IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe 1 Content of the application for a CEP...
-
Upload
maryann-wade -
Category
Documents
-
view
224 -
download
3
Transcript of IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe 1 Content of the application for a CEP...
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
1
Content of the application for a CEP
Content of the application for a CEP
Hélène BRUGUERA
Deputy Head
Certification of Substances Division
Hélène BRUGUERA
Deputy Head
Certification of Substances Division
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
2
• Process to obtain a CEP: outlined in Resolution AP-CSP(07) 1
• “Content of the dossier”:– Chemical purity (revised May 2007)
– TSE risk
• See docs on web site www.edqm.eu
• Process to obtain a CEP: outlined in Resolution AP-CSP(07) 1
• “Content of the dossier”:– Chemical purity (revised May 2007)
– TSE risk
• See docs on web site www.edqm.eu
Send an application to EDQM
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
3
How long does it take?How long does it take?
• Timeframes:– Applicant notified by EDQM on the assessment
conclusion• Within 5 months of receipt of new dossier• Within 4 months of receipt of additional information
– Responses expected• within 6 months for original demand • within 3 month for any subsequent demand
– Responses assessed within 4 months
• Timeframes:– Applicant notified by EDQM on the assessment
conclusion• Within 5 months of receipt of new dossier• Within 4 months of receipt of additional information
– Responses expected• within 6 months for original demand • within 3 month for any subsequent demand
– Responses assessed within 4 months
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
4
The situationThe situation
• Mean time to obtain a CEP (chemical): 20 months
• 3% of CEPs obtained after 1st evaluation• 70% of CEPs: 2-3 rounds
• Mean time to obtain a CEP (chemical): 20 months
• 3% of CEPs obtained after 1st evaluation• 70% of CEPs: 2-3 rounds
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
5
How can I speed up the granting of my CEP for chemical purity ?How can I speed up the granting of my CEP for chemical purity ?
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
6
Send a complete applicationSend a complete application
• Application form (for new application) www.edqm.eu
• Dossier in English preferably (or French); 1 copy;
• Quality Overall Summary (electronic+paper)
• Samples of 1 or 2 commercial batches
• Application form (for new application) www.edqm.eu
• Dossier in English preferably (or French); 1 copy;
• Quality Overall Summary (electronic+paper)
• Samples of 1 or 2 commercial batches
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
7
At receiptAt receipt
• Validation of application: check of completeness• If application receivable: dossier nr allocated + clock
start• New applications blocked if deficient:
– Missing pieces (form, declarations, dossier,…)– Technical reasons:
• Refer to the current Ph. Eur monograph• Description of route of synthesis and/or impurity profile of
the starting material• Use of Class I solvents without proper justification and
control
• Validation of application: check of completeness• If application receivable: dossier nr allocated + clock
start• New applications blocked if deficient:
– Missing pieces (form, declarations, dossier,…)– Technical reasons:
• Refer to the current Ph. Eur monograph• Description of route of synthesis and/or impurity profile of
the starting material• Use of Class I solvents without proper justification and
control
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
8
• Technical reasons (cont)– Suitable information on impurities, solvents,…– Presence of validation data– Quantitative method to replace a non-specific TLC
test of the monograph– Sterile substances: validation of the sterilisation
• If application not receivable: dossier nr allocated but clock does not start. The company has 6 months to submit info + clock start
• 30% of new applications blocked in 2007 (most of them unblocked)
• Technical reasons (cont)– Suitable information on impurities, solvents,…– Presence of validation data– Quantitative method to replace a non-specific TLC
test of the monograph– Sterile substances: validation of the sterilisation
• If application not receivable: dossier nr allocated but clock does not start. The company has 6 months to submit info + clock start
• 30% of new applications blocked in 2007 (most of them unblocked)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
9
How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
10
Administrative info (applic. form)Administrative info (applic. form)
• Name and addresses of the parties involved (all sites)
• Declarations (GMP, Willingness to be inspected, Use of animal (TSE risk or other origin) / human material)
• History of the substance (give details)• Retest period requested ?
