Related Articles

The workshop “Pharmacogenetics in Individualized Medicine: Methods, Regulatory, and Clinical Applications” was held November 15–16, 2008 in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. This workshop provided an opportunity for pharmaceutical scientists, clinical practitioners, clinical laboratory scientists, and FDA to discuss methods, regulatory, and the application of pharmacogenetics in clinical practice and drug discovery. Key highlights of the workshop were: (a) the use of genetic information in individualized medicine has significant potential in advancing drug development and human health by optimizing drug response, drug efficacy, and preventing adverse drug reactions; (b) various barriers exist preventing the advance of the individualized medicine in the society, industry, and clinical practice; and (c) the barriers may be overcome by integrated approaches; the education of researchers, clinical practitioners, and patients and fostering interactive communication among stakeholders. By targeting the AAPS audience, this workshop was one step among many steps that AAPS–FIP is intending to take towards removing the barriers to widespread uptake of pharmacogenetics in drug discovery and clinical practice.

Regulatory approaches for evaluating therapeutic equivalence of multisource (or generic) drug products vary among different countries and/or regions. Harmonization of these approaches may decrease the number of in vivo bioequivalence studies and avoid unnecessary drug exposure to humans. Global harmonization for regulatory requirements may be promoted by a better understanding of factors underlying product performance and expectations from different regulatory authorities. This workshop provided an opportunity for pharmaceutical scientists from academia, industry and regulatory agencies to have open discussions on current regulatory issues and industry practices, facilitating harmonization of regulatory approaches for establishing therapeutic equivalence and interchangeability of multisource drug products.

The ICH-E5 guideline provides a general framework for evaluating the potential impact of ethnic factors on the acceptability of foreign clinical data, with the underlying objective of minimizing duplication of clinical data, and it also describes the requirement of bridging studies for extrapolation of foreign clinical data to a new region. The ICH-E5 guideline brought great change in concept and strategy of global drug development for pharmaceutical companies. The procedures described in the ICH-E5 guideline have proved useful in the assessment of the ethnic sensitivity of a medicinal product that is to be introduced to a foreign region for registration purpose. Many companies are now developing various products based on ICH-E5 strategies and many successful cases will continuously appear within coming years.

The American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) National Biotechnology Conference Short Course “Translational Challenges in Developing Antibody-Drug Conjugates (ADCs),” held May 24, 2012 in San Diego, CA, was organized by members of the Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics and Drug Metabolism section of AAPS. Representatives from the pharmaceutical industry, regulatory authorities, and academia in the US and Europe attended this short course to discuss the translational challenges in ADC development and the importance of characterizing these molecules early in development to achieve therapeutic utility in patients. Other areas of discussion included selection of target antigens; characterization of absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion; assay development and hot topics like regulatory perspectives and the role of pharmacometrics in ADC development. MUC16-targeted ADCs were discussed to illustrate challenges in preclinical development; experiences with trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1; Genentech) and the recently approved brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris®; Seattle Genetics) were presented in depth to demonstrate considerations in clinical development. The views expressed in this report are those of the participants and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliations.

The qualification process for ensuring that a paddle or basket apparatus is suitable for its intended use is a highly debated and controversial topic. Different instrument qualification and suitability methods have been proposed by the pharmacopeias and regulatory bodies. In an effort to internationally harmonize dissolution apparatus suitability requirements, the International Pharmaceutical Federation's (FIP) Dissolution/Drug Release Special Interest Group (SIG) reviewed current instrument suitability requirements listed in the US, European, and Japanese pharmacopeias and the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) Topic Q4B on harmonization of pharmacopoeial methods, in its Annex 7, Dissolution Test General. In addition, the SIG reviewed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Draft Guidance for Industry, “The Use of Mechanical Calibration of Dissolution Apparatus 1 and 2—Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP)” and the related ASTM Standard E2503-07. Based on this review and several in-depth discussions, the FIP Dissolution/Drug Release SIG recommends that the qualification of a dissolution test instrument should be performed following the calibration requirements as indicated in the FDA (draft) guidance. If additional system performance information is desired, a performance verification test using US Pharmacopeia Reference Standard tablet or an established in-house reference product can be conducted. Any strict requirement on the use of a specific performance verification test tablet is not recommended at this time.

