Farmacia Aguilar

Este Blog esta destinado a compartir conocimiento relacionado con:

Tecnología Farmacéutica,
Farmacia Industrial y Galénica,

La industria Farmacéutica

promoviendo la divulgación de temas actuales del mundo de la Farmacia convirtiendose en una fuente de consulta para profesionales Farmaceuticos del sector y universitarios de Pregrado o Postgrado

BLOGS FARMACEUTICOS

Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta news. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta news. Mostrar todas las entradas

lunes, 14 de marzo de 2011

IV Jornadas de Investigación de la UB


Este Viernes 18 de MarzoSe celebran las IV jornadas de Investigación a la UB, donde se exponen las mejores investigaciones realizadas en cada uno los distintos departamentos de la Universidad de BarcelonaPonentes:

Dr.Carlos Oleaga

Dr.Miriam Onrubia

Dr.Marta Barenys

Dr.Oriol Penon

Dr.Carolina Storniolo

Dr.Aurelio Vazquez

Dr.Johnny E. Aguilar Díaz

Dr.Vicenta Albarral

Dr.EsperanÇa Carrio

Dr.Xavier Garcia

Dr.Eva TorresDr.Laura Alcalde



Los objetivos son Dar a conocer las investigaciones realizadasPromover la interrelación a nivel de conocimientosTransmitir la necesidad de promover la investigacion a la UB

Los Programas

lunes, 27 de septiembre de 2010

The New GAMP Good Practice Guide: How to Operate Computerised Systems in a GMP-Compliant Way

2008 saw the publication of version 5 of the GAMP® Guide and thus the creation of a standard for the validation of computerised systems, which is accepted all over the world, and required in some parts, too. Even though GAMP®5 covers the complete life cycle of computerised systems, the main focus is on the necessary validation activities. Some basic activities of the (GMP-compliant) operation are already described in GAMP®5 in the "O" appendices (O for operation).
These operation-related appendices served as the basis for the creation of a GAMP GPG (Good Practice Guide) "A Risk-Based Approach to Operation of GxP-Computerized Systems - A Companion Volume to GAMP®5" published at the beginning of 2010. GPGs are based on the GAMP®5 and focus on specific areas within the life cycle (e. g. testing) or on particular IT systems (e. g. MES systems).
The structure of this GPG follows, as far as this is possible, the structure of the operation-related GAMP®5 appendices.
01. Introduction 02. Overview of the Operation Phase03. What Organizations Should Do04. Process Relationships05. Handover06. Establishing and Managing Support Services07. Performance Monitoring08. Incident Management09. Corrective and Preventive Action10. Operational Change and Configuration Management11. Repair Activity12. Periodic Review13. Backup and Restore14. Business Continuity Management15. Security Management16. System Administration17. Data Migration18. System Retirement, Decommissioning, and Disposal19. Appendix 1 - RACI Roles and Operational Processes 20. Appendix 2 - Mapping of Operational Processes to ITIL® and COBIT®21. Appendix 3 - List of Control Records22. Appendix 4 - References23. Appendix 5 - Glossary
On balance one can say that the GMP-regulated environment places more and more emphasis on the operational phase of computerised systems. As a complement to the GAMP®5 Guide, the GAMP GPG "A Risk-Based Approach to Operation of GxP-Computerized Systems - A Companion Volume to GAMP®5" gives excellent guidance for daily practice.

Source ECA

miércoles, 16 de junio de 2010

Johnny Aguilar & Elias B. First Prize I-ISPE SPAIN AWARD


Johnny Aguilar y Elías Benito de Novartis BdV, ganadores del I Premio ISPE España al mejor artículo técnico de ingeniería farmacéutica
El premio se entregó durante la IV Congreso de ISPE España, presidida por Sergio Torralbo.
“Aportación al diseño de un sistema cerrado de granulación por vía húmeda totalmente integrado de alto rendimiento con sistema de análisis online”, bajo este título se esconde el minucioso trabajo explicativo desarrollado por nuestros compañeros Johhny Aguilar, MST Manager y Elías Benito, Process Expert de Cápsulas de la planta de producción de Novartis Barberà, que les ha hecho ganadores del I Premio ISPE España el mejor artículo técnico de ingeniería farmacéutica. “El artículo pretende aportar a partir de un análisis de riesgo previo (ICHQ9) una guía de apoyo en el diseño de líneas de granulación que permita obtener altos rendimientos y además propone la implementación de sistemas de análisis integrados on line”,
La entrega del premio se realizó durante el IV Congreso de ISPE España que se celebró en Madrid el pasado 19 de mayo y que contó con la participación del director general de Novartis Farmacéutica, Francisco Ballester con la ponencia “ Retos y tendencias del Sector Salud", así como otros destacados ponentes como la Dra. Anna Veiga, directora del CMR, Doña Doña Belén Escribano, Subdirectora General de Inspección y Control de Medicamentos de la Agencia Española de Medicamentos y Productos Sanitarios, así como otros compañeros de la industria farmacéutica.