• Name and addresses of the parties involved (all sites)
• Declarations (GMP, Willingness to be inspected, Use of animal (TSE risk or other origin) / human material)
• History of the substance (give details)• Retest period requested ?
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
11
Technical documentationTechnical documentation
• PA/PH/CEP (04) 1: Content of dossier for chemical purity
• <=> 3.2.S of CTD– General information– Route of synthesis– Impurities, solvents, catalysts– Control of the substance (specification and
methods)– Analytical validation-suitability of the monograph– (Stability is optional)
• PA/PH/CEP (04) 1: Content of dossier for chemical purity
• <=> 3.2.S of CTD– General information– Route of synthesis– Impurities, solvents, catalysts– Control of the substance (specification and
methods)– Analytical validation-suitability of the monograph– (Stability is optional)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
12
3.2.S.2.2 Manufacturing Process3.2.S.2.2 Manufacturing Process
• Flow chart
• Detailed description of the process, including quantities
• Maximum/typical batch size and yields
• Describe any reprocessing/recovery of materials
• Flow chart
• Detailed description of the process, including quantities
• Maximum/typical batch size and yields
• Describe any reprocessing/recovery of materials
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
13
Semi-synthetic products: Fermentation steps involved in synthesis of starting material– Characterisation of fermented starting material, incl.
detailed impurity profile, compliance with the general monograph 1468
– Carry-over of fermentation impurities– Use TSE risk substances in manufacture?
• Different sites, different manufacturing methods or alternatives, reprocessing, in one dossier: – impurity profile of final substance unchanged– detailed information
Semi-synthetic products: Fermentation steps involved in synthesis of starting material– Characterisation of fermented starting material, incl.
detailed impurity profile, compliance with the general monograph 1468
– Carry-over of fermentation impurities– Use TSE risk substances in manufacture?
• Different sites, different manufacturing methods or alternatives, reprocessing, in one dossier: – impurity profile of final substance unchanged– detailed information
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
14
3.2.S.2.3 Control of Materials3.2.S.2.3 Control of Materials
• Starting materials: TOP 2 deficiency in 2007– Propose and justify which substance(s) is the starting
material(s) e.g. incorporated as a significant structural fragment into the structure of the final substance. Is the substance purchased or manufactured in-house ?
– Short steps synthesis: description of its route of synthesis, and detailed impurity profile (related substances, reagents, solvents, catalysts)
– Suitable specifications - limits for impurities, solvents,…– Description of carry-over of its impurities to the final
substance– Where more than one supplier is used batch results for the
final substance manufactured from the different suppliers
• Starting materials: TOP 2 deficiency in 2007– Propose and justify which substance(s) is the starting
material(s) e.g. incorporated as a significant structural fragment into the structure of the final substance. Is the substance purchased or manufactured in-house ?
– Short steps synthesis: description of its route of synthesis, and detailed impurity profile (related substances, reagents, solvents, catalysts)
– Suitable specifications - limits for impurities, solvents,…– Description of carry-over of its impurities to the final
substance– Where more than one supplier is used batch results for the
final substance manufactured from the different suppliers
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
15
3.2.S.2.3 Control of Materials3.2.S.2.3 Control of Materials
• Describe specifications for all reagents, solvents used– Purity tests for solvents (e.g benzene in toluene, acetone,
ethanol)– Specifications for pure and recovered solvents – Quality of water
• Include specification of recovered materials if any
• Describe specifications for all reagents, solvents used– Purity tests for solvents (e.g benzene in toluene, acetone,
ethanol)– Specifications for pure and recovered solvents – Quality of water
• Include specification of recovered materials if any
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
16
3.2.S.3.2 Impurities3.2.S.3.2 Impurities
Need to address:• Organic impurities• Inorganic impurities (catalysts,…)• Residual solvents• Genotoxic impurities
Need to address:• Organic impurities• Inorganic impurities (catalysts,…)• Residual solvents• Genotoxic impurities
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
17
3.2.S.3.2 Organic impurities3.2.S.3.2 Organic impurities
• Discussion on impurities should cover: – Potential impurities, origin, correspondence with
transparency list of the monograph and individual impurity results
– Use of monograph nomenclature or correlation with monograph nomenclature required
– Which impurities are actually present? Levels found in production batches (actual data needed) - chromatograms
• Discussion on impurities should cover: – Potential impurities, origin, correspondence with