Harmonization of pharmacy education has to be made a global agenda that will encompass the developments that have taken place in basic, medical, pharmaceutical sciences in serving the needs and expectations of the society. The professional pharmacy curriculum is designed to produce pharmacists who have the abilities and skills to provide drug information, education, and pharmaceutical care to patients; manage the pharmacy and its medication distribution and control systems; and promote public health. Required coursework for all pharmacy students includes pharmaceutical chemistry; pharmaceutics (drug dosage forms, delivery, and disposition in the human body) pharmacology; therapeutics (the clinical use of drugs and dietary supplements in patients); drug information and analysis; pharmacy administration (including pharmacy law, bioethics, health systems, pharmacoeconomics, medical informatics); clinical skills (physical assessment, patient counseling, drug therapy monitoring for appropriate selection, dose, effect, interactions, use); and clinical pharmacy practice in pharmacies, industry, health maintenance organizations, hospital wards, and ambulatory care clinics.

Various regulatory authorities such as the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH), the United States Food and Drug administration (FDA), and the Canadian Drug and Health Agency (CDHA) are emphasizing on the purity requirements and the identification of impurities in Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs). The various sources of impurity in pharmaceutical products are — reagents, heavy metals, ligands, catalysts, other materials like filter aids, charcoal, and the like, degraded end products obtained during \ after manufacturing of bulk drugs from hydrolysis, photolytic cleavage, oxidative degradation, decarboxylation, enantiomeric impurity, and so on. The different pharmacopoeias such as the British Pharmacopoeia, United State Pharmacopoeia, and Indian Pharmacopoeia are slowly incorporating limits to allowable levels of impurities present in APIs or formulations. Various methods are used to isolate and characterize impurities in pharmaceuticals, such as, capillary electrophoresis, electron paramagnetic resonance, gas–liquid chromatography, gravimetric analysis, high performance liquid chromatography, solid-phase extraction methods, liquid–liquid extraction method, Ultraviolet Spectrometry, infrared spectroscopy, supercritical fluid extraction column chromatography, mass spectrometry, Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, and RAMAN spectroscopy. Among all hyphenated techniques, the most exploited techniques for impurity profiling of drugs are Liquid Chromatography (LC)-Mass Spectroscopy (MS), LC-NMR, LC-NMR-MS, GC-MS, and LC-MS. This reveals the need and scope of impurity profiling of drugs in pharmaceutical research.

Purpose

Identification of all common and potentially avoidable adverse events is crucial to further improve the quality of medical care. The intention of the current study was to evaluate a standardized physician independent survey format on adverse events in total knee arthroplasty. The protocol for reporting adverse drug events following the International Conference of Harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use (ICH) was adopted for adverse events occurring during surgical interventions.

Material and methods

Data of a prospective sequential cohort trial introducing a clinical pathway for total knee arthroplasty was analysed. Reporting of adverse events was done by a physician independent study nurse using the modified ICH-Good Clinical Practice (GCP) format (Structure and Content of Clinical study reports - E3) in 260 patients. The adverse events were graded to their severity and their potential relation to surgical treatment.

Results

A total of 55 patients (21%) suffered from an adverse event and 16 (6%) from a serious adverse event. In 38 patients' one adverse event occurred, 12 patients showed 2 adverse events and 5 patients suffered from a combination of an adverse and a serious adverse event. A serious adverse event alone occurred in 11 patients. The incidence of adverse events (Fisher p = 0.448) and serious adverse (p = 0.126) events showed no significant difference between the two cohorts. The most common adverse events were deep vein thrombosis (8% and 5%) followed by wound healing problems (1% and 0%) and haematoma (1% and 3%). A wide range of non surgical adverse events were recorded with low incidence levels.

Conclusion

The use of the modified ICH-GCP format supports standardization of adverse event reporting. Routine assessment of adverse events by a study nurse revealed higher incidence rates of adverse events in total knee arthroplasty. We recommend the implementation of trained paramedical staff for the documentation of adverse events in routine clinical care.

