Implementation of Quality by Design (QbD): Status, Challenges and Next Steps Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Office of New Drug Quality Assessment (ONDQA), OPS, CDER.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop Washington D.C. September 27-29, 2006
Advertisements

ICH Q4B Regulatory Acceptance of Analytical Procedures and/or Acceptance Criteria (RAAPAC) Overview and Update Robert H. King, Sr. Office of Pharmaceutical.
1 Implementation of Quality by Design (QbD): Status, Challenges and Next Steps Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Office of New Drug Quality Assessment (ONDQA), OPS,
VALIDATION What is the new guidance?. What is a Compliance Policy Guide? Explain FDA policy on regulatory issues CGMP regulations and application commitments.
Integrating CMC Review & Inspection Industry Recommendations Joe Anisko April 24, 2003.
Implementation of Quality-by-Design: ONDQA Initiatives Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science October 5, 2006 Chi-wan Chen, Ph.D. Deputy Director.
Perspectives on New Paradigms of Risk and Compliance in Pharmaceutical Development: Quality by Design, PAT, and Design Space David J. Cummings OPS Quality.
Office of New Drug Chemistry (ONDC)
Office of New Drug Chemistry, OPS, CDER, Food and Drug Administration Establishing Dissolution Specification Current CMC Practice Vibhakar Shah, Ph.D.
Manufacturing Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science July 20-21, 2004 Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical.
COMPARABILITY PROTOCOLS ACPS March 12-13, 2003 Stephen K. Moore, Ph.D. Chemistry Team Leader CDER/Office of New Drug Chemistry Co-Chair, Comparability.
Pilot Risk-Ranking Model to Prioritize Manufacturing Sites for GMP Inspections Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science Manufacturing Subcommittee.
Assessing Quality-by-Design A CMC Review Perspective
Challenges and Opportunities in Enhancement of the CMC Section of NDAs: Quality – by - Design Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical.
PAT Validation Working Group Process and Analytical Validation Working Group Arthur H. Kibbe, Ph.D. Chair June 13, 2002.
ONDQA Perspective on Post Approval Changes Eric P. Duffy, PhD Director, Division of Post-Market Evaluation, ONDQA, CDER, FDA Public Meeting: Supplements.
1 Revisions to 21 CFR Supplements and Other Changes to an Approved Application PhRMA Perspective FDA Public Meeting – 7 Feb 2007.
Learnings from Pre-approval Joint Inspection of a GSK QbD Product with US-FDA & EMA and the application of Continuous Verification 17 May 2011, Beijing,
Ensuring Physical Stability of Pharmaceuticals: Can/should we improve our ability to identify and prevent physical changes? Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy.
Executive summary prepared by some members of the ICH Q9 EWG for example only; not an official policy/guidance July 2006, slide 1 ICH Q9 QUALITY RISK MANAGEMENT.
Application of the principles of QbD in vaccines production Andrea Pranti.
Achieving and Demonstrating “Quality-by-Design” with Respect to Drug Release/dissolution Performance for Conventional or Immediate Release Solid Oral Dosage.
Risk-Based CMC Review Paradigm
Organizational Gaps in Reaching the “Desired State” Helen Winkle.
Slide 1 May 2008 Training Workshop on Pharmaceutical Development with focus on Paediatric Formulations Mumbai, India Date: May 2008 QUALITY BY DESIGN.
Quality by Design Application of Pharmaceutical QbD for Enhancement of the Solubility and Dissolution of a Class II BCS Drug using Polymeric Surfactants.
Establishing Drug release/Dissolution Specifications – QBD Approach Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Office of New Drug Quality Assessment (ONDQA), OPS, CDER Advisory.
D. Christopher Watts, Ph.D. Office of Pharmaceutical Science, CDER, FDA Science Seminar Series for the Office of Commissioner April 9, 2004 Process Analytical.
Excipient QbD Concepts to Enhance the Development of Robust Drug Products Priscilla S. Zawislak Global Regulatory Affairs Manager - Ashland Inc. Chair.
1 Supplements and Other Changes to an Approved Application By: Richard J. Stec Jr., Ph.D. February 7, 2007.
Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical Science, CDER, FDA ACPS Subcommittee on Manufacturing Science: Identification and Prioritization.
1 PAT and Biological Products Tom Layloff FDA-SGE Management Sciences for Health The views expressed here are those of the author and not necessarily.