transparency list of the monograph and individual impurity results
– Use of monograph nomenclature or correlation with monograph nomenclature required
– Which impurities are actually present? Levels found in production batches (actual data needed) - chromatograms
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
18
Organic impurities (cont)Organic impurities (cont)
Need to address:• Suitability of the method(s) of the
monograph for the detection of all impurities present in the material
• If the monograph is not suitable then need to supplement it with an additional (validated!) method
• Set appropriate limits
Need to address:• Suitability of the method(s) of the
monograph for the detection of all impurities present in the material
• If the monograph is not suitable then need to supplement it with an additional (validated!) method
• Set appropriate limits
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
19
3.2.S.3.2 Residual solvents3.2.S.3.2 Residual solvents
ICH guideline Q3C CPMP Concept paper (2003)
• Data for ALL solvents used during synthesis (incl. 1st steps)
• Batch results + typical chromatograms• Solvents likely to be present/used in the last
steps• justified limits (ICH or lower) • validated test methods • mentioned on CEP (+ method appended)
ICH guideline Q3C CPMP Concept paper (2003)
• Data for ALL solvents used during synthesis (incl. 1st steps)
• Batch results + typical chromatograms• Solvents likely to be present/used in the last
steps• justified limits (ICH or lower) • validated test methods • mentioned on CEP (+ method appended)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
20
3.2.S.3.2 Other impurities3.2.S.3.2 Other impurities
• Demonstrate the absence of particular reagents in the final substance or set a limit
• Demonstrate absence of residues of catalysts or set a limit – EMEA draft guideline on catalysts
(CPMP/SWP/4446/00)
• Demonstrate the absence of particular reagents in the final substance or set a limit
• Demonstrate absence of residues of catalysts or set a limit – EMEA draft guideline on catalysts
(CPMP/SWP/4446/00)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
21
3.2.S.3.2 Genotoxic impurities3.2.S.3.2 Genotoxic impurities
TOP 1 Question in 2007
• Cf NfG CPMP/SWP/5199/02 since 01/2007• Applicable to:
• substances not yet marketed in Europe• new routes of synthesis
• Specific discussion with regard to genotoxic impurities:• Look for potential genotoxicity (structural alerts)• Consult literature and databases
TOP 1 Question in 2007
• Cf NfG CPMP/SWP/5199/02 since 01/2007• Applicable to:
• substances not yet marketed in Europe• new routes of synthesis
• Specific discussion with regard to genotoxic impurities:• Look for potential genotoxicity (structural alerts)• Consult literature and databases
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
22
GTI (cont)GTI (cont)• Principles:
– Data available on maximal exposure– TTC approach (1.5 g/day)– Tox tests (AMES)
• Analytical (sensitive) methods to show residual levels• Demonstrate absence (<30% of max exposure or
TTC) or justify a limit• The use of the substance may be taken into
consideration
==> « Questions and Answers » to be published on EMEA website
• Principles:– Data available on maximal exposure– TTC approach (1.5 g/day)– Tox tests (AMES)
• Analytical (sensitive) methods to show residual levels• Demonstrate absence (<30% of max exposure or
TTC) or justify a limit• The use of the substance may be taken into
consideration
==> « Questions and Answers » to be published on EMEA website
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
23
3.2.S.4 Control of Drug Substance3.2.S.4 Control of Drug Substance
• Refer to the right monograph and its tests• Include additional/alternative tests if necessary• Use quantitative method for related substances • Appropriate limits for impurities, solvents,…in
accordance with the process and relevant guidelines - General monograph 2034
• Adequate methods description -> format to be appended to the CEP
• Refer to the right monograph and its tests• Include additional/alternative tests if necessary• Use quantitative method for related substances • Appropriate limits for impurities, solvents,…in
accordance with the process and relevant guidelines - General monograph 2034
• Adequate methods description -> format to be appended to the CEP
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
24
3.2.S.4 Control of Drug Substance3.2.S.4 Control of Drug Substance
For monographs which still include a
non-specific & non-quantitative TLC method:
suitably validated QUANTITATIVE method for related substances & suitable limits for impurities to be proposed in the application
For monographs which still include a
non-specific & non-quantitative TLC method:
suitably validated QUANTITATIVE method for related substances & suitable limits for impurities to be proposed in the application
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
25
3.2.S.4 How to set limits for related substances3.2.S.4 How to set limits for related substances
• Impurities of the monograph: limits of the monograph• “Other detectable impurities” of the monograph are known
substances detected by the method but NOT normally present above the identification threshold from general monograph (2034).