Background

The quality and safety of advanced therapy products must be maintained throughout their production and quality control cycle to ensure their final use in patients. We validated the cell count method according to the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use and European Pharmacopoeia, considering the tests’ accuracy, precision, repeatability, linearity and range.

Methods

As the cell count is a potency test, we checked accuracy, precision, and linearity, according to ICH Q2. Briefly our experimental approach was first to evaluate the accuracy of Fast Read 102® compared to the Bürker chamber. Once the accuracy of the alternative method was demonstrated, we checked the precision and linearity test only using Fast Read 102®. The data were statistically analyzed by average, standard deviation and coefficient of variation percentages inter and intra operator.

Results

All the tests performed met the established acceptance criteria of a coefficient of variation of less than ten percent. For the cell count, the precision reached by each operator had a coefficient of variation of less than ten percent (total cells) and under five percent (viable cells). The best range of dilution, to obtain a slope line value very similar to 1, was between 1:8 and 1:128.

Conclusions

Our data demonstrated that the Fast Read 102® count method is accurate, precise and ensures the linearity of the results obtained in a range of cell dilution. Under our standard method procedures, this assay may thus be considered a good quality control method for the cell count as a batch release quality control test. Moreover, the Fast Read 102® chamber is a plastic, disposable device that allows a number of samples to be counted in the same chamber. Last but not least, it overcomes the problem of chamber washing after use and so allows a cell count in a clean environment such as that in a Cell Factory. In a good manufacturing practice setting the disposable cell counting devices will allow a single use of the count chamber they can then be thrown away, thus avoiding the waste disposal of vital dye (e.g. Trypan Blue) or lysing solution (e.g. Tuerk solution).

Objective: Access to medicines has long been and remains a challenge in African countries. The impact of medicines registration policies in these countries poses a challenge for pharmaceutical companies wanting to register medicines in these countries. The recent AMRHI (African Medicines Registration Harmonisation Initiative) has increased the focus on the need for harmonisation. Medicines registration regulations differ across African countries. Anecdotal evidence, based on the experience of pharmaceutical companies on progress towards harmonisation is somewhat different, i.e. that country specific requirements were a barrier to the registration of medicines. The objective of this study was therefore to determine the nature and extent of regulatory hurdles experienced by pharmaceutical companies who wish to register and supply medicines to African countries.

Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive pilot study was conducted across pharmaceutical companies, both local and multinational. These companies were based in South Africa and were also members of Pharmaceutical Industry Association of South Africa (PIASA). The pharmaceutical companies supply both the private and public sectors. An online survey was developed using Survey Monkey. Survey questions focused on the following strands: nature and level of current supply of medicines to African countries by companies, general regulatory requirements, region specific questions and country specific questions across four regional economic communities in Africa, namely; Southern African Development Community (SADC), East African Community (EAC), Economic Community of the West African States (ECOWAS) and Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS).

Results: A total of 33 responses were received to the questionnaire of which 26 respondents were from the PIASA Regulatory working group and 7 were from the PIASA Export working group.It was noted that since most of the regulatory authorities in Africa are resource-constrained, harmonisation of medicine registration policies will contribute positively to ensuring the safety, quality and efficacy of medicines. The experience of pharmaceutical companies indicated that country specific regulatory requirements are a barrier to registering and supplying medicines to African countries. In particular, GMP inspections, GMP inspection fees and country specific labeling were cited as key problems.

Conclusion: Pharmaceutical companies operating in African markets are experiencing difficulties in complying with the technical requirements of individual African countries. Further research is required to provide a balanced perspective on the country specific regulatory requirements vs. the African Regulatory Harmonisation Initiative (AMRHI).

Since several years risk-based monitoring is the new “magic bullet” for improvement in clinical research. Lots of authors in clinical research ranging from industry and academia to authorities are keen on demonstrating better monitoring-efficiency by reducing monitoring visits, monitoring time on site, monitoring costs and so on, always arguing with the use of risk-based monitoring principles. Mostly forgotten is the fact, that the use of risk-based monitoring is only adequate if all mandatory prerequisites at site and for the monitor and the sponsor are fulfilled.

