Regulatory authorities specifications

The placement of emergency kits containing controlled substances in LTCF not registered with the DEA will be deemed in compliance with the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, if the appropriate state agency or regulatory authority specifically approves such placement, and sets forth procedures that require the following ... 

Under certain situations, for specific equipment configurations, it may be possible to safely operate above the NFPA limit of 60% of the LFL. If this method of operation is to be considered, system-specific test data should be generated which demonstrates dial the combusdble concentradon can be controlled in a safe manner, and only then in consultadon with appropriate company and (where required) regulatory authorities. 

The Japanese regulatory authority is the Ministry of Health and Welfare (MHW) and the Pharmaceutical and Medical Safety Bureau (PSMB) is responsible for the promulgation of national and international guidelines in the form of Notifications. Guidelines are available on the Internet web-site of the National Institute of Health and Science (http //www.nihs.go.jp). The MHW has not issued specific guidance on the development of chiral drugs, but has nonetheless responded to the enantiomer-versus-racemate scientific debate. The attitude of the MHW and its advisory body, the Central Pharmaceutical Affairs Council (CPAC) is discussed in two articles by Shindo and Caldwell published in 1991 and 1995 [17, 18]. The latter paper analyzes the results of a survey of the Japanese pharmaceutical industry which sought responses on chirality issues. 

Pharmacopoeia publications provide a final important source of information for the pharmaceutical industry, regulatory authorities, and the healthcare professions. These are concerned with establishing quality standards. These publications include monographs that define specifications for the purity and identity of established pharmaceutical ingredients, both active and non-active, together with recognised analytical methods that may be used to evaluate them. The most relevant are the United States Pharmacopoeia (USP) and the European Pharmacopoeia (Ph.Eur). 

As for job specifications, dmg regulatory authorities in all the countries provide written job descriptions for their employees, with the exception of Cypms and Venezuela, although in the latter written SOPs are available. 

Dmg regulatory authorities in each of the countries produce an annual or quarterly report, the contents of which vary. The study in Cyprus specifically pointed out that the annual reports of its DRA are mostly activity reports, with no comments about the extent to which the set objectives have been achieved. 

Only three countries, Tunisia, Uganda and Zimbabwe, do not issue a GMP certificate. The drug regulatory authorities in these three countries do conduct GMP inspections, but do not issue a specific document which indicates that a manufacturing plant has attained GMP standards. The MCAZ does, however, provide a GMP certificate at the manufacturer s request to facilitate international registration and export of products. In Malaysia, various types of certificates are issued GMP certificates Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product for export and Certificate of Free Sale for medical devices and cosmetic products. Cyprus has no clear criteria for issuing a GMP certificate instead. 

Most often studies will be accepted by regulatory authorities even if they do not contain all information. For example, a summary, the scope, a separate notice regarding the residue definition or a schematic diagram of the analytical procedure are helpful and may avoid additional questions, but they are not essential. Also, detailed specification of standard glassware or chemicals commonly used in residue analysis is less important. Finally, data about extraction efficiency or analyte stability can be offered in separate studies or statements, which are also valid for other methods. However, each method must precisely describe at the minimum ... 

The Electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) is the vision for future electronic submissions to the FDA. This specification was developed by the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) as an open-standards solution for electronic submissions to worldwide regulatory authorities. The FDA has adopted the eCTD as the future replacement for its other e-submission guidance, although for now the older guidance is still in effect. Note that the eCTD still depends largely on submitting text documents as PDF files and submitting data sets as SAS XPORT transport format files. 

Specification of acceptable limits on extractables is preferred when possible by regulatory authorities. At a minimum, a profiling of extractables using appropriate solvents is expected of pharmaceutical manufacturers. 

In addition to the regular biennial inspections, specific inspections of a particular study can be carried out at the specific request of regulatory authorities either in the UK or abroad. There may also be a surveillance visit to monitor the effectiveness of remedial actions arising from serious adverse inspection/findings. 

The mutual recognition procedure is an alternative means by which a marketing authorization may be sought. It is open to all drug types except products of biotechnology. Briefly, if this procedure is adopted by a sponsor, then the sponsor applies for a marketing licence not to the EMEA, but to a specific national regulatory authority (chosen by the sponsor). The national authority then has 210 days to assess the application. 

Mechanistic studies carried out in the course of recent years indicated that sodium saccharin may be involved in the formation of specific proteins occurring in rat urine which may contribute to the formation of bladder tumours. Most scientists and regulatory authorities now share the view that the incidence of bladder tumours in male rats after saccharin ingestion is species-specific and therefore probably without any significance for humans. Accordingly, the former temporaiy ADI of 0-2.5 mg/kg of body weight has been raised to 0-5 mg/kg by JECFA21 and the SCF.22... 

Essentially, the eCTD is a transport format for facilitating electronic submissions. The eCTD serves as an interface for industry-to-agency transfer of regulatory information while at the same time, taking into consideration the facilitation of the creation, review, life cycle management, and archival of the electronic submission. The eCTD specification lists the criteria that will make an electronic submission technically valid. The eCTD represents a major advance in the submission of information to support an NDA. In the future, companies may be able to send their submissions to several regulatory authorities simultaneously with a single stroke of a computer key. 

The CTDs were implemented in July 2003. They are format-based documents for submission to the regulatory authorities the country-specific process of review, for example, via the IND and NDA of the United States or the Centralized Procedure of the EMEA, is not affected. The harmonized CTDs help to reduce cost and accelerate approval time. Figure 7.1 shows the CTD structure five modules with Module 1 for regional administrative information specihc to each country. Module 2 on summary of quality, nonclinical and clinical. Module 3 on quality. Module 4 on nonclinical study reports, and Module 5 on clinical study reports. 

Regulatory authorities recognize that, in spite of all the control systems put in place, deviations and changes are sometimes inevitable. A robust GMP system includes procedures to handle, review, and approve changes in raw materials, specifications, analytical methods, facilities, equipment, processes, computer software, and labeling and packaging. All the changes have to be documented with references for traceability. 

---