Quality by Design (QbD) Myth : An expensive development tool ! Fact : A tool that makes product development and commercial scale manufacturing simple !
1-7.The ICH Q8 “Minimal Approach” to Pharmaceutical Development
Parametric Tolerance Interval Test for Delivered Dose Uniformity (DDU) Working Group Update Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Office of New Quality Assessment (ONDQA,
1 Regulatory Aspects of Pharmaceutical Excipients PQRI Workshop Nick Buhay Acting Director Division of Manufacturing and Product Quality Office of Compliance.
1 An Update on ICH Guideline Q8 – Pharmaceutical Development FDA Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science: 5 Oct 2006 Dr John C Berridge Senior Regulatory.
Stability of FPPs- Conducting, Bracketing, Matrixing Sultan Ghani.
Quality by Design & Question-Based Review: Observations by the Generic Pharmaceutical Industry Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science October 5,
Challenges and Opportunities in Enhancement of the CMC Section of NDAs: Quality – by - Design Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical.
PhRMA Perspective on FDA Final Report FDA Advisory Committee on Pharmaceutical Sciences October 20, 2004 G.P. Migliaccio, Pfizer Inc.
Risk-Based CMC Review - OGD Perspective Gary J. Buehler, R.Ph. Director Office of Generic Drugs July 21, 2004 Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science.
Molecule-to-Market-Place Quality
COMPARABILITY PROTOCOLUPDATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCE Manufacturing Subcommittee July 20-21, 2004 Stephen Moore, Ph.D. Chemistry Team.
Bioequivalence of Locally Acting Gastrointestinal Drugs: An Overview
Satish Mallya January 20-22, |1 | 2-3. Pharmaceutical Development Satish Mallya Quality Workshop, Copenhagen May 18-21, 2014 May 18-21,2014.
10:00 A.M. – Noon 7 June 2004 ICH Quality Plenary Meeting.
Progress in FDA’s Drug Product Quality Initiative Janet Woodcock, M.D. November 13, 2003.
1 Office of Pharmaceutical Science on Jon Clark FDA/CDER/OPS Associate Director for Policy Development.
General Aspects of Quality assessment of multisource interchangeable medicines Rutendo Kuwana Technical Officer, WHO, Geneva Training workshop: Assessment.
Using Product Development Information to Address the Bioequivalence Challenges of Highly-variable Drugs Lawrence X. Yu, Ph. D. Director for Science Office.
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Subcommittee of the ACPS Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. ACPS Meeting October 22, 2002.
Introduction to the Meeting Introduction to the Meeting Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences Clinical Pharmacology Subcommittee November 17-18,
ICH Quality Topics Update
CDER / Office of Compliance ACPS October 5, 2006 Joseph C. Famulare Acting Deputy Director Office of Compliance CDER / FDA.
FDA’s Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science The Subcommittee on Process Analytical Technologies (PAT): Closing Remarks Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy.
Lawrence X. Yu, Ph.D. Director for Science Office of Generic Drugs, OPS, CDER, FDA ACPS Meeting, ACPS Meeting, Oct. 22, 2003 Office of Generic Drugs Research.
Drug Quality Regulations for the 21 st Century PhRMA Perspective Manufacturing Subcommittee Meeting – May 21, 2003 Gerry Migliaccio Pfizer Inc.
Examining Drug Quality Regulation Douglas C. Throckmorton, MD Deputy Director Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Public Meeting on 21 CFR February,
FDA Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science and Clinical Pharmacology July 22-23, 2008 Introduction and Update Helen N. Winkle Director, Office of.
Topic #2: Quality by Design and Pharmaceutical Equivalence Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Office of Pharmaceutical Science Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
开发报批美国 FDA 的仿制药 与相关问题探讨 上海复星普适医药科技有限公司何平. 内容提要 开发仿制药的重要性和机遇 开发仿制药的重要性和机遇 开发仿制药的挑战 开发仿制药的挑战 申报仿制药的分类 申报仿制药的分类 仿制药研发团队 仿制药研发团队 仿制药的研发过程 仿制药的研发过程 QbD 在制剂开发中怎么体现.
POST APPROVAL CHANGE MANAGEMENT PROTOCOLS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION
An Update on ICH Guideline – Pharmaceutical Development
Quality by design (Qbd)
Quality System.
QUALITY BY DESIGN Training Workshop on Pharmaceutical Development with focus on Paediatric Formulations Mumbai, India Date: May 2008.
ICH Q9: Quality Risk Management
ICH Q9: Quality Risk Management
Quality by Design.
Presentation transcript:

