Category: Uncategorized

The FDA recently updated guidance for clinical trials & trial design. This update stems from an objective of the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act). It includes recommendations for how industry sponsors of pharmaceuticals or biologics should design and conduct clinical trials. The guidance provides a greater explanation of how biologic and oncology trial design can simultaneously evaluate more than one investigational drug.

 

FDA Guidance

 

The guidance goes into depth about the clinical research milestones of master protocol design. Data integrity considerations are also mentioned for biomarker co-development and trial statistical analysis. Traditionally, oncology clinical trials are designed to assess multiple investigational drugs at the same time. Clinical data in this type of design is analyzed across multiple cancer types during the same trial to find all sources of patient efficacy and commercial value.

 

Another primary driver is the CDMO race due to testing multiple drugs and sub-populations under the same protocol. Pharmaceutical consultants like RCA Inc. have witnessed a shortening of client commercialization timelines across the life sciences industry. This directly adds incremental pressure on project sponsors. Clinical teams are being tasked to discover late-stage drug success faster than ever before. Every trial must simultaneously ensure patient safety while producing data that satisfies the regulatory safety and effectiveness.

 


Need help with your Clinical Trials? Talk to our Experts


 

Investigational Drugs (IND FDA)

 

The FDA concisely describes this unique protocol design and clinical trial planning for IND filings and multiple sub-studies. Sub-studies may have separate goals and require aligned efforts across the data science team. For example, collaboration is needed in order to appropriately value multiple investigational drugs. Consideration should be given that therapeutic value may be in one or more disease sub-types in the clinical trial.

 

With these considerations in mind, the FDA goes on to describe the benefits of a master protocol across the study design. This provides the project sponsor design flexibility via electronic data capture (EDC) in an EDC system (e.g. shared control arm, adaptive designs, centralized data capture).

 

Clinical Trial Design

 

This new FDA guidance also provides insights on potential challenges the industry should consider when using master protocols. These unintended consequences can include greater difficulty when assigning detailed adverse events to an investigational drug if numerous products are being investigated across the clinical study.

 

Any lack of adverse event reporting clarity can impact the safety profile of an investigational drug. This directly makes the clinical analysis for FDA approval more complicated for the regulatory body. Multiple study groups can also increase the overinterpretation of study findings. For example, signs of positive product efficacy for cardiac biomarkers could be different than from cancer biomarkers. Biomarker discovery for one subpopulation could also be identified as false if based a different ad hoc patient group.

 

Basket Trials

 

Basket trial design includes assessing an investigational drug blend by including a dose-finding or safety lead-in component. The goal is to identify safe quantities of the combination early in the clinical trial before progressing with an efficacy activity-estimating factor. The FDA proposes therapeutic efficacy for sub-studies within basket trials are constructed as single-arm, activity-estimating trial. The primary endpoint would be recorded as total response rate.

 

The guidance goes on to elaborate on sub-study objectives, including study rationale for each population. A comprehensive statistical analysis plan (SAP) with reasoning for sample size and unique stopping rules based on ineffectuality should also be included in the program documentation.

 

Umbrella Trials

 

A master protocol designed to evaluate multiple drugs is commonly referred to as an umbrella trial. These umbrella trials are often administered as a single drug or as a combination product. Umbrella trials are often a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the mechanism of action of the investigational drug/drugs with a common control arm. Study design for an umbrella trial can include sub-studies based on a patient biomarker or to a separate therapeutic sub-study inside the trial.

 

Clinical Study Design

 

As the clinical study focus, the FDA provides a clear understanding of how project sponsors improve the efficiency of master protocols. For example, using a common control arm during an Umbrella Trial has proven to help evaluate multiple drugs simultaneously for a single disease state.

 

Control Arm

 

For clinical trials, the FDA now recommends a project sponsor use a common control arm when numerous drugs are evaluated simultaneously in a single illness (e.g. umbrella trials). The FDA guidance elaborates in the use of a control arm be the current standard of care (SOC) so trial results are understandable from the perspective of the biologic and oncology medical community.

 

Changes in SOC can also take place during the trial because of an FDA approval or the latest scientific data. The Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) would need to be revised before any data analysis occurs if this is the case.

 

Novel Drugs

 

When a project sponsor uses sub-studies to assess two or more investigational drugs, the FDA advocates for providing a thorough scientific motivation for the combination. This includes the clinical trial sponsor defining the Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D). Analysis should include each novel drug and ensuring the appropriate dosage has been identified for each individual drug.

