Category Archives: manufacturing

Health Canada releases draft guidance on classification of observations for inspection of cells, tissues and organs establishments

Health Canada has released a draft guidance to assist with companies become compliant with the safety of human cells, tissues and organs for transplantation regulations which came into force on 7 December 2007. The purpose of this regulatory initiative is to minimise the potential health risks to Canadian recipient of human cells and tissues and organs. And to ensure that such organisations remain compliant with the proposed regulations.

More information is available on the Health Canada website

Health Canada opens consultation on cleaning validation guidance

Health Canada has opened the consultation process to provide guidance on issues and topics related to the validation of equipment cleaning the removal of contaminants associated with previous products, residues of cleaning agents as well as control of potential microbial contaminants. This guidance is for pharmaceuticals biologicals and radiopharmaceutical product manufacturers. The purpose of this guidance is to ensure that such manufacturers remain compliant with good manufacturing practice (GMP).

more information can be found on the Health Canada website

Health Canada publish new regulations on process validation for terminal sterilisation of pharmaceutical products

The draft guidelines outlined in process validation: terminal sterilisation processes pharmaceutical products (GUI – 0074) applied to the validation of sterilisation of raw materials, packaging materials, and finished products pharmaceutical and veterinary drugs.

This guidance is to ensure that companies remain within compliance of good manufacturing practice (GMP)

More information is published on the health Canada website

FDA publish updated guidance on current good tissue practice (CGTP)

The FDA is issuing this guidance to provide establishments that manufacture human cells, tissues, and cellular tissue-based products with recommendations complying with current good tissue practice (CGTP).

This is to ensure that all of these establishments can remaining compliance with 21CFR part 1271 subpart D and subpart E

FDA published guidance on the regulatory classification of pharmaceutical Co-Crystals

This guidance is being developed for applicants of new drug application is an abbreviated drug applications in order to give them an insight into the agency’s current thinking on the classification of co-crystal solid-state forms. It also provides information about the data that should be submitted to support the appropriate classification and the regulatory implications of classification.

Full guidance given below

FDA produces guidelines on the use of nucleic acid test on pooled and individual donor samples to reduce risk of hep B transmission

This guidance is being provided to blood establishments that collect whole blood and blood components for transfusion or other manufacturing. The FDA recommends the use of FDA licensed nucleic acid test to screen blood donors hepatitis B virus DNA. This guidance also provides recommendations for blood testing and disposition, Doner Management, methods of Donerrequalification and product labelling.

Full guidance provided below

FDA publishes guidance for industry on Q8, Q9 and Q10 (R4) questions and answers

Since the Q8, Q9, and keep 10 guidance is were made final experiences implementing the guidance is in the ICH regions are given rise to requests for clarification. So the FDA has consolidated these requests into a structured questions and answers document that users should interrogate.

Q8 is associated with pharmaceutical development, Q9 is associated with quality risk management, and Q 10 is associated with pharmaceutical quality systems.

FDA updates guidance on questionnaires for screening blood donors

The FDA has published draft guidance that recognises the abbreviated donor history questionnaire and accompanying materials as an acceptable mechanism collecting blood donor history information from frequent donors of blood and blood components that is consistent with the FDA requirements and recommendations.

The FDA is approved other abbreviated donor history questionnaires in the past and is brought blood donor questionnaires up-to-date in this respect.

excerpt from publication

full text here

This guidance recognizes the abbreviated donor history questionnaire and accompanying materials, version 1.3 dated August 2011, prepared by the AABB Donor History Task Force (referred to as “task force”), as an acceptable mechanism for collecting blood donor history information from frequent donors of blood and blood components that is consistent with the FDA requirements and recommendations. FDA has approved other abbreviated donor history questionnaires (aDHQ) in biologics license application supplements and may recognize other aDHQ and accompanying materials as acceptable in the future. We intend to make the aDHQ and accompanying materials (referred to as “aDHQ documents”) that we find acceptable available on the FDA website.
The aDHQ documents will provide blood establishments that collect blood and blood components (referred to as “manufacturers” or “you”) with a specific process for administering questions to frequent donors of blood and blood components1 (referred to as “frequent blood donors”) to determine their eligibility to donate. (In this guidance, the term “eligibility” refers to the donor suitability requirements described in Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations 640.3
(21 CFR 640.3)). Acceptable aDHQ documents are those documents that FDA has determined will provide manufacturers with one means of obtaining donor history information from a frequent blood donor to determine if the donor is eligible consistent with the requirements in 21 CFR 640.3.