Based on the relevant chapter in ICH GCP (International Conference on Harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use – Good Clinical Practice) this publication takes a holistic approach by identifying and describing the requirements for future monitoring and the use of risk-based monitoring. As the authors are operational managers as well as QA (Quality Assurance) experts, both aspects are represented to come up with efficient and qualitative ways of future monitoring according to ICH GCP.

This is a summary report of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists, the Food and Drug Administration and the United States Pharmacopoeia cosponsored workshop on “Assuring Quality and Performance of Sustained and Controlled Release Parenterals.” Experts from the pharmaceutical industry, the regulatory authorities and academia participated in this workshop to review, discuss and debate formulation, processing and manufacture of sustained and controlled release parenterals and identify critical process parameters and their control. Areas were identified where research is needed in order to understand the performance of these drug delivery systems and to assist in the development of appropriate testing procedures. Recommendations were made for future workshops, meetings and working groups in this area.

Malaria vaccines are considered amongst the most important modalities for potential elimination of malaria disease and transmission. Research and development in this field has been an area of intense effort by many groups over the last few decades. Despite this, there is currently no licensed malaria vaccine. Researchers, clinical trialists and vaccine developers have been working on many approached to make malaria vaccine available.

African research institutions have developed and demonstrated a great capacity to undertake clinical trials in accordance to the International Conference on Harmonization-Good Clinical Practice (ICH-GCP) standards in the last decade; particularly in the field of malaria vaccines and anti-malarial drugs. This capacity is a result of networking among African scientists in collaboration with other partners; this has traversed both clinical trials and malaria control programmes as part of the Global Malaria Action Plan (GMAP). GMAP outlined and support global strategies toward the elimination and eradication of malaria in many areas, translating in reduction in public health burden, especially for African children. In the sub-Saharan region the capacity to undertake more clinical trials remains small in comparison to the actual need.

However, sustainability of the already developed capacity is essential and crucial for the evaluation of different interventions and diagnostic tools/strategies for other diseases like TB, HIV, neglected tropical diseases and non-communicable diseases. There is urgent need for innovative mechanisms for the sustainability and expansion of the capacity in clinical trials in sub-Saharan Africa as the catalyst for health improvement and maintained.

Globally the medical device (MD) market has been growing quite rapidly over the past decade. The regulatory framework for pharmaceuticals and devices differ substantially. The regulatory authorities in different regions of the world recognize different classes of medical devices (MDs), based on their design complexity, their use characteristics, and their potential for harm, if misused. With the vast majority of MDs in developing countries being imported, the respective governments need to put in place policies & regulations to address all elements related to MDs, ranging from its development, manufacturing, registration to post-marketing obligations & disposal so that public can have access to high quality, safe & affordable products for appropriate use. This article highlights current regulations pertaining to registration of MDs in India, in light of those existing in Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) member countries & Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries.

Rap1 GTPase is an important regulator of RPE cell junctions, required for maintenance of barrier function.

Purpose.

To determine whether the small GTPase Rap1 regulates the formation and maintenance of the retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) cell junctional barrier.

Methods.

An in vitro model was used to study RPE barrier properties. To dissect the role of Rap1, two techniques were used to inhibit Rap1 function: overexpression of RapGAP, which acts as a negative regulator of endogenous Rap1 activity, and treatment with engineered, adenovirally-transduced microRNAs to knockdown Rap1 protein expression. Transepithelial electrical resistance (TER) and real-time cellular analysis (RTCA) of impedance were used as readouts for barrier properties. Immunofluorescence microscopy was used to visualize localization of cadherins under steady state conditions and also during junctional reassembly after calcium switch. Finally, choroidal endothelial cell (CEC) migration across RPE monolayers was quantified under conditions of Rap1 inhibition in RPE.

Results.

Knockdown of Rap1 or inhibition of its activity in RPE reduces TER and electrical impedance of the RPE monolayers. The loss of barrier function is also reflected by the mislocalization of cadherins and formation of gaps within the monolayer. TER measurement and immunofluorescent staining of cadherins after a calcium switch indicate that junctional reassembly kinetics are also impaired. Furthermore, CEC transmigration is significantly higher in Rap1-knockdown RPE monolayers compared with control.

