quality risk management and submission strategies for ... · quality risk management and submission...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Quality Risk Management and Submission Strategies for Breakthrough Therapies
IFPAC/Washington DCJanuary 22, 2014
Sarah Pope Miksinski, Ph.D.Acting Director, Division of New Drug Quality Assessment 2
ONDQA/OPS/CDER/FDA
2
Outline• Background
– Quality– FDASIA – Breakthrough therapies
• Expedited programs for serious conditions– Draft guidance– Manufacturing and product quality considerations
• Risk to quality• CMC challenges for expedited submissions• Best practices and submission strategies
A Conversation of Risk…
3
4
Expectations for Quality
Patients and caregivers assume that their drugs:• Are safe• Are efficacious• Have the correct identity• Deliver the same performance as described
in the label• Perform consistently over their shelf life• Are made in a manner that ensures quality• Will be available when needed
5
What is Pharmaceutical Quality?
• The suitability of either a drug substance or drug product for its intended use. This term includes such attributes as the identity, strength and purity(ICH Q6A)
• The degree to which a set of inherent properties of a product, system or process fulfills requirements (ICH Q9)
Patient & Product
Product & Process
6
Linking Process - Product - Patient
Product
Patient
Process
Quality TargetProduct Profile
Critical QualityAttributes
Material Attributes &Process Parameters
7
FDASIA (2012)• Section 901– Fast Track Drug Products
– Facilitate development and expedite the review of drugs for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition that demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical need
• Section 902 –Breakthrough Therapy Drugs– Expedite the development and review of a drug for serious or
life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies
• Provide timely advice and interactive communication with the sponsor regarding the development of the drug
• Provide a collaborative cross disciplinary review utilizing senior managers and experienced review staff, as appropriate
• Section 905 – Risk Benefit Framework– Implement a structured risk-benefit assessment framework in
the new drug approval process and regulatory decision making
8
• Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions –Drugs and Biologics (2012)– Communication is critical– May involve a more rapid manufacturing development
program to accommodate the accelerated pace of the clinical program
– Focus on early communication to ensure that the manufacturing development programs and timing of submissions meet the Agency’s expectations for licensure or marketing approval
– Proposal of a commercial manufacturing program that will ensure availability of quality product at the time of approval
Guidance for Industry (Draft)
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM358301.pdf
9
• Alignment of CMC development timelines with clinical development– Consideration of manufacturing scale– Coordination with contract manufacturers, as needed– Early availability of manufacturing sites for inspection
• Accelerated manufacturing development likely with less information than typically available– May warrant a risk-benefit assessment regarding risk
of less CMC information vs. patient benefit
Challenges for Expedited Reviews
10
Considerations for Expedited Reviews• Limited data available and/or submitted
– Manufacturing batch data– Stability data– Data available at time of submission
• Review timing constraints• Frequent communication often needed• Supply/availability considerations
All rest on the overall risk to quality as well as potential mitigation strategies.
10
The Risk/Benefit Balance…
11
Availability to patients Risks to Quality
1212
Communications• IND stage
– preIND, EOP1, EOP2, preNDA– Additional meetings upon request– CMC-specific meetings are an option– Formal information requests
• NDA stage– Formal information requests– PDUFA V interactions (e.g. LCM)– Teleconferences during review clock, as needed
A Conversation of Risk…
13
1414
Risk-Based Discussions • Focus on identified risks and potential unidentified
risks to quality• Should happen at appropriate times during IND
and NDA review• Most effective when discussions are transparent
and proactive (vs retroactive or reactive)– Can be initiated by Applicant or Agency– Proactively incorporate elements of risk mitigation– Propose risk mitigation strategies as soon as possible
• Highly collaborative in nature– Proactive conversations with all key players present
1515
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • General
– Discuss NDA submission strategy/timing as soon as possible
• Early assignment of CMC review team• Proactive communication between review and
inspection staff– Early submission of manufacturing site information
• Submit with expanded access submission• Submit with first piece of rolling review
1616
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • General
– Early discussion of stability data package• Strategy• Amount of data
– Early discussion of application-specific aspects• New technologies• Significant QbD aspects
– Use of post-marketing CMC commitments/requirements to mitigate risks
1717
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • IND/Pre-NDA discussions
– NDA submission strategy/timing• Planned amendments
– Clinical/commercial comparability• Strategy• Supporting data
– Stability data package to be submitted– Amount of stability data in original NDA– Manufacturing sites
1818
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • IND/Pre-NDA discussions
– Significant Quality by Design elements• Proposed regulatory flexibility
– Possible post-marketing CMC commitments/requirements
• Risks that may need postapproval mitigation strategies
– Availability of drug for commercial launch– Plans for treatment protocols/expanded access
submissions– Other opportunities for early submission of certain CMC
information
1919
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • During the NDA review
– Teleconferences as needed for clarification• Agency- and Applicant-initiated• Preceding/following information requests or inquiries
– Information Requests• Staggered as necessary• Responses submitted as available
– Early discussions of possible PMCs/PMRs
2020
Expedited Reviews – Best Practices • During the NDA review
– Discussion of launch challenges– Quick response times to Agency requests– Proactive communication regarding incoming
submissions– Discussions based on risk and link to the patient– Early discussions of CMC labeling
• Container/carton labeling
2121
FDA Innovative Drug Approvals• FY 2011-2012 Innovative Drug Approvals• Many were expedited reviews
22
Proposed Office of Pharmaceutical Quality
• Combines components of current CDER Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences and CDER Office of Compliance
• Intended to provide better alignment between all quality functions (review, inspection, research)
• Focus areas for new office:– Integrated approaches for review and inspection– Risk based approaches to review and inspection– Efficiency and risk-based work prioritization– Modern regulatory science approaches (e.g., clinically relevant
specifications, statistical sampling)
23
Conclusions• Patient/caregiver expectations of quality
– Safe, effective, high quality, correct identity, perform as labelled, available
• Pharmaceutical quality – Expectations the same regardless of submission strategy
• Challenges with expedited/breakthrough therapies– Alignment of CMC and clinical development– Often warrant a risk/benefit assessment regarding risk of less
CMC information vs. patient benefit• Proactive communications regarding risk management
encouraged during development and review• Best practices focus on the identification of opportunities
for early submission and/or dialog, as well as effective communication of risk to quality
• FDASIA and CDER’s restructuring of quality functions hold promise for moving forward
