Introduction to Topic #1: QbD approach for quality control and assurance of Dissolution Rate Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director, Office of Pharmaceutical.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Statistical Evaluation of Dissolution for Specification Setting and Stability Studies Fasheng Li Associate Director, Pharmaceutical Statistics Worldwide.
Advertisements

USP and Dissolution Testing Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Sciences 2 May 2005 Will Brown Staff Liaison to the Biopharmaceutics Expert Committee.
 Contracts  Subcontracting  Suppliers  Complaints  Corrective and preventive actions (CAPA)  Internal audits  Management reviews Management requirements.
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,
EPSON STAMPING ISO REV 1 2/10/2000.
Integrating CMC Review & Inspection Industry Recommendations Joe Anisko April 24, 2003.
Pharmaceutical Nomenclature Issues and challenges Moheb M. Nasr, Ph.D. Acting Director Office of New Drug Chemistry (ONDC) OPS, CDER, FDA Advisory Committee.
Determine impurity level in relevant batches1
Implementation of Quality-by-Design: ONDQA Initiatives Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science October 5, 2006 Chi-wan Chen, Ph.D. Deputy Director.
Manufacturing Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science July 20-21, 2004 Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical.
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.
Individual Bioequivalence Lawrence J. Lesko, Ph.D. Director Office of Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical.
Regulatory requirements and benefits converting to Continued Process Verification.
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.
Huzairy Hassan School of Bioprocess Engineering UniMAP.
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.
ISO STANDARDS TRAINING & CONSULTING
Regulatory Update Ellen Leinfuss SVP, Life Sciences.
Achieving and Demonstrating “Quality-by-Design” with Respect to Drug Release/dissolution Performance for Conventional or Immediate Release Solid Oral Dosage.
Organizational Gaps in Reaching the “Desired State” Helen Winkle.
ACPS Advisory Committee Meeting October , 2002 ACPS Advisory Committee Meeting October , 2002 Scientific Considerations of Polymorphism in.
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.
Software Quality Assurance Lecture 4. Lecture Outline ISO ISO 9000 Series of Standards ISO 9001: 2000 Overview ISO 9001: 2008 ISO 9003: 2004 Overview.
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.
© 2011 Underwriters Laboratories Inc. All rights reserved. This document may not be reproduced or distributed without authorization. ASSET Safety Management.
FDA Recommendations: Sampling Plans for Blood Establishments Lore Fields MT(ASCP)SBB Consumer Safety Officer OBRR/CBER/FDA October 19, 2012.
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.
ACPS Meeting, October 19-20, 2004 BioINequivalence: Concept and Definition Lawrence X. Yu, Ph. D. Director for Science Office of Generic Drugs, OPS, CDER,
1-7.The ICH Q8 “Minimal Approach” to Pharmaceutical Development
A Qualitative Decision Making Tool to Aid in Defining the Number of Lots for a Process Validation Campaign Leslie Sidor — Amgen Inc Midwest Biopharmaceutical.
Important informations
1 An Update on ICH Guideline Q8 – Pharmaceutical Development FDA Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science: 5 Oct 2006 Dr John C Berridge Senior Regulatory.
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.
1 Basis of the Proposed Tactical Plan for a QbD approach for Quality Control and Assurance of Dissolution Rate Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director,
What Impact should ICH Q8 have on ICH Q6A Decision Trees?
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
The USP Performance Test Dissolution Systems Suitability Studies Walter W. Hauck, Ph.D. USP Consultant Presentation to Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical.
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
10:00 A.M. – Noon 7 June 2004 ICH Quality Plenary Meeting.
Blend Uniformity: Update Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D.. Background Issue: Assuring and documenting “adequacy of mixing” operations –PQRI’s Proposal Stratified.
Progress in FDA’s Drug Product Quality Initiative Janet Woodcock, M.D. November 13, 2003.
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.
CDER / Office of Compliance ACPS October 5, 2006 Joseph C. Famulare Acting Deputy Director Office of Compliance CDER / FDA.
Second Meeting of the FDA/ACPS Process Analytical Technology: Closing Remarks Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences.
FDA’s Advisory Committee for Pharmaceutical Science The Subcommittee on Process Analytical Technologies (PAT): Closing Remarks Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy.
Bioequivalence Criteria Research Plan Stella G. Machado, Ph.D. Office of Biostatistics and the Replicate Design Technical Committee Advisory Committee.
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.
Topic #2: Quality by Design and Pharmaceutical Equivalence Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Office of Pharmaceutical Science Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences CDER, FDA October 21, 2003 Dose Content Uniformity: Parametric Tolerance Interval Approach.
In vitro - In vivo Correlation
FDA’s IDE Decisions and Communications
Medical Device Regulatory Essentials: An FDA Division of Cardiovascular Devices Perspective Bram Zuckerman, MD, FACC Director, FDA Division of Cardiovascular.
Quality Risk Management
Quality System.
USP and Dissolution Testing
USP and Dissolution Testing
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.
Presentation transcript:

