no BE between early phase and Phase 3 formulations [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by fno Homepage – Belgium, 2020-01-22 17:11 (856 d 02:26 ago) – Posting: # 21080
Views: 2,219

Thanks Helmut for your feed-back!

» Without digging into guidelines: No. What we have in Phase I/II is sometimes not what I would call a ‘formulation’ in the biopharmaceutical sense at all. Anything goes: Manually filled capsules, lab-scale tablet-presses, etc.

Indeed.

» Doesn’t matter because we are interested in PK (I) and safety (II).

OK but then how to justify in the dossier the extrapolation of some early phase outcomes, e.g. a food effect or an efficacy and/or safety exposure signal... should these key findings be evaluated/demonstrated again with the final formulation?

» Once you move to phase III you are bound to cGMP (though still in pilot-scale). Only when you move from III to the to be marketed formulation, the applicable SUPAC guidance (IR, MR, SS) cut in and very likely you need a BE study.

Yep.

Thank you!

Kind regards,
Fabrice

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,110 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,567 registered users;
online 18 (0 registered, 18 guests [including 9 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 20:37 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

We absolutely must leave room for doubt
or there is no progress and no learning.
There is no learning without having to pose a question.
And a question requires doubt.
People search for certainty.
But there is no certainty.    Richard Feynman

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5