Premio
El jurado del I Premio ISPE España ha evaluado la calidad técnica, la capacidad divulgativa y la componente innovadora de los artículos presentados.

PARA ACCEDER AL ARTICULO HACER CLICK AQUI

lunes, 27 de julio de 2009

Acuerdo entre Agencias reguladoras sanitarias

La US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), la Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) y el European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and Health Care (EDQM) han establecido un acuerdo bilateral de confidencialidad, para compartir entre todos ellos información restringida sobre inspecciones a fabricantes de principios activos y de excipientes.

Estos acuerdos tiene como objetivo, facilitar la participación de las tres organizaciones en un proyecto piloto conjunto para harmonizar y racionalizar las prácticas de inspección internacionales, y el alcance de estos acuerdos incluye el intercambio de información interna y confidencial, relacionada con principios activos y excipientes utilizados en la fabricación de medicamentos.

Aquí también podéis consultar la lista de acuerdos de confidencialidad que tiene actualmente FDA con otras organizaciones.

jueves, 18 de junio de 2009

Quo vadis GMP?

The USA have already made suggestions for updating the US-American GMP rules through their initiative "cGMP for the 21st Century". But what about Europe? The EC GMP Guide Part I dates back to the 80s. Part II (ICH Q7) is a product of the 90s. Even these two parts show obvious differences in comparable chapters. Revisions of various annexes have been conducted until today or are pending (e.g. Annexes 2 and 11). Changes have also been made to some chapters of the Guide itself (e. g. introduction of the Product Quality Review and of Risk Management in Chapter 1).

What comes next?

Perhaps the new GMP Guide of the Canadians could give us a hint to this? As a PIC/S member country and also as a country with a Mutual Recognition Agreement on GMP with the EU, Canada's GMP rules should also be of interest to the EU. Quite recently (8 May 2009) the Canadians' new GMP Guide was published. It comes into force on 8 November 2009. Details on the changes with regard to the original version of 2002 can be found here.

The now very comprehensive Guide consists of 102 pages (including 4 appendices, acronym list, glossary and references) in PDF format and has a slightly different structure than the EC GMP Guide. The manufacture of sterile medicinal products has e.g. been directly integrated into the Guide. The contents, however, are quite similar to those of Annex 1 (sometimes even the wording is identical).
The following list represents the table of contents of the 2009 version of the Canadian GMP rules:

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction
2.0 Purpose
3.0 Scope
4.0 Quality Management
4.1 Guiding Principle
4.2 Relationship among Quality Elements
4.2.1 Quality Assurance
4.2.2 Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) for Drugs
4.2.3 Quality Control .
5.0 Regulation
Sale
Premises
Equipment
Personnel
Sanitation
Raw Material Testing
Manufacturing Control
Quality Control Department
Packaging Material Testing
Finished Product Testing
Records
Samples
Stability
Sterile Products
Medical Gases
Appendix A Internationally Harmonized Requirements for Batch Certification
Appendix A1 Content of the Fabricator's/Manufacturer's Batch Certificate for Drug/Medicinal Products Exported to Countries under the Scope of a Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA)
Appendix B
Acronyms
Glossary of Terms
Appendix C Annexes to the Current Edition of the Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) Guidelines
References
Health Products and Food Branch Inspectorate - Operational Centres

The structure of the Canadian GMP Guide is very helpful for the reader, since - apart from the actual regulation - he or she also finds the corresponding rationale for this regulation as well as its interpretation. The requirements on equipment are e.g. described in a concise manner (cleanable, not contaminating the product, functional). The rationale then explains among others which types of contamination (dust, rust …) can occur for which reasons (misuse of the equipment, poor maintenance …). Finally, the interpretation requires among other things that validated CIP equipment must be easy to dismantle for periodic verification. Such detailed requirements cannot be found explicitly e.g. in the EC GMP Guide.

In the following you will find some examples for notable features of the new Canadian GMP rules:

For the identity testing of raw materials, a composite sample from 10 containers at the most is acceptable if a potency test is performed on this composite sample taking account of the mass balances. These concrete specifications are not to be found like this in the EC GMP Guide.
The responsibility for the timely performance of the annual Product Quality Review lies with quality control. This is certainly due to the fact that there is no Qualified Person defined in the Canadian regulations.
Archived documents have to be accessible within 48 hours. Such a concrete requirement cannot be found in the EC GMP Guide.
Metal surfaces of water systems should at least have "316 stainless steel" quality and should be passivated. We do not know such concrete requirements on water systems in official regulations in Europe.
The extent of revalidation work on water systems should be determined jointly by staff from quality control, engineering, production and further involved departments. In this context, the EC GMP Guide does not include such a concrete list of departments either.
Conclusion: The new Canadian GMP Guide is indeed worth reading and also provides detailed information on general GMP rules. In this respect, it could also give guidance to European firms where national or European GMP legislation does not specify any details. Naturally, this document is not legally binding for European companies.