• Additional impurities (any impurity not on the transparency list) : apply the general monograph (2034)
- Individual limits for specified impurities- Individual limits for identified non-qualified
impurities- Limit for unspecified impurities
• Impurities of the monograph: limits of the monograph• “Other detectable impurities” of the monograph are known
substances detected by the method but NOT normally present above the identification threshold from general monograph (2034).
• Additional impurities (any impurity not on the transparency list) : apply the general monograph (2034)
- Individual limits for specified impurities- Individual limits for identified non-qualified
impurities- Limit for unspecified impurities
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
26
Limits for related substancesLimits for related substances
• For products out of the scope of the general monograph 2034 (antibiotics, peptides,…):– Characterise the impurity profile– Apply the principles of the general monograph
(limits for specified, unspecified, total impurities)– Propose justified limits (not necessarily ICH Q3A)
on the CEP
• For products out of the scope of the general monograph 2034 (antibiotics, peptides,…):– Characterise the impurity profile– Apply the principles of the general monograph
(limits for specified, unspecified, total impurities)– Propose justified limits (not necessarily ICH Q3A)
on the CEP
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
27
Qualification of Additional Impurities
• Qualification by use– History of the product: – Consistency with manufacturing capability– Shown to be present in other products
already approved in Europe• Qualification by toxicological data• Or limited to qualification/identification
threshold
Qualification of Additional Impurities
• Qualification by use– History of the product: – Consistency with manufacturing capability– Shown to be present in other products
already approved in Europe• Qualification by toxicological data• Or limited to qualification/identification
threshold
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
28
3.2.S.4.3 Method validation3.2.S.4.3 Method validation
• All in-house methods should be validated (incl. non-routine methods)ICH Q2B for methodologyTypical chromatograms
• Cross-validation against Ph. Eur methods: comparative results obtained from the same
samples
• All in-house methods should be validated (incl. non-routine methods)ICH Q2B for methodologyTypical chromatograms
• Cross-validation against Ph. Eur methods: comparative results obtained from the same
samples
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
29
3.2.S.4.4 Batch data3.2.S.4.4 Batch data
– Should be in line with specification– Details on batches tested (batch nr, size, dates of
manufacture, analysis)– Numerical figures (“complies” not appropriate)
– Should be in line with specification– Details on batches tested (batch nr, size, dates of
manufacture, analysis)– Numerical figures (“complies” not appropriate)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
30
3.2.S.5 Reference Standards or materials3.2.S.5 Reference Standards or materials
• Use the Ph. Eur. standards (EPCRS) or provide traceability to these standards and certificates for the in-house standards used
• Use the Ph. Eur. standards (EPCRS) or provide traceability to these standards and certificates for the in-house standards used
3.2.S.6 Container closure system3.2.S.6 Container closure system
• Provide a description of the commercial packaging
• Provide specification for all materials used• Reference compliance with appropriate guidelines
(i.e. EMEA CHMP Plastic Primary Packaging Materials (CPMP/QWP/4359/03))
• Provide a description of the commercial packaging
• Provide specification for all materials used• Reference compliance with appropriate guidelines
(i.e. EMEA CHMP Plastic Primary Packaging Materials (CPMP/QWP/4359/03))
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
31
3.2.S.7 Stability 3.2.S.7 Stability
Option ! EMEA guideline “Stability testing of existing active substances” EMEA guideline on “Declaration of storage conditions for
medicinal products”
• ICH conditions incl accelerated• Study description - relevant parameters•Detailed results• Validation of in-house methods (stability
indicating)
Option ! EMEA guideline “Stability testing of existing active substances” EMEA guideline on “Declaration of storage conditions for
medicinal products”
• ICH conditions incl accelerated• Study description - relevant parameters•Detailed results• Validation of in-house methods (stability
indicating)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
32
• Proposed retest period and storage conditions:– In accordance with stability results (real time +