Conclusions.

Rap1 GTPase is an important regulator of RPE cell junctions, and is required for maintenance of barrier function. This observation that RPE monolayers lacking Rap1 allow greater transmigration of CECs suggests a possible role for potentiating choroidal neovascularization during the pathology of neovascular age-related macular degeneration.

Bioanalytical methods used to support the drug development process are validated to ensure that they function in the manner in which they are intended. “Incurred” or study samples can vary in their composition when compared with the standards and quality control samples used to validate the method and analyze these samples. During the 3rd American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists(AAPS)/Food and Drug Administration(FDA) Bioanalytical Workshop, it was suggested that the reproducibility in the analysis of incurred samples be evaluated in addition to the usual prestudy validation activities performed. This manuscript provides recommendations concerning the number and types of samples that should be analyzed in such an evaluation, as well as the manner in which the resultant data should be analyzed. Suggestions as to follow-up activities and data reporting are also discussed. This approach is at best a beginning and is offered as a platform for future discussion, comments, and revision.

The American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS) covers the full range of areas of expertise associated with the resolution of concerns pertaining to drugs and drug products. This editorial highlights the initiatives, issues, and challenges that are the forefront of the pharmaceutical sciences in 2007. It also provides an overview of how these difficult questions are being addressed through the programs and events associated with the AAPS 2007 Annual Meeting that will be held at the San Diego, California, Convention Center from November 11 to 15, 2007.

The Conference Report of the 3rd AAPS/FDA Bioanalytical Workshop (Crystal City III) endorsed the concept that assay methods supporting bioanalytical data in submissions must demonstrate assay reproducibility by using incurred samples. The present Workshop was convened to provide a forum for discussion and consensus building about incurred sample assay reproducibility for both nonclinical and clinical studies. Information about current regulatory perspectives on incurred sample reanalysis (ISR) was presented, implications of ISR for both large and small molecules were discussed, and the steering committee put forth recommendations for performing ISR. These recommendations from the Workshop, along with the subsequent evolution of approaches leading to a robust ISR program, may be used by scientists performing bioanalytical assays for regulated studies to provide additional confirmation of assay reproducibility for incurred samples.

The objective of this brief article is to provide an overview of some of the important harmonization efforts that are currently under way within the animal health community. Topics include: scientific networks and interdisciplinary communication: organizations that address animal-related public health concerns; the role of the veterinary pharmaceutical scientist within human health-oriented professional organizations; recent publications pertaining to veterinary pharmacology, pharmaceutics and therapeutics; and the role of global networking in veterinary product research and development.

Working closely and cooperatively with regulatory authorities during drug development is vital to successful drug development programs. In the United States, the drug development team includes not only members of the key disciplines of drug discovery, clinical research, regulatory affairs, marketing, chemistry, toxicology, and legal aspects, but also the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). New regulations encourage meetings at the pre-investigational new drug (pre-IND), end-of-phase-2, and pre-new drug application (pre-NDA) submission phases. Appropriate informal discussions via fax and telephone are also encouraged. By proactively interacting with the FDA, the pharmaceutical industry increases the probability of a successful drug development program.

Background: The implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and the Good Clinical Practice Directive 2005/28/EC fundamentally restructured and harmonized the conduct of clinical trials in Europe. GCP inspections – which affect study sites, laboratories, sponsors and contract research organizations (CRO) alike – make up an important part of these regulations. A common understanding of how these regulations apply in daily life is however not always ensured.

Methods: A working group of the Clinical Research/Quality Assurance subcommittee of the German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies (VFA) was established to outline the regulatory requirements, the experience gathered with inspections by means of a survey and to set up guidance on how to manage an inspection.

Results and conclusions: The survey, conducted with the help of 15 pharmaceutical companies within the VFA, included a total of 224 inspections (74 inspections in Germany, 150 from other European countries). Most frequent findings in and outside Germany were related to “documentation” (40.5% vs. 21.3%), “investigational new drugs” (16.2% vs. 14.7%), “drug safety” (13.5% vs. 8%) and “application for a clinical trial authorization” (5.4% vs. 12%).