Does it indicate where GMP is heading? For this, the alterations seem too moderate. From this perspective, the document rather represents a rung on the ladder of GMP evolution and may be seen as the Canadian authority's contribution to the Darwin anniversary year.
Here you can find the 2009 version of the Canadian GMP rules.

sábado, 13 de junio de 2009

Nuevos requerimientos para el Agua Purificada

Current Ph.Eur. Requirements on Pharmaceutical Water


With the Supplement 6.3 to the European Pharmacopoeia, some changes with regard to water for pharmaceutical use came into force in 2009. They affect water for injection (WFI), highly purified water (HPW) as well as purified water (PW).

Basically, the changes are the same for all three water qualities. WFI is an exception; in the section on sterilised water for injection, the tests for oxidizable substances and ammonium are also concerned. For both testing procedures, there is now a distinction between containers larger or smaller than 50 ml.

What is identical for all three water qualities is the introduction of the new section on microbiological monitoring. Apart from mentioning the action value of 100 CFU/ml respectively 10 CFU/100 ml (limits unchanged), exact types of test strains, growth conditions and the agar to be used have been taken over.

The more detailed description of conductivity measurement, too, can be found in all three qualities. With regard to the conductivity cell, there is now a note that the cell constant has to be certified by the supplier and that this has to be calibrated regularly against a certified reference solution or against a conductivity cell with certified cell constant.

However, the most important change is certainly the long-awaited cancellation of the test for heavy metals, since this test point is covered by the conductivity measurement. This also concerns all three water qualities mentioned, with the exception that the test can only be dropped for purified water in case conductivity testing fulfils the requirements on WFI (bulk). This is a further step towards a harmonisation with the American pharmacopoeia (USP).

lunes, 8 de junio de 2009

Principios Activos Farmacéuticos

Dado el creciente número de APIs con bajos niveles de calidad, o directamente falsificados, que permanentemente se introducen en la cadena de suministros, el APIC (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients Committee) ha creado un documento guía para valorar las diferentes fuentes posibles de APIs.

APIC Quick Guide for API Sourcing
Esta guía para identificar fuentes de APIs legítimas y confiables, está dirigida tanto a los fabricantes de APIs, a los que da recomendaciones prácticas para poder demostrar que sus productos se han fabricado siguiendo las ICH Q7 o las GMP EU Parte II, como a los laboratorios farmacéuticos, a quienes da consejos sobre como valorar la calidad de los proveedores.

La APIC Quick Guide toca principalmente los siguientes temas:

Cadena de suministros: Agentes, brokers, distribuidores, reacondicionadores y reetiquetadores
Auditorías
Documentación de soporte
Packaging: etiquetado y tamper-proof sealing
Inspección de materiales, muestreo, análisis y perfil de impurezas
Los capítulos que tratan las auditorías y la documentación, están muy detallados e incluyen recomendaciones prácticas como la de cambiar la agenda y reinspeccionar áreas que ya han sido analizadas, para destapar escenarios que hayan podido haberse creado artificialmente. Otro punto importante que recomienda para obtener una visión general, es el análisis de los PQR (Product Quality Review).

Además de todo eso, es muy importante mantener una muy buena comunicación entre el laboratorio y el proveedor.

En cuanto a los temas de packaging, etiquetado y cierres resistentes a la manipulación, el fabricante de APIs debe proporcionar a sus clientes, muestras de etiquetas y cierres que permitan detectar las falsificaciones de manera rápida e inconfundible.

Este nuevo documento es un complemento ideal del que habían editado anteriormente (“How to do” Document), con la interpretación de la guía ICH Q7.

De todas maneras, nunca hay que olvidar que todo esto son diferentes piezas del gran puzzle de la cualificación de proveedores, y que siempre deben evaluarse los riesgos asociados para poder determinar la razonabilidad de las diferentes medidas que deban tomarse, dependiendo del API y del proveedor en cuestión.

Aquí podéis bajar la APIC Quick Guide
Aquí podéis bajar el “How to do” Document

miércoles, 22 de abril de 2009

Becas para España

La universidad de Salamanca España ofrece 106 becas para Estudiantes Iberoamericanos

espero que sea de vuestro interes aqui el enlace


http://rel-int.usal.es/documentos2009/Convocatoria_Master_09.pdf

lunes, 6 de abril de 2009

Reacciones frente a la Nueva Guia de Validacion de Procesos de la FDA

Life Cycle Approach
En cuanto a la forma de implementación de la estrategia de ciclo de vida (Life Cycle Approach), las respuestas incluyen un amplio uso de herramientas estadísticas, una fuerte integración de las actividades de desarrollo con las de producción, mayor énfasis en el uso de la valoración de riesgos y más actividades de calidad mediante el diseño (Quality-by-Design - QbD).