Notification of authenticity of EMS certificates

The European medicines agency has been informed that some health authorities in importing countries require further legislation or authentication of EMA product certificates.

in instances where any foreign agency has cast doubts the authenticity of the product certificate from the DMA, the DMA encourages these health authorities to request a duplicate of the DMA certificate directly from the MA. Requests can be made to the MA compliant Inspectorate sector via phone or e-mail or post. The request needs to include the reference number and the name and address of the person in Health Authority to and certificate can be sent, DMA will send the certificate directly to Health Authority free of charge.

full press release

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has been informed that health authorities in some importing countries require further legalisation or authentication of the EMA certificates. The EMA supports the WHO’s view on the superfluous nature of authentication processes. In case of any doubt on the authenticity of already issued EMA certificates, the EMA encourages health authorities to request a duplicate of the EMA certificate directly from the EMA. These requests can be addressed to the EMA Compliance and Inspection Sector by fax +44 (0)20 7418 8595, by e-mail: certificate@ema.europa.eu or by post 7 Westferry Circus, Canary Wharf, London, E14 4HB, United Kingdom. The request has to include the reference number of the certificate(s) and the name and address of the person in the health authority to whom the certificate(s) can be sent. The EMA sends these certificates directly to the health authority free of charge.
If you have any comments or enquiries please send them by e-mail to certificate@ema.europa.eu for the members of the Certificates team to receive and act upon.

EMA publishes new information pack for certificates of medicinal products

In support of the recent changes to the application procedure for certificates of medicinal products, EMA has published a new updated information pack on its website.

The CMP is being issued in the framework of the World Health Organisation certification scheme on the quality of pharmaceutical products moving in international commerce. And in accordance with this new procedure the European Union has changed its procedures and its application forms.

excerpt from publication

full text here

A Certificate of a Medicinal Product (CMP) is a certificate issued for a medicinal product by the authority granting the marketing authorisation. The purpose of these certificates is to certify the marketing authorisation status of the medicinal product and that the medicinal product is produced using acceptable Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) standards.
CMPs are issued in the framework of the World Health Organisation (WHO) certification scheme on the quality of pharmaceutical products moving in international commerce. According to such a scheme, the CMP is intended for use by the competent authority within an importing country when the product in question is under consideration for a product licence that will authorise its importation and sale and when administrative action is required to renew, extend, vary or review such a licence.
The procedures for authorisation and, consequently, certification of medicinal products in the European Union (EU) are complex. The objective of this document is to provide a brief and easily understandable summary of the arrangements. More detailed information is available in the appropriate Community legislation1,2,3.

EMA implements a new certificate of medicinal products

EMA has announced a new application process for certificates of medical products following discussions with the World Health Organisation and industry representatives.

A number of changes have been made to the application form and are summarised in new BMA guidance documents.

Fees have not been increased.

excerpt from publication

Implementation of a new application form, which will reflect the following changes:
Possibility to attach Annex II to the certificate, which consists of information about manufactures of the biological active substance
Possibility to indicate Product’s Trade Name in the Importing Country
Creation of a drop down list for manufacturing activities instead of a free text
Modification of text concerning frequency of inspections (risk based approach)
Change in the declaration of ‘Permission letter’. Permission letter needs to be submitted only once to the Agency and the requester will be held responsible to update it, only if the name, address or the status of the parties or any conditions defined in the letter change
Change in the customer number. All companies have been informed about their customer number and it is compulsory to use it on the application form
Notification on Authenticity of EMA certificates
No increase in the fee during 2011

full document here

EMA updates website on certificates of medical products

The purpose of the European Medicines Agency certificate of medical products scheme is to support the work of health authorities outside of the European Union. The certificates are issued by the agency on behalf of the European commission to confirm the marketing authorisation status of products either authorised by the European commission through centralised procedure or products for which a centralised application has been submitted to the agency. The certificate confirms the good manufacturing practice (GMP) compliance of the manufacturing sites producing the products and the bulk  pharmaceutical forms has been established and confirmed.