 

Targeting Biomarkers

 

The FDA goes on to elaborate on digital biomarkers to help validate the patient selection and recruiting for clinical trials. Biomarkers should be clearly identified based on the intended therapeutic response.

 

For example, an oncology biomarker for tumor size can help predict the response to the investigational drug. This type of study biomarker might demonstrate how the mechanism of action succeeded or failed. There needs to be a consensus among the clinical study team on how biomarkers are justified. Understanding study measures for showing marker positivity before patients enter the trial is critical.

 

Data Monitoring

 

One final important note about the master protocol in the updated FDA guidance describes the independent radiologic review committee. This committee medical research should include blinded tumor-based assessments to provide a charter for the independent data monitoring committee (IDMC).

 

The IDMC charter would guide the committee through ad hoc trials, such as patient efficacy and drug futility. The IDMC can also recommend clinical trial protocol actions. This often includes changes in sample size or modification of a sub-study based on overwhelming futility or efficacy evidence.

 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].

What can life science companies do to prepare themselves in the current medical device regulatory environment?

 

 

In this sound bite from RCA Radio, host Brandon Miller is joined by Jordan Elder, RCA’s Director of Regulatory Affairs, and Kinga Demetriou, an Expert Certifier at BSI, as they discuss what companies can do to properly prepare themselves for success in the current regulatory environment.

 

  • Take a look at your product and make sure your regulatory strategy is conducive to your particular product and market. Have a pathway forward
  • Make sure that your strategy implements the most up-to-date guidances and standards. Stay up to date 
  • Get to know your testing laboratory and certifiers early in the design process to ensure no critical milestones are overlooked. Partner up
  • Compliance processes take a considerable amount of time. Early engagement gives you the best chance to meet deadlines. Get a head start

 


Listen to the full Podcast on Global Regulatory Trends –> Click Here


 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].

In Vitro Diagnostics Regulation (IVDR) Changes

 

Listen to this In Vitro Diagnostics highlight from RCA Radio where Seyed Khorashahi breaks down the EU’s move from list-based IVD device classifications to a rule-based IVDR medical device classification, resulting in four new device classes.
 
 

 

Listen to the entire episode where we go over all of the important things happening in the Medical Device industry here.

 

 

Device Classification Changes

  • List-based Classification to a Rule-Based 
    • Class A (lowest risk) to class D (highest risk), where class B, C, and D would require Notified Body (NB) involvement.
  • MDGC 202- 16 Guidance on Classification for in vitro diagnostic Medical Devices under Regulation (EU) 2017/746.

 

Lifecycle Approach

  • Establishment and Demonstration of effective Quality Management Systems (QMS).
  • More stringent requirements for clinical evidence that demonstrates conformity.
  • Post-Market Performance monitoring and reporting requirements.
  • Introduction of Unique Device Identifiers (UDIs) for improved traceability.

 

Supply Chain Oversight

  • Regulations covering the entire supply chain.
    • Economic Operators
      • Importers
      • Distributors
      • Authorized Representatives
  • Notified Bodies have discretionary authority to audit suppliers and subcontractors

 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].

continuous manufacturingThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently updated its pharmaceutical manufacturing guidance on Continuous Manufacturing (CM), including elaborating on established industry best practices.

 

Examples of new insights provided by FDA include clarification of the differences between continuous manufacturing modes and manufacturing approaches. The intended purpose behind the guidance is to continue industry harmonization efforts between ICH guidance and FDA regulatory & statutory requirements.

 

Continuous Manufacturing

 

Continuous manufacturing involves the process of uninterrupted materials being steadily added into the manufacturing process. The in-process ingredients are then manufactured and simultaneously developed into output materials during manufacturing. The updated FDA guidance focuses on facets of a continuous manufacturing system where multiple steps of operation are connected as continuous flow manufacturing.

 

The intended seamless procedure is considered by many industry experts as more efficient and helps reduce human error. By comparison, batch manufacturing lines may not use the same types of automated monitoring nor leverage as many predictive maintenance data points.

 

Factors of Production

 

The FDA guidance provides a deeper explanation of the underlying continuous manufacturing factors of production. A description of these characteristics by the Agency expands upon continuous flow production themes, including types of technology, options for dosage form, or molecule type.

 

Topics that are broadly applicable to a continuous production system and batch manufacturing are not included in the updated guidance scope. FDA recommends to the reader to revisit other existing ICH Q7 guidance as needed and appropriate for the medical manufacturer.

 

Control Strategy

 

Continued process performance and product quality are two primary elements described in the scientific approach to continuous manufacturing. State of control relies on the continuous production process and unique parameters (e.g. process parameters, quality attributes, etc.) that are designed to stay within an appropriate pre-set range.