Introduction to Topic #1: QbD approach for quality control and assurance of Dissolution Rate Ajaz S. Hussain, Ph.D. Deputy Director, Office of Pharmaceutical Science, CDER, FDA ACPS Meeting, May 2005

Topic #1 ACPS Discussion Goals Seek ACPS recommendations on a proposed regulatory tactical plan  QbD based regulatory decision system for quality assurance and control of optimal drug dissolution rate over the life cycle of a product Are the tactical steps outlined consistent with the QbD goals we seek to achieve? What additional steps and/or changes would you recommend to improve this plan? What additional scientific evidence is necessary to support the development and implementation of this plan? General considerations for identifying and developing statistical procedures Any other specific recommendations?  Prioritization?

Proposed Steps Alternate regulatory approach – suitability of dissolution measurement system Gauge Reproducibility and Repeatability Study Using Pivotal Clinical or Bio Lot Systems-based decision tree or establishing dissolution rate specification Opportunities for utilizing the PAT approach for controlling dissolution rate and development of real time quality assurance strategies Decision tree for “design space” concept articulated in the draft ICH Q8 Develop a side-by-side comparison New and Generic Drugs and explain why the level of QA/QC confidence in the proposed approach should be higher than what is achieved under the current system

Proposed Steps Seek ACPS recommendation at the May 2005 meeting on general considerations for identifying and developing statistical procedures Develop a detailed proposal for a subsequent meeting of the ACPS Seek harmonization on the approach with other regulatory authorities (starting with ICH Q8 Part 2)

Topic #1 ACPS Discussion Goals Seek ACPS recommendations on a proposed regulatory tactical plan  QbD based regulatory decision system for quality assurance and control of optimal drug dissolution rate over the life cycle of a product Are the tactical steps outlined consistent with the QbD goals we seek to achieve? What additional steps and/or changes would you recommend to improve this plan? What additional scientific evidence is necessary to support the development and implementation of this plan? Any other specific recommendations?

QbD & Goals? A systematic process of defining optimal design specifications of a product, its manufacturing process and its quality control and assurance methods  High degree process understanding  High confidence of low risk of releasing a poor quality product  High efficiency through continuous learning and improvement Intended Use Route of administration Patient population ….. Product Design Design Specifications (Customer requirements) Manufacturing Process

The Process R&DQualityManufacturing CMC Review Biopharm Review Clinical Review Pharm/Tox Review Process Validation Approval CGMP Inspection Compliance Quality Control

Need for a “Quality System” Orientation

Quality System Requirements QS-9000 Third Edition element 4.2.5—Continuous Improvement (1998). For those product characteristics and process parameters that can be evaluated using variable data, continuous improvement means optimizing the characteristics and parameters at a target value and reducing variation around the value. For those product characteristics and process parameters that can only be evaluated using attribute data, continuous improvement is not possible until characteristics are conforming.  If attribute data results do not equal zero defects, it is by definition nonconforming product. Improvements made in these situations are definition corrective actions, not continuous improvement. Continuous improvement [shall be undertaken] in processes that have demonstrated stability, acceptable capability and performance.

USPXXIII 3-Stage Acceptance Rule Step 1, 6 tablets No Pass Yes Step 2, additional 6 tablets Yes No Step 3, additional 12 tablets Yes No Fail Pass

A Recent Proposal… A step in the right direction…..  Hauck, W.H., Foster, T., Sheinin, E., Cecil, T., Brown, W., Marques, M. and Williams, R.L. Oral Dosage Form Performance Test: New Dissolution Approaches. Pharm. Res. 22: (2005) Conclusions  (a) hypothesis testing, with clear delineation of consumer and producer risks  (b) testing by variables as opposed to testing by attribute  (c) a tolerance interval approach to set acceptance criteria  (d) more flexible study design But …. Several challenges first need to be addressed (e.g., measurement system and robust estimates of variability) and then it will be essential to find an appropriate balance between statistics and pharmaceutical science  One has to start with pharmaceutical science discussion before developing an appropriate statistical tool

Corrective Actions Provide the leverage for Continuous Improvement? A case of an Approved and Validated product follows….