Foreign agencies can then rely upon the certificates to allow the importation of medical products from Europe for sale in their regions. It gives them full confidence that all the correct manufacturing procedures had been followed, without the need to physically inspect the site themselves.

full site available here

EMA publish revision to guidance on impurities in veterinary medical products

This guidance is being published with the objective to recommend acceptable amount of residual solvents in pharmaceuticals forthe safety of target animals as well of the safety of residuals in products derived from treated food producing animals.

There are no therapeutic benefits from residual solvents, all residual solvent should be removed to the extent possible to meet product specifications. The list of solvents and their acceptable levels is not exhaustive and other solvent will be added to this list as it develops.

excerpt from guideline

full text here

The objective of this guideline is to recommend acceptable amounts for residual solvents in pharmaceuticals for the safety of the target animal as well as for the safety of residues in products derived from treated food producing animals. The guideline recommends use of less toxic solvents and describes levels considered to be toxicologically acceptable for some residual solvents.
Residual solvents in pharmaceuticals are defined here as organic volatile chemicals that are used or produced in the manufacture of active substances or excipients, or in the preparation of veterinary medicinal products. The solvents are not completely removed by practical manufacturing techniques. Appropriate selection of the solvent for the synthesis of active substance may enhance the yield, or determine characteristics such as crystal form, purity, and solubility. Therefore, the solvent may sometimes be a critical parameter in the synthetic process. This guideline does not address solvents deliberately used as excipients nor does it address solvates. However, the content of solvents in such products should be evaluated and justified.
Since there is no therapeutic benefit from residual solvents, all residual solvents should be removed to the extent possible to meet product specifications, good manufacturing practices, or other quality-based requirements. Veterinary medicinal products should contain no higher levels of residual solvents than can be supported by safety data. Some solvents that are known to cause unacceptable toxicities (Class 1, Table 1) should be avoided in the production of active substances, excipients, or veterinary medicinal products unless their use can be strongly justified in a risk-benefit assessment. Some solvents associated with less severe toxicity (Class 2, Table 2) should be limited in order to protect target animals and human consumers from potential adverse effects. Ideally, less toxic solvents (Class 3, Table 3) should be used where practical. The complete list of solvents included in this guideline is given in Appendix 1.
The lists are not exhaustive and other solvents can be used and later added to the lists. Recommended limits of Class 1 and 2 solvents or classification of solvents may change, as new safety data becomes available. Supporting safety data in a marketing application for a new veterinary medicinal product containing a new solvent may be based on concepts in this guideline or the concept of qualification of impurities as expressed in the guideline for active substance (VICH GL 10, Impurities in New Veterinary Drug Substances) or veterinary medicinal product (VICH GL 11, Impurities in New Veterinary Medicinal Products), or all three guidelines.

EMA published concept paper on the visions of guidelines for influenza vaccines

The current regulatory requirements quality, nonclinical and clinical development of influenza vaccines are currently stated in several regulatory documents. These guidelines were drafted and appointed a different time points over several years before the onset of the major pandemics in 2009 -  2010.

The EMA has recognised a need to update the guidance of requiring the manufacturing, nonclinical and clinical development of complaints of vaccines. Especially in the light of novel vaccine technologies such as recombinant proteins, viruslike particles (the LPs) DNA or live viral vectors.

For these reasons the EMA may has issued this concept paper.

