adventures in compliance: converging on global regulatory
TRANSCRIPT
J. Mark Wiggins, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD)
Adventures in Compliance: Converging on Global Regulatory and Compendial Standards for Drug Substances and Products
Overall “Guiding” Principle
To promote public health by providing safe and effective medicines with consistent quality to extend and improve
the lives of patients around the world.
• Roles for:
– Regulators
– Pharmacopoeias
– Industry
• Benefit to:
– Patients
Multi-National / Local Companies(Innovator / Generic / Excipient / API / Product)(Pharmaceuticals / Biologics / Vaccines)
Medicines with Good QualityMedicines that are Available
Harmonized Quality Standards
Review / Approval / Inspection
2
Convergence Harmonization• Convergence
– to unite in a common interest or focus; move toward uniformity; tend to a common result or conclusion
• Harmonization
– process and results of adjusting differences or inconsistencies to bring significant features into agreement
Adventures in ComplianceAdventures can be exciting…daring…potentially dangerous…
Harmonization or Harmonisation?
3
Purpose and Significance:Pharmacopoeia / Monographs
• A pharmacopoeia’s core mission…protect public health …creating and making available public standards…help ensure the quality of medicines.
• Pharmacopoeias…reflect specifications approved by the regulatory body.
• Pharmacopoeial monographs…an important tool for assurance of the quality of pharmaceutical ingredients and products… through testing of their quality.
• Specifications in pharmacopoeias…a list of tests, references to analytical procedures, and appropriate acceptance criteria…
Source: www.who.int/medicines/publications/pharmprep/WHO_TRS_996_annex01.pdf?ua=1
4
Pharmacopoeia Harmonization:Long-Term Vision
• The "Ideal Pharmacopoeia" would contribute to product quality:
– By providing appropriate standardization
– By facilitating drug registration
– By supporting regulatory agencies
– Through a single, global compendial standard.
* “The Ideal Pharmacopoeia – A Model for the Future”Pharmaceutical Technology, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 122-125 (November 2008)
5
“A Single, Global Compendial Standard”:49 Active Pharmacopoeia Commissions / 36 Pharmacopoeias
ArgentinaCzech
RepublicHungary Japan Pakistan Slovakia Ukraine
Austria Denmark Iceland Kazakhstan Philippines SloveniaUnited
Kingdom
Belarus Egypt India Korea Poland SpainUnited
States
Belgium Finland Indonesia Lithuania Portugal Sweden Viet Nam
Brazil France Iran Mexico Romania Switzerland Europe
China Germany Ireland MontenegroRussian
FederationThailand Africa
Croatia Greece Italy Norway Serbia Turkey WHO
Source: WHO/2012 6
Good Pharmacopoeial Practices(GPhP) / WHO
NEW!
WHO Technical
Report No. 996
Published May-2016
Source: www.who.int/medicines/publications/pharmprep/WHO_TRS_996_annex01.pdf?ua=1
7
Adventures in Compliance
• Compliance with official compendial requirements is a legal and regulatory requirement in those countries/ regions in which the pharmacopoeia is applicable.
• A company must comply with:
– approved product registration and
– appropriate compendial requirements.
• HOW a company complies…there is flexibility…and there is complexity…
• CONSIDER: Publication of a NEW monograph.
8
Which came first?
The Monograph – or – The Approval?
Source:
Google Images
Depends on “who” you are!
Adventures in Compliance
9
Drug Substance/Product Specifications:Tests, Methods, Acceptance Criteria
Before Pharmacopoeia Monograph After Pharmacopoeia Monograph
Source: Google Images 10
• Before Monograph Elaboration
• Quality Standard (QS) reflects global product registrations (methods, limits)
• ≥ 150 country-specific registrations
11
US
EU (~30)
MOW #1
MOW #150
Registrations / QS(Updates / Renewals / Change Control)
Trying to Align: Product Registrationsand Compendial Requirements
Product Life-Cycle
• After Monograph Elaboration / Official
• Challenge: Resolve differences between monograph and global registrations (≥ 150)
• ≥ 49 specific pharmacopoeias
12
US
EU (~30)
MOW #150
Trying to Align: Product Registrationsand Compendial Requirements
Product Life-Cycle
Ideal Pharmacopoeia Harmonization
ProspectiveHarmonization
PharmacopoeiaIdeal
Goal:
Prospective Harmonization: New Monographs for APIs/Products
▪ Goal: To create a harmonized monograph from the beginning.