This can be catastrophic for the business and availability of Important drugs A Warning Letter

Inability to resolve Out of Specification Observations… Undermines the credibility of decision system  Raises questions - adequacy of the current decision system  Increases the risk of releasing unacceptable quality product to the consumer  Contributes to the low efficiency

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

Need for improvement is not just limited to CAPA We need to be confident on our analyses of  Surveillance samples  Consumer complaints  Other investigations

Is the Current Approach to “Calibration” Adequate? Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

More U.S. Marines contract Malaria Wednesday, September 10, 2003 Posted: 9:25 AM EDT (1325 GMT) WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Ten more U.S. military personnel serving as part of the peacekeeping mission in Liberia are showing signs of having contracted malaria. We faced significant challenges in our analysis: Unexpected inter- laboratory differences that highlighted limitation of the current calibration procedure “We are at a loss to explain the difference between DPA’s and PHI-DO’s initial results. ……………….. We further contend that the Helium sparging does not remove dissolved air as well as the vacuum procedures and therefore could account for the additional 5 or 6% increase in the dissolution results. And finally, for this formulation basket wobble can significantly increase the dissolution values.” Prophylaxis compliance and not pharmaceutical quality was the reason DPA/CDER/FDA Memo B. J. Westenberger, 17 October 2003

Equally important is the need to Better understand the sources of variability in product performance and quality so as to establish the most appropriate design specifications  that support continuous improvement and address increasing complexity of product designs Develop measurements systems for products intended for non-oral route of administration and novel drug delivery systems Develop and implement globally harmonized proactive regulatory decision systems  For example: ICH Q6A and draft ICH Q8

Example: Pharmaceutical Development & Dissolution Specification Without pharmaceutical development information  Decision focus only on dissolution test data Test often used for both “in-process control” and final product testing  Decision characteristics focus only on “mean” Variability managed indirectly -“discriminating” test conditions and “tight” procrustean acceptance criteria Leads to a deterministic interpretation of specification (ignores the impact of random variability)  “Specifications are Standards” – can not be risk-based “Event Trees” not “Decision Trees”  Difficult to resolve “out of specification” observations  Post-approval changes and optimization or continuous improvement difficult

Dissolution specification without pharmaceutical development information Test 1 Test 2 Mean Dissolution Profiles (n=6) Pivotal clinical lots “Discriminating test” FDA 75% Applicant

Dissolution Test Problems: False +ives and -ives Test/Ref. Mean I. J. MacGilvery. Bioequivalence: A Canadian Regulatory Perspective. In, Pharmaceutical Bioequivalence. Eds. Welling, Tse, and Dighe. Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, (1992)).

Differences between US & Japan? *Due to ACS restrictions on discussing specific drugs, names of drugs available in open literature have been erased.

Differences between US & Japan? Due to ACS restrictions on discussing specific drugs, names of drugs available in open literature have been blocked.

ICH Q6A: Goal and Characteristics of Pharmaceutical Quality Decision System “The quality of drug substances and drug products is determined by their design, development, in-process controls, GMP controls, process validation, and by specifications applied to them throughout development and manufacture.” Characteristics Goal Life-cycle

What is the ICH Q8 Opportunity? Specifications In process controls Development Design Process validation GMP Controls ICH Q6A Decision Characteristics “…where the provision of greater understanding of pharmaceutical and manufacturing sciences can create a basis for flexible regulatory approaches.”

ACPS May SUPACDissolution IVIVC BCS ICH Q6A 2004, PAT & draft ICH Q8 Current State Desired State

ACPS Discussion The Measurement System  Cindy Buhse Overview of Current Regulatory Decision process  Mehul Mehta and Vibhakar Shah Current state of science  Lawrence Yu Basis of the proposed Tactical Plan  Ajaz Hussain ACPS recommendations for improving and/or modifying the proposed plan

Corrective Actions and Preventive Actions Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

Identifying Sources of Variability Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Steps necessary Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004

CAPA: Challenges Hussain, A.S. Biopharmaceutics and Drug Product Quality: Performance Tests for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. for Drug Products, A Look Into the Future. USP Annual Scientific Meeting "The Science of Quality“. September 26–30, 2004