalence of the impurity profile, release testing by the vendor or acceptance testing by the customer, as appropriate, should be conducted. • Changes can be evaluated using data from pilot scale batches. If equivalence is demonstrated by using pilot batches, the first production batch should also be evaluated for equivalence. The production batch equivalence data should be kept on file at the manufacturing site. 21
- 22. two physical properties of the drug substance, morphic form particle size, 22
- 23. The physical properties of the drug substance will be considered equivalent after a given change if three consecutive postmodification batches of the finished drug substance are compared to three or more consecutive representative premodification batches and the test data for each batch demonstrate: • Conformance to established acceptance criteria for morphic form or, where acceptance criteria do not exist, the isolation of the same form or mixture of forms within the range of historical data • Conformance to historical particle size distribution profile 23
- 24. A. Site, Scale, and Equipment Changes The manufacturing site, scale of manufacture, and manufacturing equipment changes discussed in this section do not include any modifications to the synthetic pathway (i.e., the same starting materials, intermediates, solvents, and reagents are involved). 24
- 25. 1. Site Changes Changes to a different manufacturing site should be reported. Changes within the same manufacturing site need not be submitted to the Agency, and equivalence testing asdescribed in this document need not be carried out.Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in annual reports or supplements to the applications, as appropriate) should include: • The name and address of the new facility 25
- 26. • A concise description of the manufacturing steps being transferred, a summary of any variation in equipment or operating conditions, and a statement that the synthetic pathway is identical at the new site • Evaluation of the impurity profile and physical properties. This evaluation should include: – A report on changes in impurities with a description of analytical procedures – Data on three consecutive batches made at the new site – Historical data for comparison – A description of the source of the historical data. 26
- 27. 2. Reporting Category: Annual Report if the site change does not involve the final intermediate Supplement :Changes Being Effected if the site change involves the final intermediate 3. Scale Changes Scale changes include increases and decreases in the batch size of intermediates,including the final intermediate, beyond those approved in the original application. 27
- 28. 4. Equipment Changes A change to new equipment need not be submitted to the Agency, even where equipment is specified in the approved application. 28
- 29. Specification changes for the final intermediate are not included in this guidance, nor are certain specification changes for raw materials, starting materials, and intermediates derived from natural sources or biotechnology (see section I). 1. Specification Changes Made to Comply with Compendial Changes Test documentation (submitted in amendments to master files and/or in annual reports to the applications, as appropriate) should include: 29
- 30. • A description of the change • Updated specifications Reporting Category: • Annual Report. 2. Specification Changes That Provide Greater Assurance of Quality Examples: Tightening of acceptance criteria Replacing an existing analytical procedure with an improved procedure Revised specifications associated exclusively with improved analytical procedures 30
- 31. Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in annual reports to the applications, as appropriate) should include: Rationale for the proposed change and a brief description of any new analytical procedures, including a discussion of improvements over existing procedures. Updated specifications. Reporting Category: • Annual Report. 31
- 32. 3. Other Specification Changes Examples: • Relaxing acceptance criteria • Deleting a test • Replacing an existing analytical procedure with a new procedure that does not qualify as an improvement • Revised specifications associated with changes in supplier/grade of starting materials, reagents, or solvents 32
- 33. Some specification changes that fall within the scope of section V.B.3 would clearly not affect the quality of downstream intermediates or the drug substance and therefore no evaluation of equivalence would be needed. Examples include: Elimination of a redundant test (e.g., deletion of a boiling point test for a solvent where a chromatographic assay test is routinely performed) 33
- 34. Elimination of a test that is no longer necessary (e.g., testing for an impurity that is no longer present due to a change in the supplier of a starting material) Inconsequential quality changes (e.g., change in the concentration of a reagent which would subsequently be diluted prior to use) 34
- 35. Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in annual reports or supplements to the applications, as appropriate) should include • Rationale for the proposed change and a brief description of any new analytical procedures • Evaluation of the impurity profile and physical properties, if appropriate (see above). This evaluation should include: – A report on changes in impurities with a description of analytical procedures – Data on three consecutive batches made using material that justifies the revised specifications – Historical data for comparison – A description of the source of the historical data 35
