PREQUALIFICATION OF ANTIMALARIAL DRUG PRODUCTS - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 31
About This Presentation
Title:

PREQUALIFICATION OF ANTIMALARIAL DRUG PRODUCTS

Description:

... with http://www.who.int/medicines/library/qsm/manual-on-marketing/who-dmp-rgs-98 5.doc ... HM, Olliaro P., In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003 Oxford) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:57
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 32
Provided by: hanske6
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: PREQUALIFICATION OF ANTIMALARIAL DRUG PRODUCTS


1
PREQUALIFICATION OF ANTIMALARIAL DRUG PRODUCTS
Assessment of product dossiers Clinical and
Bioequivalence part
  • Hans Kemmler
  • Clinical Reviewer
  • Antibacterials and Antimalarials
  • Swissmedic
  • Bangkok, 19 October 2004

2
Overview
  • Prequalification Requirements for Finished
    Pharmaceutical Products (FPPs)
  • Clinical issues
  • The basic requirements
  • Results of evaluation
  • Conclusions

3
Prequalification Requirements for Finished
Pharmaceutical Products (FPPs)
  • Website WHO (http//mednet3.who.int/prequal/defau
    lt.htm)
  • Manufacturers are requested to submit a covering
    letter, sample and product dossier (generics --
    innovator) including a completed checklist.
  • Generics If innovators exist and are approved
    Bioequivalence study, assessed with
    http//www.who.int/medicines/library/qsm/manual-on
    -marketing/who-dmp-rgs-985.doc
  • Innovator What data and information needs to be
    submitted in a dossier for an innovator product?

4
Artemisinin- Generics for Malaria?
  • Currently only very few innovators (artemisinin
    derivatives) approved in ICH- and associated
    countries
  • No reference product available for bioequivalence
    studies

5
Artemisinin - Innovators?
  • What data and information needs to be submitted
    in a dossier for an innovator product?
  • For innovator products, registered/licensed in
    the USA, EU or Japan Submit the following
    information
  • A WHO-type Certificate of a Pharmaceutical
    Product issued by one of the regulatory authority
    of ICH regions (or other stringent regulatory
    authorities), together with the summary of
    product characteristics (SmPC)
  • Assessment report(s) issued by the respective
    regulatory authority
  • ........
  • Does not apply to most of FPP for which
    Expression of Interest was invited

6
Problems for applicant (1)
  • Is my FPP an innovator product?
  • Then, since not approved in ICH countries
  • Full documentation of preclinical and clinical
    efficacy and safety according to ICH requirements
    has to be provided, all claims in SPC have to be
    substantiated
  • fully documented clinical studies!! (abstracts
    and even publications normally not sufficient)

7
Problems for applicant (2)
  • I want my FPP to be evaluated as generic! Which
    reference product can I use for BE-studies?
  • Currently no recommendations possible
  • Applicant has to research literature for suitable
    reference product, and prove that this product
    has sufficient efficacy and safety data
    available
  • Very difficult!
  • (But Help from WHOs side maybe coming)

8
Questions of applicants (1)
  • The active ingredient of my FPP is listed in the
    WHO - Essential Drugs List
  • http//www.who.int/health_topics/essential_medicin
    es/en/ Essential medicines are those that
    satisfy the priority health care needs of the
    population. They are selected with due regard to
    public health relevance, evidence on efficacy and
    safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness.
    http//www.who.int/medicines/organization/par/edl/
    eml2002core.doc
  • http//www.who.int/medicines/organization/par/edl/
    eml2002comp.doc The complementary list presents
    essential medicines for priority diseases which
    are efficacious, safe and cost-effective but not
    necessarily affordable, or for which specialised
    health care facilities or services may be needed.
  • Why do I have to prove efficacy and safety again?

9
Model List of Essential Medicines(13th list)
  • artemether (2) (injection) P01BE02
  • artemether lumefantrine (1) (tablets)
    P01BE52
  • artesunate (2) (tablets) P01BE03
  • (1) core list, (2) complementary list

10
Questions of applicants (2)
  • WHO has invited Expression of Interest, so
    efficacy and safety are already known and
    documentation already at WHO?
  • Innovators Why do I have to prove efficacy and
    safety again?
  • Generics Which is possible reference product?

