inter-batch variability? [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Dr_Dan  – Germany, 2010-08-04 10:29 (4310 d 11:36 ago) – Posting: # 5713
Views: 16,166

Dear all
I need your help regarding following problem: we performed 2 BA (pilot) and 2 BE (pivotal, one 2 way cross-over and one replicate design) studies with the same test formulation.
The batches we used were:
Study 1 (pilot): test 1 (lab scale), ref. 1, study centre 1
Study 2 (pilot): test 2, ref. 2, study centre 1
Study 3 (pivotal): test 2, ref. 1, study centre 2
Study 4 (pivotal): test 3, ref. 3, study centre 3
Both pivotal studies show bioequivalence, the pilot studies were not powered adequately to demonstrate bioequivalence but the results hint in this direction. The drug is highly variable.
The point estimator (AUC/Cmax) differ between the studies:
Study 1: 111/116
Study 2: 84/95
Study 3: 111/114
Study 4: 98/97
The assessor concludes that these different point estimators hint at inter batch variability of the test product (why not the reference?) and therefore a marketing authorisation can not be granted.
What should be our response, which argumentation could help to safe our product?
Your input is very much appreciated.
Kind regards
Dan

Kind regards and have a nice day
Dr_Dan

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
22,092 posts in 4,630 threads, 1,567 registered users;
online 8 (0 registered, 8 guests [including 6 identified bots]).
Forum time: Monday 22:05 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

There is no adequate defense, except stupidity,
against the impact of a new idea.    Percy Williams Bridgman

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