 

Further, the guidance specifically calls out the importance of identifying the root cause of drift. FDA continuous manufacturing examples highlighted for employees to closely monitor include variation of inputs, equipment fatigue, and aging of materials.

 

Process Dynamics

 

Understanding transient events and the various impacts they can have on the continuous production system is a critical facet of FDA Control Strategy. Further, the FDA guidance elaborates that this includes transient events that are both planned (e.g., process start-up, process shutdown or a manufacturing pause) and unplanned (e.g. production disturbance).

 

Residence Time Distribution (RTD)

 

One key takeaway from the FDA guidance for industry is understanding how process dynamics are characterized when output material quality is affected. Additionally, using measures like residence time distribution can help medical manufacturers differentiate between the time available for material transport and transformation. 

 

This type of quality metric strategy is specific to the continuous manufacturing process an often includes:

 

  • Product composition
  • Product formulation
  • Material properties
  • Equipment design
  • Equipment configuration

 

Operating Range

 

Each planned operating range should be based on the process dynamics and characterized by the planned over the planned ranges and anticipated input. Further, the FDA clearly states that material variability should use scientifically justified approaches for measuring quality against process dynamics that illustrate the variation during material transport and transformation.

 

Material Characterization

 

The FDA guidance goes on to list material feeding, process dynamics and output material quality as crucial continuous manufacturing elements that negatively impact material characterization. The FDA guidance lists a materials characterization facility as important to increasing production quality. Finally, realizing the predictability of material attribute variability on process performance and product quality is significant to the control strategy.

 

Solid Dosage Form

 

While analyzing the continuous manufacturing material flow process in a solid dosage form, the FDA guidance lists the following considerations that can impact powder feeding:

 

  • Particle size
  • Cohesiveness
  • Adhesiveness
  • Hygroscopicity
  • Static charge
  • Surface area of drug substances and excipients

 

Chemically Synthesized

 

While analyzing the material flow process in a chemically synthesized drug substance, the continuous manufacturing FDA guidance lists the following considerations that can impact flow properties:

 

  • Viscosity
  • Concentration
  • Multi-phase feed

 

Monoclonal Antibody

 

While analyzing the material flow process in a therapeutic protein (e.g. monoclonal antibody) substance, the FDA guidance lists the following continuous manufacturing considerations that can impact cell culture performance, process performance, or process consistency:

 

  • Lot-to-lot variability
  • Cell culture media
  • Different types of feed components

 

System Integration

 

The FDA guidance goes into depth about integrated systems characteristics and how equipment design can influence continuous manufacturing performance:

 

  • Design configuration
    • Maximum run time compatibility
    • Parts geometry impacting transformation
    • Integration and transfer steps
  • Design interface
    • Surge tanks
    • Mass flow rate
  • Material diversion and sampling
    • Diverter valve
    • Sampling probe
    • Material flow
    • Material transformation

 

The guidance continues to elaborate on equipment selection and how the equipment design, if executed properly, can help with process simplification.

 

Process Monitoring

 

Process monitoring and maintaining a state of control during production increases the understanding of real-time system performance. The FDA guidance states that these common approaches to process monitoring and control are also applicable to continuous manufacturing:

 

  • Established target setpoints
  • Established control limits
  • Design space
  • Measurement specifications

 

Process Analytical Technology

 

The FDA guidance also elaborates on why process analytical technology is suitable for continuous manufacturing. Examples provided by the agency for industry employees include:

 

  • In-line ultraviolet (UV) flow cells
  • Monitoring therapeutic protein concentration
  • In-line near-infrared spectroscopy
  • Assessing blend uniformity or water content
  • High-performance liquid chromatography
  • Monitoring the conversion of chemical reactions

 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].

In the pharmaceutical and medical device industries, quality culture plays an essential role in profit generation, product safety and approval from regulatory bodies. As a result, organizations must prioritize maintaining product and process quality. One significant aspect of quality control is data integrity — a company’s data should be complete, consistent and accurate in both paper and electronic forms.

 

The adoption of electronic record keeping systems has led to a resurgence in data integrity citations. In response, many regulatory agencies — including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the Pharmaceutical Inspectorate Consortium (PICS) and the World Health Organization (WHO) — have released guidance on data integrity. Many of these reports discuss quality culture as a key part of maintaining data integrity in life sciences.

 

What Is a Quality Culture?

 

Within an organization, quality culture is a working environment in which the risk of noncompliant and erroneous data and records is minimized. Creating a quality culture requires that all members of an organization encourage the open reporting of errors, omissions and other threats to data integrity and product quality.