11
Problems of assessors (1)
  • Evidence of efficacy and safety of active
    ingredient is not sufficient evidence for FPP,
    each has to be evaluated on its own merits
  • With one exception, the FPPs which have been
    used for inclusion of API in Essential Drugs
    List, are not known to assessors -gt thus even not
    possible to provide guidance for reference
    product

12
Problems of assessors (2)
  • Within time frame for assessment, no possibility
    to perform own literature review -gt has to be
    provided by applicant for his FPP
  • No guidance documents or SOPs from WHO
    applicable -gt assessors developed draft SOP for
    specific problem

13
Clear deficiencies in many submissions received
  • No characterisation of pharmacokinetic properties
    of FPP For innovators and generics as well
    unacceptable
  • General statements
  • No interaction known -gt clearly not true
  • No (or minimal) adverse events information has
    to be provided through literature survey
  • Too broad efficacy claims

14
Clear deficiencies
  • Galenical development history not provided -gt Do
    results of earlier studies apply to current
    formulation?
  • Lacking List of all clinical trials performed
    with
  • specific FPP (including information on
    formulation, if possible)
  • Active ingredient

15
Clear deficiencies
  • Far from complete toxicological documentation
    Literature easily available e.g.
    ARTEMISININ-COMPOUNDS LITERATURE LIST
  • 1. Abdin MZ, Israr M, Rehman RU, Jain SK.
    Artemisinin, a novel antimalarial drug
    biochemical and molecular approaches for enhanced
    production. Planta Med 69(4)289-299, 2003.
  • To
  • 352. Zheng GQ Cytotoxic terpenoids and
    flavonoids from Artemisia annua. Planta Med
    6054-57, 1994.
  • 353. Ziffer H, Highet RJ, Klayman DL
    Artemisinin an endoperoxidic antimalarial from
    Artemisia annua L. Fortschr Chem Org Naturst
    72121-124, 1997.

16
Toxicological data
  • In contrast to ICH guidelines full documentation
    not required in these cases
  • Are well investigated for API, only FPP specific
    data (e.g. local tolerance) should be presented
  • Expert report is sufficient, emphasis on tox-data
    with possible relevance for adverse events

17
Lessons learned during assessment
  • Applicants
  • Several applicants submit very small bits and
    pieces of information relating to their FPP
  • Additional pieces of information nearly every
    month
  • Assessors
  • Bits assessed with each new round of meetings and
    letters sent to applicant
  • Very time consuming and inefficient
  • Increasingly difficult to have all relevant
    information at hand

18
Note to applicants....
1. Demonstrate bio-equivalence with an
established, acceptable reference product. A
suitable reference product has to be identified
by the applicant and must be one that is
acceptable to WHO assessors. 2. Provide direct
evidence in support of the products efficacy and
safety, which in most cases will be based on both
of the following a. general information
pertaining to the active ingredients
pharmacologic properties, including
toxicological, pharmacokinetic, and efficacy and
safety data as published, and resulting from
investigations with preparations different from
the FPP applied for b. specific information
emerging from clinical studies performed with the
proposed product
19
Note to applicants....
2. Provide direct evidence in support of the
products efficacy and safety, which in most
cases will be based on both of the
following a. general information pertaining to
the active ingredients pharmacologic properties,
including toxicological, pharmacokinetic, and
efficacy and safety data as published, and
resulting from investigations with preparations
different from the FPP applied for b. specific
information emerging from clinical studies
performed with the proposed product
20
Basic requirements
  1. Complete list of all clinical trials performed
    with the proposed FPP (compare ICH CTD M4E ,
    section 2.7.3.2 and 2.7.3.6 and tables 2.7.3.1
    and 2)
  2. If different galenical formulations of the FPP
    have been marketed or used in clinical trials, a
    galenical development history should be provided
    with clear identification of the respective
    formulations used in the trials included in the
    list (see1.)
  3. Basic pharmacokinetic characterisation of the FPP
  4. Summary of Product Characteristics and Package
    Insert
  5. Expert reports on pharmaco-toxicological and
    clinical evidence for the active ingredient as
    well as the FPP

21
Basic requirements Ia
  • Complete list of all clinical trials performed
    with the proposed FPP
  • The applicants should provide a complete list of
    all clinical trials (phase I, II and III) they
    are aware of and for which their product was
    used. It should be indicated whether the study
    was sponsored by the applicant. As a first step
    in the identification of studies not sponsored by
    the applicant, a consultation of the review of
    the Cochrane database may be useful Artemisinin
    derivatives for treating uncomplicated malaria.
    (McIntosh HM, Olliaro P., In The Cochrane
    Library, Issue 2, 2003 Oxford).

