Current Approaches for Dissolution Similarity Assessment, Requirements, and Global Expectations

This report summarizes podium presentations and breakout sessions from the second day of the 2019 M-CERSI workshop on In Vitro Dissolution Similarity Assessment in Support of Drug Product Quality: What, How, and When? Presenters from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Health Canada (HC), E...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The AAPS journal 2022-03, Vol.24 (3), p.50-50, Article 50
Hauptverfasser: Abend, Andreas M., Zhang, Limin, Fredro-Kumbaradzi, Emilija, Hoffelder, Thomas, Cohen, Michael J., Anand, Om, Delvadia, Poonam, Mandula, Haritha, Zhang, Zhen, Kotzagiorgis, Evangelos, Lum, Susan, Pereira, Victor Gomes, Barker, Amy, Lavrich, David, Kraemer, Johannes, Sharp-Suarez, Sandra
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This report summarizes podium presentations and breakout sessions from the second day of the 2019 M-CERSI workshop on In Vitro Dissolution Similarity Assessment in Support of Drug Product Quality: What, How, and When? Presenters from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Health Canada (HC), European Medicines Agency (EMA), Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA), and the pharmaceutical industry shared experiences/concerns with dissolution profile similarity assessment supporting minor/moderate Chemistry, Manufacturing and Control (CMC) changes. Members from regulatory agencies explained that dissolution profile similarity testing is only part of the overall assessment of the acceptability of the proposed changes; decisions are usually made based on aggregate weight of evidence. Scientific shortcomings of f 2 were highlighted but no proposal on how to replace it was made. Controlling dissolution timepoint variability and application of pairwise batch-to-batch comparisons (PBC) of dissolution profiles caused considerable debate. Several industry participants suggested increased sample sizes to raise confidence in decision-making and to avoid PBC. They proposed identification of a single mathematical method with predefined acceptance criteria and suggested that dissolution timepoint selection should follow EMA and HC guidance. A majority of meeting attendees favored applying clinically relevant dissolution specifications (CRDS) and dissolution safe space to determine the impact of minor/moderate CMC changes as opposed to dissolution profile similarity assessment via statistical methods. Day 2 of the workshop highlighted the need and opportunities for global harmonization including variability, timepoint selection, role of CRDS, and statistical methods to address the ambiguity globally operating pharmaceutical companies are currently facing. Graphical Abstract
ISSN:1550-7416
1550-7416
DOI:10.1208/s12248-022-00691-4