Keath
☆    

India,
2014-03-18 13:27
(4486 d 09:30 ago)

Posting: # 12651
Views: 3,318
 

 Retention of IPs for BE studies for Trans­dermal Systems [Regulatives / Guidelines]

Dear All,

I have doubt regarding the sample retention as per the FDA guidance. In the trasdermal formulations, there are many tests to be performed for generation of the complete release profile for which it will cross the limit of 300 (for solid oral formulation) as mentioned in the guidance.

My query is that should i have to consider upper limit of 300 units as or i have to retain 5 times of the complete release profile??

Thanks in advance!!
Dr_Dan
★★  

Germany,
2014-03-19 12:43
(4485 d 10:15 ago)

@ Keath
Posting: # 12666
Views: 2,790
 

 Retention of IPs for BE studies for Trans­der­mal Systems

Dear Keath
The FDA guideline states that as a general rule the quantity of reserve samples should be sufficient to permit the Agency to perform five times all of the release tests required in the application or supplemental application. Because since at the time of releasing the guideline the FDA had limited experience with the retention and testing of non-solid oral dosage forms, the FDA was unable to recommend an upper limit for the retention of these products (including transdermal patches). Therefore I suggest keeping the five times quantity (even if this means much more than 300 samples) unless you have a scientific rationale for a less amount. The decision is in the responsibility of the sponsor.
I hope this helps.
Kind regards
Dan

Kind regards and have a nice day
Dr_Dan
Keath
☆    

India,
2014-03-24 10:47
(4480 d 12:11 ago)

@ Dr_Dan
Posting: # 12692
Views: 2,568
 

 Retention of IPs for BE studies for Trans­der­mal Systems

Dear Dr. Dan

Thank you for sharing your views
UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,570 registered users;
198 visitors (0 registered, 198 guests [including 23 identified bots]).
Forum time: 23:58 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Most scientists today are devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on
producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood
of inane papers that now constitutes “scientific progress”
in many areas.    Paul Feyerabend

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