accelerated)– Extrapolation possible (according to ICH)
• Proposed retest period and storage conditions:– In accordance with stability results (real time +
accelerated)– Extrapolation possible (according to ICH)
3.2.S.7 Stability 3.2.S.7 Stability
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
33
How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
34
The QOSThe QOS
• QOS = Quality Overall Summary
• Summary of the application highlighting the key points+suitability of the monograph
• The expert can be anyone having sufficient knowledge/experience in the topic, i.e. from the applicant’s company
• CV of the expert to be appended
• QOS = Quality Overall Summary
• Summary of the application highlighting the key points+suitability of the monograph
• The expert can be anyone having sufficient knowledge/experience in the topic, i.e. from the applicant’s company
• CV of the expert to be appended
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
35
The QOS (cont)The QOS (cont)
• Use template of QOS available on EDQM website– Helps to prepare the QOS– Helps for the assessment report
• Submit electronic QOS (Word) to EDQM in addition to paper copy
• Use template of QOS available on EDQM website– Helps to prepare the QOS– Helps for the assessment report
• Submit electronic QOS (Word) to EDQM in addition to paper copy
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
36
How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?How can I speed up the granting of a CEP for chemical purity ?
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
• Send a complete application
• Submit a good technical documentation
• Prepare a good QOS
• Hints
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
37
HintsHints
• The dossier should be Clear, Concise, Readable, Obtained from recent data
• The e-QOS should be in line with the dossier• Follow recommendations described in
“Content of the dossier” + “TOP TEN deficiencies”
• Technical Advice procedure, workshops,…• Submit electronic files
• The dossier should be Clear, Concise, Readable, Obtained from recent data
• The e-QOS should be in line with the dossier• Follow recommendations described in
“Content of the dossier” + “TOP TEN deficiencies”
• Technical Advice procedure, workshops,…• Submit electronic files
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
38
Electronic submissionsElectronic submissions
Electronic dossier (new appl., revisions, add info): pdf files welcome– e-QOS obtained from EDQM template
(Word)– Paper copies still required if > 10 pages– Dropbox to exchange files– EDQM sends requests for info by e-mail
Electronic dossier (new appl., revisions, add info): pdf files welcome– e-QOS obtained from EDQM template
(Word)– Paper copies still required if > 10 pages– Dropbox to exchange files– EDQM sends requests for info by e-mail
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
39
Additional informationAdditional information
• Submit in time and in 2 parts:– Questions/Anwers document addressing all
deficiencies. To be submitted electronically + paper copies
– Updated sections of the dossier as annexes (electronic + paper)
• Submit in time and in 2 parts:– Questions/Anwers document addressing all
deficiencies. To be submitted electronically + paper copies
– Updated sections of the dossier as annexes (electronic + paper)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
40
And also…And also…
• Timetables noted on the letter of acknowledgement of receipt
• No AR for additional info, but treated in time
• Do not contact EDQM before the expected dates
• No possibility of « special fast track »
• Timetables noted on the letter of acknowledgement of receipt
• No AR for additional info, but treated in time
• Do not contact EDQM before the expected dates
• No possibility of « special fast track »
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
41
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
42
You have got the CEP, it is not finished….
You have got the CEP, it is not finished….
The CEP has to be maintained through the Revision systemThe CEP has to be maintained through the Revision system
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
43
Revisions/Renewals of CEPs
Revisions/Renewals of CEPs
Hélène BRUGUERA
Deputy Head
Certification of Substances Division
Hélène BRUGUERA
Deputy Head
Certification of Substances Division
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
44
Basic principles for maintaining a CEPBasic principles for maintaining a CEP• Any change (administrative or
technical) to be reported to EDQM for approval Revised CEP granted
• Holder to inform customers and/or authorities with revised CEP
• Original CEP: valid 5 years. Need to apply for renewal in time.