- 36. This category encompasses a wide range of process- related changes. New specifications may be called for when different solvents, reagents, starting materials, or intermediates are involved 1. Changes That Do Not Involve New Starting Materials or Intermediates • Changes in unit operations (e.g., addition, deletion, change in the order, repetition of an existing unit operation on a routine basis) 36
- 37. • Addition or deletion of raw materials (e.g., solvents, reagents) or ancillary materials (e.g., resins, processing aids) • Changes in solvent composition (other than for an analytical procedure, which would be covered under Specification Changes) • Operating conditions (e.g., temperature, pH, reagent stoichiometry, time). 37
- 38. Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in annual reports or supplements to the applications, as appropriate) should include: • Description of change • Specifications for new reagents and solvents and Certificates of Analysis from the suppliers, if applicable • Evaluation of the impurity profile and physical properties. This evaluation should include: – A report on changes in impurities with a description of analytical procedures – Data on three consecutive batches made using material produced by the changed process 38
- 39. – Historical data for comparison – A description of the source of the historical data Reporting Category: • Annual Report if equivalence is demonstrated prior to the final intermediate. • Supplement: Changes Being Effected if equivalence is demonstrated at the final intermediate or drug substance. 39
- 40. 2. Changes in the Route of Synthesis in One or More Steps Involving Different Starting Materials and/or Intermediates (except the final intermediate) Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in supplements to the applications, as appropriate) should include: Description of the change with details of the new synthetic procedure, the operating conditions, and controls of critical steps and intermediates 40
- 41. • Appropriate structural characterization data for new intermediates • Specifications for any new starting materials and/or intermediates • Evaluation of the impurity profile and physical properties. This evaluation should include: – A report on changes in impurities with a description of analytical procedures – Data on three consecutive batches made using material produced by the changed process – Historical data for comparison. 41
- 42. – A description of the source of the historical data. Reporting Category: • Supplement: Changes Being Effected in 30 Days if equivalence is demonstrated prior to the final intermediate. • Prior approval supplement if equivalence is demonstrated at the final intermediate or drug substance. 42
- 43. 3. Changes in Which an Intermediate Is Redefined as a Starting Material This change is often in response to an increase in commercial availability of the proposed starting material. In general, the specification for the proposed starting material should Test documentation (submitted as amendments to master files and/or in supplements to the applications, as appropriate) should include: • Rationale for the proposed change and overview of current synthetic procedure 43
- 44. • Rationale for the proposed change and overview of current synthetic procedure • Evidence that the intermediate complies with the current definition and/or expected characteristics of a starting material. • A new or revised specification, a description of new or revised analytical procedures for the redefined starting material, and, if appropriate, additional tests and/or tightened acceptance criteria for downstream intermediates 44
- 45. • A list of sources of the redefined starting material • A description of how the suitability of a new supplier or revised process from an existing supplier will be assessed • Evaluation of the impurity profile and physical properties. This evaluation should include: – A report on changes in impurities with a description of analytical procedures – Data on three consecutive batches made using material that justifies the new or revised specifications 45
- 46. – Historical data for comparison – A description of the source of the historical data. Reporting Category: • Supplement: Changes Being Effected in 30 Days. 46
- 47. Multiple changes are those that involve various combinations of the changes described in sections V.A, B, and C. 47
- 48. Medicine was the discovery of penicillin This,of course,resulted ina similar increase “G” by Alexander Fleming in 1929. It took no less than 14 years until a manufacturing process for the fermentative production of this new antibiotic had been developed. Unfortunately, the first patient treated with the new “wonder drug” died because the manufacturing process yielded so little material that there was simply not enough of it available to cure one patient. Clearly, the process needed to be improved, in other 48
- 49. words : changed!After the first series of process improvements, penicillin indeed proved that it is a wonder drug; from that time on,many lives of patients that would have been lost otherwise were saved by administering penicillin. 49
- 50. 50