Excerpt from regulations

full text here

Regulatory requirements for the quality, non-clinical and clinical development of influenza vaccines are
currently stated in several documents including multidisciplinary guidelines such as
EMEA/CPMP/4986/03, CHMP/VWP/263499/06, the Note for guidance on harmonisation of requirements
for influenza vaccines CPMP/BWP/214/96 and the Guideline on dossier structure and content for
pandemic influenza vaccine marketing authorisation application (EMEA/CPMP/VEG/4717/03 rev. 1).
These guidelines were drafted and adopted at different time points and over several years before the
onset of the 2009-2010 influenza pandemic and each addresses one of seasonal influenza vaccines,
pre-pandemic or pandemic vaccines.
The need to update the available guidelines regarding the manufacturing, non-clinical and clinical
development of influenza vaccines was recognised during and following the 2009-2010 influenza
pandemic. More recently, issues encountered and experience gained during requests for CHMP
scientific advice and the processing of several applications for marketing authorisation of influenza
vaccines have underlined the desirability of updating the existing guidelines. In addition, it is
anticipated that novel influenza vaccines could be based on e.g. recombinant proteins, virus-like
particles (VLPs), DNA or live viral vectors and there is a need to consider the regulatory expectations
that would apply to such products.
Although current and future influenza vaccines may vary in nature and composition they all aim to
prevent clinically manifest influenza by means of eliciting a protective immune response. Therefore the
development of a single consolidated guidance document on the quality, non-clinical and clinical
requirements for influenza vaccines seems to be both feasible and appropriate.

 

EMA and FDA collaborate on inspections with Australia

Two pilot programs of collaboration on inspections between European medicines agency and its international partners in United States and Australia have been conducted successfully. The two programs focused on collaboration between international regulators for quality and safety.

Joint inspections on good clinical practice were undertaken in a large number of clinical programs, as well as joint inspections of active pharmaceutical ingredients manufacturing plants.

All agencies have agreed that the programs have been a success and will continue on this collaborative approach in future. This is clearly start of international recognition between the agencies inspection standards, which should have positive effects of mutual recognition and reduce the regulatory burden of companies operating internationally in our industry.

Excerpt  from announcement

Full Text Here

Two pilot programmes of collaboration on inspections between the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and its international partners in the United States and Australia have concluded successfully, according to two reports published today. The two programmes focus on increasing international regulatory collaboration among the regulatory agencies so that drug quality and safety can be enhanced globally.

The report on the joint good clinical practice (GCP) inspection pilot programme details the success of information-sharing and collaboration on inspections relating to clinical trials. Under the joint GCP inspection pilot, the EMA and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) exchanged more than 250 documents relating to 54 different medicines and, in conjunction with the GCP inspectors of the EU Member States, organised 13 collaborative inspections of clinical trials. This lays the foundation for a more efficient use of limited resources, improved inspectional coverage and better understanding of each agency’s inspection procedures. It demonstrates how the agencies can work together to improve the protection of participants in clinical trials and better ensure the integrity of data submitted as the basis for drug approvals.

The report on the joint active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) inspections pilot programme details the success of information-sharing and collaboration on API inspections among the participating authorities (EMA, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, United Kingdom, EDQM, FDA and Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA)). Over the course of the 24-month pilot phase, the participants shared their surveillance lists and found 97 sites common to all three regions, resulting in the exchange of nearly 100 inspection reports and in nine joint inspections.

Both pilots involved the exchange of considerable amounts of information and the establishment of inspections carried out jointly by the agencies. This led to increased levels of understanding between the agencies, and a greater number of inspections of value to more than one authority.

Based on the positive experience in the two pilots, the agencies have agreed to continue with their collaboration on inspections, taking into account the experiences and lessons learned during the pilot phases.

 