• After renewal, CEP valid for an unlimited period, provided the dossier is kept up-to-date
• Any change (administrative or technical) to be reported to EDQM for approval Revised CEP granted
• Holder to inform customers and/or authorities with revised CEP
• Original CEP: valid 5 years. Need to apply for renewal in time.
• After renewal, CEP valid for an unlimited period, provided the dossier is kept up-to-date
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
45
Revisions of CEPs: BackgroundRevisions of CEPs: Background
• Based on EU Regulations on Variations to Marketing Applications
• Guideline on requirements on revision / renewal of CEPs (PA/PH/CEP (04) 2)
• New procedures for management of revision / renewal of CEPs (PA/PH/Exp. CEP/T (04) 18)
• Available on EDQM website
• Based on EU Regulations on Variations to Marketing Applications
• Guideline on requirements on revision / renewal of CEPs (PA/PH/CEP (04) 2)
• New procedures for management of revision / renewal of CEPs (PA/PH/Exp. CEP/T (04) 18)
• Available on EDQM website
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
46
Guideline on Requirements: documentationGuideline on Requirements: documentation• Application form (specific for revisions)• Technical data:
– Justification of change– Assurance that the conditions are fulfilled– Updated pages of the dossier– Specific supporting documents– COMPARATIVE DATA - Full batch results
• Application form (specific for revisions)• Technical data:
– Justification of change– Assurance that the conditions are fulfilled– Updated pages of the dossier– Specific supporting documents– COMPARATIVE DATA - Full batch results
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
47
Types of changesTypes of changes
• Notifications
• Minor changes
• Major changes
• Renewal
• Update following revision of the monograph / regulatory change
• Notifications
• Minor changes
• Major changes
• Renewal
• Update following revision of the monograph / regulatory change
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
48
NotificationsNotifications
• Change in holder, manufacturer references: holder name, address (no move),...
• Change in batch size by ≤ x 10• Minor changes to test procedures (no changes in
performances - few cases in practice)• Tightening limits (methods not affected)• Post-stability commitment data• Deletion of information from CEP: manuf. site, retest
period, country of origin for TSE
• Change in holder, manufacturer references: holder name, address (no move),...
• Change in batch size by ≤ x 10• Minor changes to test procedures (no changes in
performances - few cases in practice)• Tightening limits (methods not affected)• Post-stability commitment data• Deletion of information from CEP: manuf. site, retest
period, country of origin for TSE
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
49
NotificationNotificationTimescales and Fees
• Simple 2 weeks/500 euros • Multiple (max. 3) 30 days/1000 euros
Workflow: • No Acknowledgement of Receipt• Letter sent to advise that either the notifications has been
accepted as valid or has been rejected - No demand for additional information sent
• Revised CEP only issued when the information on the CEP is changed (i.e. and address)
Timescales and Fees• Simple 2 weeks/500 euros • Multiple (max. 3) 30 days/1000 euros
Workflow: • No Acknowledgement of Receipt• Letter sent to advise that either the notifications has been
accepted as valid or has been rejected - No demand for additional information sent
• Revised CEP only issued when the information on the CEP is changed (i.e. and address)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
50
Typical minor changesTypical minor changes
• Minor change in manufacture• Up scaling > x10• Change in specification (new or replaced test
parameter)• Change/Addition of manufacturing site• Change from a TSE risk to a non-TSE risk
material• Change/Addition of retest period on CEP
• Minor change in manufacture• Up scaling > x10• Change in specification (new or replaced test
parameter)• Change/Addition of manufacturing site• Change from a TSE risk to a non-TSE risk
material• Change/Addition of retest period on CEP
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
51
Minor ChangeMinor ChangeTimescales and Fees
• Single 1 month /1000 euros • Multiple (max. 3) 2 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if neccessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• EDQM has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
Timescales and Fees• Single 1 month /1000 euros • Multiple (max. 3) 2 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if neccessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• EDQM has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
52
Major changesMajor changes
• Any changes not included in the guideline (or conditions not fulfilled)
• Examples (chemical):– Introduction of new reagents, solvents– Alternative process ( Spec of the final substance