Implementation of Quality by Design (QbD): Status, Challenges and Next Steps Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Office of New Drug Quality Assessment (ONDQA), OPS, CDER Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science (ACPS) October 5, 2006

Outline FDA Presentations Topic Introduction - Moheb Nasr, Ph.D. FDA Perspective ONDQA Initiatives Chi-Wan Chen, Ph.D. OGD Initiatives Lawrence Yu, Ph.D. OBP Initiatives Steven Kozlowski, M.D. GPHA Perspectives Gordon Johnston PhRMA Perspectives Robert Baum, Ph.D. Summary and Next Steps Helen Winkle Discussions and Recommendations

The Desired State: A Mutual Goal of Industry, Society, and the Regulators A maximally efficient, agile, flexible pharmaceutical manufacturing sector that reliably produces high-quality drug products without extensive regulatory oversight. Janet Woodcock, M.D. October 5, 2005

What is Quality by Design (QbD)? In a Quality by Design system: The product is designed to meet patient needs and performance requirements The process is designed to consistently meet product critical quality attributes The impact of starting raw materials and process parameters on product quality is understood The process is evaluated and updated to allow for consistent quality over time Critical sources of process variability are identified and controlled Appropriate control strategies are developed

Product Knowledge Continuous Improvement Quality by Design Process Understanding Product Knowledge Product Specifications Product Quality Attributes Process Controls Process Parameters Desired Product Performance Process Design Unit operations, control strategy, etc. Product Design Dosage form, stability, formulation, etc. Cpk, robustness, etc. Process Performance Quality by Design

Approaches to Pharmaceutical Development Aspects Current QbD Pharmaceutical Development Empirical, Random, Focus on optimization Systematic, Multivariate experiments, Focus on control strategy and robustness Manufacturing Process Fixed Adjustable within design space, managed by company’s quality systems Process Control Some in-process testing PAT utilized, Process operations tracked and trended Product Specification Primary means of quality control, based on batch data Part of the overall quality control strategy, based on desired product performance Control Strategy By testing and inspection Risk-based control strategy , real-time release possible

Why QbD? Current System Desired State Submission (Lack of PD Traditional CMC Review Development (Empirical) & MS) Desired State Submission (Knowledge Rich in PD Development (QbD) PQAS & MS)

Terminology Quality Attributes Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) A physical, chemical, or microbiological property or characteristic of a material that directly or indirectly impacts quality Critical Quality Attributes (CQAs) A quality attribute that must be controlled within predefined limits to ensure that the product meets its intended safety, efficacy, stability and performance Critical Process Parameters (CPPs) A process parameter that must be controlled within predefined limits to ensure the product meets its pre-defined quality attributes

Dosage Form and Manufacturing Process Development Start product design in early phases of development This may be an iterative/continuous process Base critical quality attributes on desired/targeted product performance requirements QbD is full understanding of product and process and implementation of that understanding QbD is more than traditional process and formulation optimization QbD is more than justification of CQAs and CPPs

Dosage Form and Manufacturing Process Development Product design Evaluate early phase data - determination of optimum dose, route of administration, therapeutic index, PK profile, site of absorption, chemical stability, etc. Identify and justify desired quality attributes Prior knowledge can also be used to justify selection of certain quality attributes

Dosage Form and Manufacturing Process Development Formulation development Materials Chemical and physical properties affect CQA e.g., moisture and particle size distribution, which may influence downstream process parameters and product performance Need to understand variability in order to adjust process and/or set appropriate controls Selection of formulation components based on compatibility and performance requirements

Dosage Form and Manufacturing Process Development For each unit operation Understand how process parameters affect CQA Conduct risk analysis/assessment to: Identify significant process parameters and raw materials attributes Develop risk mitigation strategies Establish appropriate control strategy to minimize effects of variability on CQAs

Dosage Form and Manufacturing Process Development – Design Space ICH Q8 Definition The multidimensional combination and interaction of input variables (e.g., material attributes) and process parameters that have been demonstrated to provide assurance of quality Design space is proposed by the applicant and is subject to regulatory assessment and approval Design space concept is applicable to new and legacy drug products Manufacturing experience and product knowledge

Designing/Setting Specifications in the Future Relate specifications to critical quality attributes Provide scientific rationale to justify proposed acceptance criteria In a QbD system, certain traditional end product release testing may prove to be unnecessary

Real Time Release (RTR) Ability to evaluate and ensure acceptable quality of in-process and/or final product based on process data, including valid combination of: Assessment of material attributes by direct and/or indirect process measurements, Assessment of critical process parameters and their effect on in-process material attributes Process controls

Implementation Challenges Different strategies/approaches to accommodate diversity of drug products: Small chemicals vs. large Biologicals Oral solids vs. complex/novel dosage forms Drug vs. Combination Products Expectations for a QbD - based submissions while addressing traditional requirements Providing regulatory flexibility while assuring product quality

Implementation Challenges Industry continuous apprehension in sharing information with FDA Different regulatory processes (BLA, NDA, ANDA, follow-on, etc.) and associated regulatory practices and cultures Integration of review and inspection Workload FDA Resources Cultural changes needed in industry and FDA

FDA’s Expectations The current system is adequate for regulatory submission Quality is assured by testing and inspection Considerable regulatory oversight Substantial efforts and considerable waste However, QbD is the desired approach QbD principles should result in a higher level of assurance of product quality Additional product and process understanding could lead to regulatory flexibility Implementation of QbD by industry could enhance manufacturing efficiency Focus remains on availability of safe, effective and high quality pharmaceuticals

        Questions Do you agree that application of QbD principles should result in (1) a higher level of assurance in product quality, (2) more flexibility for the applicant to make continuous improvement; and (3) less need for FDA regulatory oversight on post-approval changes? Should FDA develop a new guidance on QbD to facilitate its implementation or rely only on ICH guidelines? What are the relevant scientific areas of disagreement among the stakeholders that the FDA should seek to establish consensus through additional efforts?

        Questions Are there additional mechanisms for educating reviewers and industry on changes being made? Are the ONDQA plans and efforts adequate to implement QbD? OGD Question-based Review initiative is currently limited to generic drug product. Should it be expanded to include drug substance? Should FDA develop a pilot program to explore specific QbD issues that are important for biotechnology products?