FDA Publish Guidance on Container and Closure Systems Testing

FDA Publish Guidance on Container and Closure Systems Testing

Full Text Here

This guidance document provides recommendations to you, manufacturers, for using methods other than sterility testing to confirm container and closure system integrity as a part of the stability protocol for sterile biological products, human and animal drugs, and medical devices. This guidance document finalizes the draft guidance of the same title dated January 1998 (January 28, 1998, 63 Federal Register (FR) 4272).
Manufacturers of drugs and biologics purporting to be sterile must test each batch or lot, as the case may be, to ensure that the product in question conforms to sterility requirements. 21 CFR 211.167(a); 21 CFR 610.12. Such drugs and biologics are also subject to stability testing requirements. 21 CFR 211.166. The stability testing requirements include maintaining a written testing program designed to assess stability characteristics. Manufacturers of medical devices must validate processes, including sterilization for a device purporting to be sterile. 21 CFR 820.75. Stability testing should be part of the design validation of such devices. In vitro diagnostic products for human use are required to be labeled with stability information. 21 CFR 809.10. For products labeled as sterile, we consider sterility to be a stability characteristic.
The purpose of stability testing is to provide evidence on how the quality of a substance or product varies with time under the influence of a variety of environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and light, which enables you to establish or modify recommended storage conditions, retest periods, and shelf life or dating period, as the case may be.2 This guidance document applies only to the replacement of the sterility test with an appropriate container and closure system integrity test in the stability written testing program (referred to in this guidanceas the “stability protocol”), recommending an alternative to sterility testing for supporting the continued capability of containers to maintain sterility. The guidance document does not apply to sterility testing methods for product sterility testing prior to release, as container and closure system integrity tests cannot demonstrate a product’s initial sterility.
This guidance document provides information that we recommend you consider when you propose using alternative methods to sterility testing to confirm the integrity of a container and closure system throughout the product’s shelf life or dating period. The recommendations in this guidance document apply to both pre- and post-approval stability protocols for sterile biological products, human and animal drugs, including investigational and bulk drugs. For medical devices, the recommendations in this guidance document apply to stability protocols for those devices labeled as sterile.
If you currently perform sterility testing as a stability-indicating test as part of a stability protocol, you may continue to do so. If your product is approved for an alternative to sterility testing as a component of your stability protocol, this document is not intended to recommend additional testing requirements.


For Assistance with Quality Aspects of Packaging Click Here

Damien Bové is THE Drug Development and Regulatory Consultant (pharmaceutical or biotechnology), I work with my clients to define a drug development target, define a drug development strategy, define a regulatory strategy or define a commercial strategy. Our clients are generally raising funds or looking to license out their technology and we help them achieve it. If you want to know more don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Avoid Expensive Mistakes, Keep On Top of New and Changing Regulations for Free!

Sign up for the most value add free newsource you can get for free. We spend a huge amount of time and effort monitoring the main drug / device regulators websites for changes in the regulatory environment, and capture between 20 and 40 new regulations, rules and initiatives each month, and summaries them in a fantastic FREE monthly Regulatory and Market Round Up. You can Un-Subscribe at any time and we don not share your details with anybody. You can’t afford to miss out on this service. Just fill in the form below.

Fill Out the Short Form Below…


  1. (required)


  2. (valid email required)

“Please note that the pages on this website are designed to provide you with general information only. We make no warranties, representations or undertakings about any of its content. This includes the completeness, accuracy and fitness for any particular purpose, or the content of any third party site referred to or accessed through it. You are personally responsible for ensuring that the information is correct and we will not be held liable or accountable for any mistakes that occur.”

FDA Publish Guidane on Media Fills for PET Drugs

FDA Publish Guidane on Media Fills for PET Drugs

Full Text Here

This guidance is intended to help manufacturers of positron emission tomography (PET) drugs meet the requirements for the Agency’s current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for PET drugs (21 CFR part 212). Most PET drugs are designed for parenteral administration and are produced by aseptic processing. The goal of aseptic processing is to make a product that is free of microorganisms and toxic microbial byproducts, most notably bacterial endotoxins. A media fill is the performance of an aseptic manufacturing procedure using a sterile microbiological growth medium, in place of the drug solution, to test whether the aseptic procedures are adequate to prevent contamination during actual drug production.



For Assistance with CMC Planning and Documentation Click Here

Damien Bové is THE Drug Development and Regulatory Consultant (pharmaceutical or biotechnology), I work with my clients to define a drug development target, define a drug development strategy, define a regulatory strategy or define a commercial strategy. Our clients are generally raising funds or looking to license out their technology and we help them achieve it. If you want to know more don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Avoid Expensive Mistakes, Keep On Top of New and Changing Regulations for Free!

Sign up for the most value add free newsource you can get for free. We spend a huge amount of time and effort monitoring the main drug / device regulators websites for changes in the regulatory environment, and capture between 20 and 40 new regulations, rules and initiatives each month, and summaries them in a fantastic FREE monthly Regulatory and Market Round Up. You can Un-Subscribe at any time and we don not share your details with anybody. You can’t afford to miss out on this service. Just fill in the form below.

Fill Out the Short Form Below…


  1. (required)


  2. (valid email required)

“Please note that the pages on this website are designed to provide you with general information only. We make no warranties, representations or undertakings about any of its content. This includes the completeness, accuracy and fitness for any particular purpose, or the content of any third party site referred to or accessed through it. You are personally responsible for ensuring that the information is correct and we will not be held liable or accountable for any mistakes that occur.”