 

As the WHO and other regulatory agencies have noted, management must be involved with the creation of a quality culture. Quality control should not be limited to the quality management team, but rather flow across all levels of leadership. Managers and other business leaders must be just as accountable for data integrity as everyone else.

 

How Can Management Contribute?

 

As awareness about the importance of quality increases, pharmaceutical companies are likely to see more requests for documentation demonstrating a commitment to quality and data integrity. Quality is also likely to impact a company’s finances — organizations with highly developed quality cultures may spend around $350 million less fixing mistakes every year.

 

To remain competitive, every business must consider the role of management in quality culture. Here are four ways leaders can contribute to quality in pharmaceutical, medical device, biologics and other organizations:

 

  • Lead by example: Quality culture must be encouraged from the top down. If managers and leaders demonstrate a commitment to quality, people throughout the company will follow.
  • Update reporting procedures: Managers should review and update their companies’ reporting procedures to elevate and address issues with data systems when they arise.
  • Review your audit schedule: While regulators don’t require internal audits, they are an important part of upholding data integrity. Review your audit schedule and ensure you are also auditing contract manufacturers and other outside parties.
  • Act on audit results: When an audit reveals gaps in data integrity, act immediately to address the problem. This shows you take quality seriously. You can address issues independently or seek help from experts like those at Regulatory Compliance Associates.

 

Learn More About Data Integrity and Quality Culture

 

The management role in quality culture is a hot topic in the life sciences industry. To learn more about data integrity and quality, contact Regulatory Compliance Associates or listen to the RCA Radio podcast. In the latest episode, host and RCA’s own, Erika Porcelli and Susan Schniepp discuss the history of data integrity and how management can integrate quality into the product lifecycle.

 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].

In the world of medical device testing, manufacturers should seek to identify key characteristics that set a high-quality laboratory aside from the rest. A successful medical device testing relationship should be built on trust, quality, and integrity. Some potential consequences for choosing an incapable third-party testing partner include inaccurate results, legal liability, regulatory compliance issues, wasted resources, and more. Most importantly, failure to achieve FDA approval or regulatory approval can lead to timely delays, wasted products, and the loss of business opportunities. 

 

How to identify a medical device testing partner

 

While the cost of medical device testing is often a determining factor, it’s essential to consider the cost of quality when selecting a testing partner. Additionally, assessing the laboratory’s ability to deliver testing results within required timelines without compromising quality is an advantage. It is critical not to be misled into unrealistic turnaround times or lower costs that could lead to re-testing and/or delays due to unreliable data driven by a lack of competence in testing. High-quality reliable data you can trust comes with appropriate timelines required to support critical sample preparation, strict quality control measures, and complex analysis.

 

In addition to cost and turnaround time, be sure to look for the following criteria when choosing a medical device testing laboratory to support your products:

 

A strong quality system

 

Quality management systems (QMS) are essential to ensure the reliability of all aspects of testing. From safeguarding the accuracy and confidence of results to the implementation of quality control measures, a strong QMS contributes to greater trust in 3rd party testing. One that has been regularly audited by the FDA is favorable.

 

Actively participates in standard development

 

Continued involvement at industry meetings including standard development keeps testing laboratories at the forefront of regulatory science and enables them to help you make the right testing decisions that are compliant and widely accepted. Technical expertise and experience go a long way in the proper support and understanding of the ever-evolving world of standards.

 

Upholds proper accreditation (ISO 17025)

 

The first sign of technical competence is accreditation to ISO 17025 which specifies the general requirements to carry out tests and/or calibrations, including sampling. Compliance with the FDA’s ASCA program is also desirable in addition to other industry-specific organizations. Accreditation demonstrates 3rd party testing compliance with international standards and ensures the credibility of lab testing services.

 

Robust regulatory resources

 

Internal subject matter experts who understand the complexities of globally regulated manufacturers will lead to more successful testing outcomes. Selecting a third-party laboratory that offers in-house expertise in this area can help reduce the regulatory feedback burden.

 

Customer-driven

 

Reliable and accurate medical device testing results are essential for maintaining customer satisfaction. Since a test report is often the final product provided by a testing laboratory, the overall customer success should be highlighted as critical to the overall success of the laboratory.

 

By specifically evaluating these factors, you can identify a strong third party testing partner that meets your specific testing needs and standards of quality, reliability, and competence.

 

To begin the Regulatory Compliance Associates scoping process today, please enter your information in the blue form below and click the submit button at the bottom of the webpage. You may also email us at [email protected].