identical, otherwise new certificate)– Process replaced
• Examples (TSE):– Addition of new source countries or suppliers of
materials
• Any changes not included in the guideline (or conditions not fulfilled)
• Examples (chemical):– Introduction of new reagents, solvents– Alternative process ( Spec of the final substance
identical, otherwise new certificate)– Process replaced
• Examples (TSE):– Addition of new source countries or suppliers of
materials
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
53
Major ChangeMajor ChangeTimescales and Fees
• Single 3 months /1500 euros • Multiple (max. 3, 1 major) 3 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if necessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• DCEP has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
Timescales and Fees• Single 3 months /1500 euros • Multiple (max. 3, 1 major) 3 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if necessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• DCEP has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
54
Consolidated RevisionConsolidated RevisionTimescales and Fees
• Multiple revisions (> 3) 4 months/2500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if necessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• DCEP has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
Timescales and Fees• Multiple revisions (> 3) 4 months/2500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• One demand for additional information sent if necessary• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• DCEP has 30 days to evaluate the response• Revised CEP issued or demand for revision rejected
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
55
Monograph revisionMonograph revision
• Revised monographs published 3 times a year
• EDQM gives instructions to the holders:– Compliance with the monograph– Suitability of the monograph
• Timescales and Fees90 days/No fee
• Revised CEP issued if necessary after approval
• Revised monographs published 3 times a year
• EDQM gives instructions to the holders:– Compliance with the monograph– Suitability of the monograph
• Timescales and Fees90 days/No fee
• Revised CEP issued if necessary after approval
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
56
RenewalRenewal
• Holder shall apply about 6 months prior to expiry date• Declaration that no change occurred or• Updated dossier (CTD) with comprehensive list of
changes– General Monograph “Substances for
Pharmaceutical Use”– Recent European quality guidelines: eg impurities,
residual solvents, residual catalysts
Not an administrative job!
• Holder shall apply about 6 months prior to expiry date• Declaration that no change occurred or• Updated dossier (CTD) with comprehensive list of
changes– General Monograph “Substances for
Pharmaceutical Use”– Recent European quality guidelines: eg impurities,
residual solvents, residual catalysts
Not an administrative job!
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
57
RenewalRenewalTimescales and Fees
• 4 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• 120 days to evaluate the request • Revised CEP issued, demand for additional information sent or
demand for revision rejected• If Demand for additional information sent
• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• EDQM has 30 days (90 for TSE) to evaluate the response
Timescales and Fees• 4 months /1500 euros
Workflow: • Acknowledgement of Receipt sent within 5 days• 120 days to evaluate the request • Revised CEP issued, demand for additional information sent or
demand for revision rejected• If Demand for additional information sent
• Holder has 30 days to respond to this demand• EDQM has 30 days (90 for TSE) to evaluate the response
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
58
Common deficienciesCommon deficiencies
• Change in the analytical method: N7/R3• Replacement of a solvent: Major• Change of strain in fermentation
process: Major• New supplier of starting material when
route of synthesis is not identical: Major• Alternative process: if the specs are
changed : New application
• Change in the analytical method: N7/R3• Replacement of a solvent: Major• Change of strain in fermentation
process: Major• New supplier of starting material when
route of synthesis is not identical: Major• Alternative process: if the specs are
changed : New application
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
59
What to do with a revised CEPWhat to do with a revised CEP
• CEP ref number incremented– RX-CEP 2007-001-Rev YY
• Provide a copy to customers
• Update of relevant Marketing Applications Type IA variation in most cases
(cf. European regulations)
• CEP ref number incremented– RX-CEP 2007-001-Rev YY
• Provide a copy to customers
• Update of relevant Marketing Applications Type IA variation in most cases
(cf. European regulations)
IPA-EDQM Mumbai 11/2007 ©2007 EDQM, Council of Europe
60
Thank you !