Health Canada Publish Draft Guidnace on GMP for Medical Gases

Health Canada Publish Draft Guidance on GMP for Medical Gases

Full Text Here

The draft guidelines outlined in Good Manufacturing Practices for Medical Gases (GUI-0031), state the generally applicable principles and practices that are acceptable to the Inspectorate and that should facilitate compliance of fabricators, packagers/labellers, distributors, importers, and home care providers of medical gases with Division 2, Part C of the Food and Drug Regulations on Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP).

This guidance document was revised to reflect the current regulatory environment and to clarify certain aspects that have relevance to the companies dealing with medical gases. Due to their unique production and handling characteristics, the application of the GMP Regulations to medical gases may be different from their application to other pharmaceuticals, thus the interpretations provided in the main GMP Guidelines are replaced by those given in this document for medical gases.

The GMP guidelines are available on Health Canada’s Compliance and Enforcement website.



For Assistance with CMC Planning and Documentation Click Here

Damien Bové is THE Drug Development and Regulatory Consultant (pharmaceutical or biotechnology), I work with my clients to define a drug development target, define a drug development strategy, define a regulatory strategy or define a commercial strategy. Our clients are generally raising funds or looking to license out their technology and we help them achieve it. If you want to know more don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Avoid Expensive Mistakes, Keep On Top of New and Changing Regulations for Free!

Sign up for the most value add free newsource you can get for free. We spend a huge amount of time and effort monitoring the main drug / device regulators websites for changes in the regulatory environment, and capture between 20 and 40 new regulations, rules and initiatives each month, and summaries them in a fantastic FREE monthly Regulatory and Market Round Up. You can Un-Subscribe at any time and we don not share your details with anybody. You can’t afford to miss out on this service. Just fill in the form below.

Fill Out the Short Form Below…


  1. (required)


  2. (valid email required)

“Please note that the pages on this website are designed to provide you with general information only. We make no warranties, representations or undertakings about any of its content. This includes the completeness, accuracy and fitness for any particular purpose, or the content of any third party site referred to or accessed through it. You are personally responsible for ensuring that the information is correct and we will not be held liable or accountable for any mistakes that occur.”

FDA Publish Guidance on Physical Chemical Identifiers for Anti-Counterfeiting

FDA Publish Guidance on Physical Chemical Identifiers for Anti-Counterfeiting

Full Text Here

This document is intended to provide guidance to pharmaceutical manufacturers who want to use physical-chemical identifiers (PCIDs) in solid oral dosage forms (SODFs). A PCID is a substance or combination of substances possessing a unique physical or chemical property that unequivocally identifies and authenticates a drug product or dosage form.
This guidance provides recommendations to pharmaceutical manufacturers on (1) design considerations for incorporating PCIDS into SODFs, (2) supporting documentation to be submitted in new drug applications (NDAs) and abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) to address the proposed incorporation of PCIDs in SODFs, (3) supporting documentation to be submitted in postapproval submissions to report or request approval to incorporate PCIDs into SODFs, and (4) procedures for reporting or requesting approval to incorporate PCIDs into SODFs as a postapproval change.
The incorporation of components or features used in radiofrequency identification for drug products is outside the scope of this guidance. In addition, this guidance does not apply to manufacturing or formulation changes, made in conjunction with the addition of a PCID, that go beyond simply inserting the PCID into a blending or mixing operation (e.g., adding a PCID to a non-functional tablet film coating is covered by this guidance, but adding a non-functional film coating that contains a PCID to a previously uncoated tablet involves manufacturing changes that are not covered by this guidance). The incorporation of a PCID into the packaging or labeling is not covered in this guidance.
Other guidance documents, which may be applicable to proposed changes outside the scope of this guidance, are located on FDA’s guidance Web site2 and should be consulted to help to determine whether additional reporting or approval procedures may apply to proposed changes outside the scope of this guidance.


