Cook Graham, France Georges, Holte Øyvind, Lorenti Giampiero, Tainsh David
Pfizer UK, Farnham, Surrey, UK;
Novartis Switzerland, and GSK Switzerland, Prangins (Nyon), Switzerland;
PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2016 Mar-Apr;70(2):163-76. doi: 10.5731/pdajpst.2015.006171. Epub 2016 Jan 21.
This paper summarizes the discussions and insights gained from the key themes that emerged during the Quality by Design (QbD) Workshop held at the European Medicines Agency (EMA) offices in London, UK, on 28-29 January 2014. Industry and regulators shared practical experiences from six case studies (five approved small molecule products and one phase 3 biotechnological product) based on QbD submissions by five companies (AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Pfizer).The case studies covered a range of different development, regulatory submission, and post-approval aspects of QbD and were developed through confidential discussions between the company representatives and regulators. Key themes that emerged from the workshop discussions were: 1. presentation of information in submissions (development story and the presentation of information in marketing authorization applications; risk assessment and criticality); 2. development aspects (design space; use of models; control strategy); and 3. post-approval aspects (lifecycle management; dossier-quality system interactions; handling of deviations). Many aspects of QbD for biotechnological products are similar to small molecules, but there are some important differences highlighted in this paper.The final section of the paper discusses some proposals for future developments to address the issues that were identified.
This paper summarizes the discussions and insights gained from the key themes that emerged during the Quality by Design (QbD) Workshop held at the European Medicines Agency offices in London, UK, on 28-29 January 2014. Industry and regulators shared practical experiences from six case studies (five approved small-molecule products and one phase 3 biotechnological product) based on QbD submissions by five companies (AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, NovoNordisk, and Pfizer).The case studies covered a range of different development, regulatory submission, and post-approval aspects of QbD and were developed through confidential discussions between the company representatives and regulators. Key themes that emerged from the workshop discussions were: 1. presentation of information in submissions (development story and the presentation of information in marketing authorization applications; risk assessment and criticality); 2. development aspects (design space; use of models; control strategy); and 3. post-approval aspects (lifecycle management; dossier-quality system interactions; handling of deviations). Many aspects of QbD for biotechnological products are similar to small molecules, but there are some important differences highlighted in this paper.The final section of the paper discusses some proposals for future developments to address the issues that were identified.
本文总结了2014年1月28日至29日在英国伦敦欧洲药品管理局(EMA)办公室举行的设计质量(QbD)研讨会上出现的关键主题所带来的讨论和见解。行业代表和监管机构分享了基于五家公司(阿斯利康、葛兰素史克、诺华、诺和诺德和辉瑞)提交的QbD案例的六个案例研究(五个已批准的小分子产品和一个3期生物技术产品)的实践经验。这些案例研究涵盖了QbD的一系列不同的开发、监管申报和批准后方面,并通过公司代表和监管机构之间的保密讨论形成。研讨会上出现的关键主题包括:1. 申报资料中的信息呈现(开发历程以及上市许可申请中的信息呈现;风险评估和关键性);2. 开发方面(设计空间;模型的使用;控制策略);3. 批准后方面(生命周期管理;档案质量体系相互作用;偏差处理)。生物技术产品的QbD的许多方面与小分子产品相似,但本文强调了一些重要差异。本文最后一部分讨论了针对已确定问题的未来发展的一些建议。
本文总结了2014年1月28日至29日在英国伦敦欧洲药品管理局办公室举行的设计质量(QbD)研讨会上出现的关键主题所带来的讨论和见解。行业代表和监管机构分享了基于五家公司(阿斯利康、葛兰素史克、诺华、诺和诺德和辉瑞)提交的QbD案例的六个案例研究(五个已批准的小分子产品和一个3期生物技术产品)的实践经验。这些案例研究涵盖了QbD的一系列不同的开发、监管申报和批准后方面,并通过公司代表和监管机构之间的保密讨论形成。研讨会上出现的关键主题包括:1. 申报资料中的信息呈现(开发历程以及上市许可申请中的信息呈现;风险评估和关键性);2. 开发方面(设计空间;模型的使用;控制策略);3. 批准后方面(生命周期管理;档案质量体系相互作用;偏差处理)。生物技术产品的QbD的许多方面与小分子产品相似,但本文强调了一些重要差异。本文最后一部分讨论了针对已确定问题的未来发展的一些建议。