From a German perspective, key findings of this working group were the necessity for a clear differentiation of responsibilities between national and federal as well as international authorities, a harmonization of inspection procedures and topics, and a clarification of whether pre-study/on-study and pre-approval/post-approval GCP inspections of the federal higher authority are included in the “Zentralstelle der Länder für Gesundheitsschutz bei Arzneimitteln und Medizinprodukten” (ZLG) requirements. The survey illustrated, that inspections usually are conducted at the investigational site, and that most of the findings are well known and thus could be prevented by communicating and discussing audit results more intensely within study groups. Again, the survey illustrated, that a harmonization of inspections appears warranted. Finally a code of practice is provided that considers these findings and delivers a basis for a successful inspection whether at the sponsor or the GCP site.

In 2003, the FIP Dissolution Working group published a position paper on dissolution/drug release testing for special/novel dosage forms that represented the scientific opinions of many experts in the field at that time (1). The position paper has supported activities, programs, and decisions in the scientific, technical, and regulatory community. Due to the rapid evolution of new practices and techniques for in vitro testing, the FIP Special Interest Group (SIG) on Dissolution/Drug Release decided to revise the previous paper and added proposals for further harmonization of in vitro release testing practices for different pharmaceutical dosage forms. This article represents the current updates to the previously published paper. This revision has been aligned to coincide with the USP taxonomy including route of administration, intended site of drug release, and dosage form. The revised paper includes information from current literature, expert discussions, and presentations from recent workshops (2,3). The authors acknowledge and expect further updates to be made as additional progress is made in the relevant areas. Thus, comments and additional contributions are welcome and may be considered for the next revision of the position paper.

The biopharmaceutical classification system (BCS) classifies compounds based on their solubility and permeability. Regulatory agencies and health organizations have utilized this classification system to allow dissolution to be used to establish bioequivalence for highly soluble and highly permeable compounds. The pharmaceutical industry has taken advantage of this and BCS-based waivers are becoming more routine and result in significant savings. Further, there is strong scientific rationale to allow BCS-based waivers for even more compounds to realize even more savings. Yet just as clear as the benefits are the barriers that limit application: lack of international regulatory harmonization, uncertainty in regulatory approval, and organizational barriers within the pharmaceutical industry. Once these barriers are overcome and additional applications are fully allowed, the full benefits of BCS applications will be realized.

On April 17th 2010 scientists from academia, the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) assembled at “The NCI Image Guided Drug Delivery Summit,” in Washington DC, to discuss recent advances, barriers, opportunities and regulatory issues related to the field. The meeting included a scientific session and an NCI/FDA session, followed by a panel discussion of speakers from both sessions. Image guided drug delivery (IGDD) in cancer is a form of individualized therapy where imaging methods are used in guidance and monitoring of localized and targeted delivery of therapeutics to the tumor. So a systematic approach to IGDD requires mechanisms for targeting, delivery, activation and monitoring of the process. While the goal in IGDD is to optimize the therapeutic ratio through personalized image-guided treatments, a major challenge is in overcoming the biological barriers to the delivery of therapeutics into tumors and cells. Speakers discussed potential challenges to clinical translation of nano-based drug delivery systems including in-vivo characterization of nanocarriers, pre-clinical validation of targeting and delivery, studies of biodistribution, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and toxicity as well as scale-up manufacturing of delivery systems. Physiological and quantitative imaging techniques may serve as enabling tools that could potentially transform many existing challenges into opportunities for advancement of the field.

Immunogenicity of biopharmaceutical products has attracted considerable attention from the industrial, academia, and regulatory organizations. Many methods exist to detect and characterize level of antidrug antibody response in patients. Still, additional work is required to harmonize various approaches used throughout the industry. This review presents results of a survey sponsored by the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists that was designed to collect relevant information and to understand various methods used throughout the bioanalytical field for the detection and evaluation of antidrug antibody responses.