For Assistance with Changes to CMC Plans and Regulation Click Here

Damien Bové is THE Drug Development and Regulatory Consultant (pharmaceutical or biotechnology), I work with my clients to define a drug development target, define a drug development strategy, define a regulatory strategy or define a commercial strategy. Our clients are generally raising funds or looking to license out their technology and we help them achieve it. If you want to know more don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Avoid Expensive Mistakes, Keep On Top of New and Changing Regulations for Free!

Sign up for the most value add free newsource you can get for free. We spend a huge amount of time and effort monitoring the main drug / device regulators websites for changes in the regulatory environment, and capture between 20 and 40 new regulations, rules and initiatives each month, and summaries them in a fantastic FREE monthly Regulatory and Market Round Up. You can Un-Subscribe at any time and we don not share your details with anybody. You can’t afford to miss out on this service. Just fill in the form below.

Fill Out the Short Form Below…


  1. (required)


  2. (valid email required)

“Please note that the pages on this website are designed to provide you with general information only. We make no warranties, representations or undertakings about any of its content. This includes the completeness, accuracy and fitness for any particular purpose, or the content of any third party site referred to or accessed through it. You are personally responsible for ensuring that the information is correct and we will not be held liable or accountable for any mistakes that occur.”

FDA Publish Guidance on PET Drug Applications

FDA Publish Guidance on PET Drug Applications

Full Text Here

On December 9, 2009, FDA issued a final current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulation for the production of positron emission tomography (PET) drugs. Under the requirements of section 121 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA), within two years following this publication date, an NDA or ANDA must be submitted for any PET drug marketed for clinical use in the United States.
This guidance is intended to assist applicants in preparing new drug applications (NDAs) or abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) for fludeoxyglucose F 18 injection, ammonia N 13 injection, and sodium fluoride F 18 injection used in PET imaging for the indications cited in Section III (below). FDA approval of an NDA or ANDA will make it possible to market these PET drugs for clinical use according to the requirements of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act).
The guidance (1) provides brief background information, (2) makes recommendations to help you decide whether you should submit an NDA or an ANDA, (3) includes a description of the content and format needed in an NDA and an ANDA, and (4) provides boxed text that you can copy or cut and paste into your application. The content and format sections provide information required to submit an NDA or an ANDA for these PET drugs. Finally, we have developed sample formats for the chemistry sections and for the proposed labeling for fludeoxyglucose F 18 injection, ammonia N 13 injection, and sodium fluoride F 18 injection as well as 356h sample forms. These formats are supplied as separate documents on FDA’s web site.
FDA’s guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the Agency’s current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements apply. The use of the word should in Agency guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required.
Because this guidance discusses in great detail what must be submitted in an NDA (particularly a 505(b)(2) NDA) or an ANDA (505(j)), the guidance differs from most guidances in that it contains extensive mandatory language, especially in the Appendices. This mandatory language is used whenever the Act and/or FDA regulations require the submission of certain information. Unlike other documents in which mandatory language is accompanied by the related cite, to make the guidance more user friendly and less cumbersome, we do not cite each regulation each time we discuss a requirement.


For Assistance with Developing PET Drugs Click Here

Damien Bové is THE Drug Development and Regulatory Consultant (pharmaceutical or biotechnology), I work with my clients to define a drug development target, define a drug development strategy, define a regulatory strategy or define a commercial strategy. Our clients are generally raising funds or looking to license out their technology and we help them achieve it. If you want to know more don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Avoid Expensive Mistakes, Keep On Top of New and Changing Regulations for Free!

Sign up for the most value add free newsource you can get for free. We spend a huge amount of time and effort monitoring the main drug / device regulators websites for changes in the regulatory environment, and capture between 20 and 40 new regulations, rules and initiatives each month, and summaries them in a fantastic FREE monthly Regulatory and Market Round Up. You can Un-Subscribe at any time and we don not share your details with anybody. You can’t afford to miss out on this service. Just fill in the form below.

Fill Out the Short Form Below…


  1. (required)


  2. (valid email required)

“Please note that the pages on this website are designed to provide you with general information only. We make no warranties, representations or undertakings about any of its content. This includes the completeness, accuracy and fitness for any particular purpose, or the content of any third party site referred to or accessed through it. You are personally responsible for ensuring that the information is correct and we will not be held liable or accountable for any mistakes that occur.”