RetrospectiveHarmonization(PDG/ICH Q4B)
13
Monograph Development:Prior to Prospective Harmonization
Separate monograph submissions
14
USP Ph. Eur.Result: Different monographs
PharmaceuticalCompany
USP monograph alignedwith registrations
- Apply different limits.
- Run 2 different methods, or
- Demonstrate method equivalence.
Ph.Eur. monograph differedfrom registrations
Monograph Development:Prospective Harmonization (Pilot 1 – 2008)
Collaboration: monograph submission/development
15
PharmaceuticalCompany
USP Ph. Eur.
Single monograph proposedPossible revisions discussed
Possible revisions evaluated in labCommunication throughout development
Intended Result: Harmonized monograph
(Tests, Methods, Acceptance Criteria)
“Prospective Harmonization -API Pilot Project: Industry Perspective”,
Pharmeuropa 22.4 (Oct. 2010),USP PF 36.6 (Nov. 2010),
JPF 20.1 (Mar. 2011)
Scope:APIs
Monograph Development:Prospective Harmonization (Pilot 1 – 2011)
Collaboration: monograph outcome
16
PharmaceuticalCompany
USP Ph. Eur.
Actual Result: Harmonized monograph
(Tests, Methods, Acceptance Criteria)
Updates were required for productregistrations in >150 countries
to align with the new monograph
Scope:APIs
“Prospective Harmonization -API Pilot Project: Industry Perspective”,
Pharmeuropa 22.4 (Oct. 2010),USP PF 36.6 (Nov. 2010),
JPF 20.1 (Mar. 2011)
Prospective/Informal Harmonization:Current Perspective
Collaboration…then Expansion
17
Scope:APIs and Products
USP
KP JPIP
Ph. Eur.+ BP
ChP
Secondary Work: PDG, MOUs, Observers
GPhPs(Adopt / Adapt)
PharmaceuticalCompany
FBras PhRus
Primary Harmonization Work
Prospective/Informal Harmonization:Monographs Completed (USP/Ph. Eur./BP)
Monograph Monograph
Rizatriptan Benzoate Aprepitant Capsules
Montelukast Sodium Sitagliptin Phosphate
Montelukast Tablets Sitagliptin Tablets
Montelukast Chewable Tablets Raltegravir Potassium
Dorzolamide Eye Drops Raltegravir Tablets
Dorzolamide-Timolol Eye Drops Raltegravir Chewable Tablets
18
Demonstrated success. Need to continue/expand effort.
Compliance with Monograph Requirements:Lessons Learned
• Monograph development is not just about setting specifications, but also about practical considerations for methods, reference standards.
• In our experience, 80 – 90% of all questions/issues during monograph development are related to limits/controls for impurities/degradates.
• Change control to comply with compendial requirements:– is difficult and time consuming.– requires multiple impacted stakeholders.– impacts multiple products, registrations (≥ 150 countries).
• There is flexibility in approaches to compendial compliance, but must balance Quality Standard, Product Registrations, Site/External Quality Testing and Release, Material Control…
19
Flexibility Complexity
Compliance with Monograph Requirements:Options/Approaches (Flexibility/Complexity)
• Focus on Compliance: We have developed a new compendial review process to enable impact assessment with implementation planning/execution.