22
Basic requirements Ib
  • Complete list of all clinical trials performed
    with the proposed FPP
  • This list should be updated each time when
    substantial new information, i.e. new clinical
    studies with the FPP, is submitted
  • Existing full study reports and publications
    based on these studies should be submitted. If no
    study report or publication exists for any of the
    aforementioned clinical trials, the applicants
    should comment on reasons known to them and
    either confirm that they are not aware of any
    negative findings in unpublished trials or
    comment on all unreported and unpublished
    evidence.

23
Basic requirements II
  • If different galenical formulations of the FPP
    have been marketed or used in clinical trials, a
    galenical development history should be provided
    with clear identification of the respective
    formulations used in the trials included in the
    list
  • If different galenical forms were manufactured in
    the development history of the product, then the
    applicant should provide a list in order to
    clearly identify the different forms used in the
    respective studies. If the applicant is not able
    to identify the specific galenical form (e.g. for
    an independently performed trial) then they
    should comment on which form was most likely
    used. It should be confirmed unambiguously if
    only one galenical formulation was ever used in
    humans.

24
Basic requirements III
  • Basic pharmacokinetic characterisation of the FPP
  • In most cases, the most important part of the
    evidence about the pharmacokinetic properties of
    the active ingredient will come from the
    (abundant!!) literature. However, at least some
    information about the pharmacokinetics/bioavailabi
    lity of the FPP is absolutely necessary, too, in
    order to allow a judgement as to whether results
    from clinical trials with other FPPs can at least
    to a sufficient degree be extrapolated to the FPP
    applied for. This information may come from
    studies in healthy volunteers or in patients. In
    all cases the results will have to be discussed
    and compared to results from published studies in
    the Clinical Expert Report. The results from
    pharmacokinetic investigations must be described
    briefly in the SPC of the product.
  • Statements that plasma levels of artemisinin
    derivatives are too difficult to measure and not
    necessary only show lack of knowledge of recent
    literature

25
Basic requirements IV
  • Summary of Product Characteristics and Package
    Insert
  • The SPC and package insert should be specific
    with regard to the infections which can be
    reasonably treated with the FPP.
  • In most cases the FPP will not be equally well
    suited for both uncomplicated and complicated
    malaria, or for all species of Plasmodia.
  • Efforts should be made to keep the SPC up to
    date, especially with regard to safety-relevant
    information.
  • (compare e.g. to Co-Artem )

26
Basic requirements V
  • Expert reports on pharmaco-toxicological and
    clinical evidence for the active ingredient as
    well as the FPP
  • Expert reports will have to be updated just
    like the list of all trials as soon as new
    substantial information is added

27
Basic requirements Consequences for assessment
All documentation, new or additional, provided
with current or future Expressions of Interest
will first be checked whether these basic
requirements are fulfilled. If the basic
requirements are not met then no assessment
will be conducted on the clinical data. The
applicant will be notified of the deficiencies.
When the basic requirements are met an assessment
of the data provided will commence and more
comprehensive communications will be sent to the
applicant as required.
28
Results of evaluation
  • Initially, only the documentation of a small
    number of FPPs has fulfilled basic
    requirements and for even less the
    documentation could be considered sufficient
  • Artesunate 50mg Tablets Sanofi-Synthelabo
  • Artemether/Lumefantrine Novartis

29
Conclusions Past
  • Artemisinin derivatives could not be evaluated
    according to published WHO Prequalification
    Requirements for Finished Pharmaceutical
    Products
  • In the beginning uncertainties on both sides,
    assessors and applicants
  • Very insufficient dossiers of many want-to-be
    innovators
  • No bioequivalence studies submitted for multi
    source products
  • No reference products identified

30
Conclusions Presence and Future
  • Draft SOP for evaluation developed
  • Basic requirements for innovator products
    published
  • WHO experts working on literature survey, which
    should
  • Provide help for innovators
  • Enable WHO to name possible reference products

31
And finally The bare necessities
  • Apart from the intrinsic efficacy/safety of the
    active ingredient, the bioavailability is THE
    clinical quality mark of a FPP, therefore
  • Without pharmacokinetic characterisation in
    humans,
  • either through Phase I Studies for innovators or
    through bioequivalence studies for multi-source
    products
  • no Finished Pharmaceutical Product will pass the
    prequalification.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com