• Test-by-Test Consideration: Limits / Methods
• Differences in Limits
– Adopt/Not adopt the updated limits
• must apply tighter limits from monograph (compliance)
• may choose not to apply wider limits from monograph (consider impact to global product registrations)
20
• Differences in Methods (“MARK” Principle)– Merge
• Incorporate additional requirements from monograph into registered method (e.g. system suitability)
– Add• Include monograph method in addition to registered
method (e.g. additional identification test)
– Replace• Switch from registered method to monograph method
– Keep• Maintain registered method instead of monograph method
(NOTE: “Replace” or “Keep” options require equivalency)
21
Compliance with Monograph Requirements:Options/Approaches (Flexibility/Complexity)
Monograph Development:Adventures in Compliance
Collaboration / Convergence:• Prospectively harmonized monographs – API/Prod (Ph. Eur., BP, USP)
• Expansion of harmonized monographs – Natl. Pharms. (JP, IP, ChP, KP)
• Developed improved methods and new reference standards
Challenges / Compliance:• Changes to approved limits (assay widened; impurities tightened)
• Changes to approved methods (isocratic hold; system suitability)
• Introduced new methods (not in approved registration, e.g. identity)
• For a particular product family, Ph. Eur. monograph applied method from one dosage form to another dosage form, which impacted current product and new formulation/strength in development
– 3 different methods for Assay/Degradates in approved registrations
22
Practical Challenges – MonographImpurity Limits
Is this peak• an API process impurity?
• a degradate in the drug product?
Is this peak controlled as• a specified impurity?• unspecified impurity?
Address practical challenges associated with monograph development.– Methods, Reference Standards, Limits –
Overlapping?(Resolution)
23
Consider: ICH Q3A/Q3B, GPhP for Limits• Safety-based limits (approved) vs. Process capability.
• Control only degradates in drug product.
Peak identified?(Ref. Std.)
• After Monograph Elaboration / Official
• Outcome / Compliance Decision
– Requested that USP NOT harmonize with Ph. Eur.
– Requested revision for Ph. Eur., USP monographs
– Requested regulatory agreement to use previously approved methods
24
US
EU (~30)
MOW #150
Trying to Align: Product Registrationsand Compendial Requirements
US (USP) MOW (USP)
• Desired outcome / Future state
• Convergence of global registrations (≥ 150) and monographs (≥ 49)
• Requires planning, collaboration
25
US
EU (~30)
MOW #150
Trying to Align: Product Registrationsand Compendial Requirements
US (USP)
EU (Ph.Eur./BP)
MOW (USP)
MOW (Ph.Eur./BP)
Japan (JP) China (ChP)
Registrations / QS / Monographs
Product Life-Cycle
Recommendations:Vision for the Future
Shared Responsibility (Regulators, Pharmacopoeias, Industry):
“We try never to forget that medicine is for the people.”
(George W. Merck, December 1950)
Converging on Global Regulatory and Compendial Standards:
Imagine a world where there is no need for translation…
26
Imagine…
• …consistent standards published by pharmacopoeias in the languages needed by their stakeholders.
• …a global pharmaceutical industry that can ensure compliance with these standards, because they contain consistent requirements.
• …regulators who can use these globally consistent standards to help ensure the quality of medicines.
• …patients around the world who are able to receive medicines with consistent quality, wherever the medicines are manufactured.
Imagine a world wherethere is no need for translation…
27
• No need for translation, because all the pharmacopoeias are saying the same thing.
• How do we get there?
– Global pharmacopoeia harmonization/convergence (e.g. Prospective/Informal harmonization)
– Implementation of Good Pharmacopoeial Practices (pharmacopoeias and regulators)
– Collaboration among pharmacopoeias, regulators, industry
• Consistent pharmacopoeia standards for consistent quality of medicines to benefit patients around the world.
Imagine a world wherethere is no need for translation…
28
29…medicine…for the people…
Thank You
Gracias Děkuji Köszönömどうも
ありがとうشکریہ Ďakujem дякую
Danke Tak Takk Рақмет Salamat Hvala Thank You
شكراً धन्यवाद 감사합니다 Dziękuję Gracias Thank You
Dank u
MerciKiitos
Terima
kasihAčiū Obrigado Tack Cảm ơn
Obrigado Merci ممنون Gracias MulțumescMerci
Danke
Thank You
Merci
Danke Thank YouHvala
ХвалаCпасибо ขอบคณุ
Dankie
Asante
Hvala ευχαριστώ Grazie Takk ХвалаTeşekkür
ederim
Merci
Thank You
谢谢
Дзякуй
30