En este sentido, los laboratorios farmacéuticos se decantan por enfatizar en el desarrollo para el futuro, aunque continúa la sensación de que aún quedan muchas preguntas por resolver y de que la guía requiere mayor clarificación y detalle.

Cambios en el concepto de validación
Muchos laboratorio farmacéuticos aún consideran que no deben cambiar su concepto de validación, aunque mucho otros ya están pensando en como hacerlo, considerando posibilidades como realizar diferentes lotes de validación, dependiendo de la complejidad y conocimiento del proceso y producto, o poner en marcha una monitorización en continuo de parámetros y tendencias.

Estrategias diferentes entre EMEA y FDA
Varias compañías piensan realizar 3 lotes de validación “como mínimo” o como “punto de inicio”. Una opinión muy extendida es que quien tendrá la última palabra será el rendimiento del proceso y deberá basarse mucho en el análisis de tendencias justificado con un buen razonamiento científico. De todas formas, hay quienes piensan mantener la actual estrategia hasta que las cosas no estén más claras y se tenga una descripción concreta de lo que la FDA espera.

Verificación continua del proceso
Las respuestas más frecuentes están relacionadas con el PQR/APR y con el tratamiento estadístico, aunque también están los que piensan en la mejora continua. En general se considera a este un concepto muy importante que puede ser fácilmente implementado a través del control de proceso, lo que además redundaría en un ahorro de costes.

En general, están los que ya lo están haciendo de alguna manera, mediante controles frecuentes y los que aún no se ven preparados para ponerlo en marcha.

Herramientas de medición de procesos
Muchas compañías están utilizando actualmente alguna de las herramientas de medición de procesos como los índices de capacidad de procesos (Cpk) o los controles estadísticos de procesos (Statistical Process Control - SPC).

Eliminación de las Etapas DQ, IQ y OQ
A pesar de que muchos laboratorios farmacéuticos querrían mantener esta estrategia, están pensando en que deberán adaptarse a los nuevos conceptos aunque aún no estén claros. Una corriente de opinión mantiene la postura de que si no se menciona la DQ, IQ ni OQ, los recursos deberán moverse hacia la mejora de procesos. Tambien tienen en mente las estrategias SD &V (Specification, Design & Verification).

CONCLUSIONES
La mayoría de los laboratorios farmacéuticos está pensando en las posibilidades potenciales de implementación de los nuevos conceptos de validación de procesos de FDA. Sobre todo se piensa en los controles estadísticos de procesos, aunque el PQR/APR y la valoración de riesgos también pueden llegar a tener un papel importante.

Aún hay puntos de incertidumbre, particularmente relacionadas con la cantidad de lotes de validación dentro y fuera de USA. La mayoría probablemente continuará con las etapas de DQ, IQ y OQ de la manera habitual. En este punto, las diferencias entre el Anexo 15 de las GMP EU, el documento PIC/S PI 006 y la guía de FDA son claras
Fuente: Asnfarma

domingo, 29 de marzo de 2009

Update of the PIC/S Recommendation on the Validation of Aseptic Processes

On 7 February 2009, the PIC/S Document 007-4 "Recommendation on the Validation of aseptic processes" was updated. The PIC/S recommendations serve as guidelines to inspectors of the PIC/S countries during inspections of pharmaceutical companies.

The changes to PI 007-4 are of minor importance and mainly concern the requirements on the incubation conditions during media fills. Formerly, 2 alternative schemes existed:

1: 20-25oC for a minimum of 14 days

2. 20-25oC for a minimum of 7 days followed immediately by incubation at a higher temperature range not to exceed 35oC for a total minimum incubation time of 14 days

Other incubation conditions were possible provided that their necessity could be proved.

The updated version lays down the following incubation conditions:

20-25oC for a minimum of 7 days, followed immediately, or after a first reading, by incubation at 30-35oC for a total minimum incubation time of 14 days. Other incubation conditions are allowed if validated beforehand.

However, the document has not been fully updated and partly contradicts the requirements of the new Annex 1 to the EC GMP Guide, which comes into force on 1 March 2009. Especially in the interpretation of media fill data, a contamination rate of less than 0.1% with a 95% confidence level is still accepted. There is an urgent need to adapt the specifications to those of Annex 1 and the FDA Guidance for Industry "Sterile Drug Products produced by aseptic processing".

The PI 007-4 can be found here.

New PIC/S Guide for the Inspection of Packaging Processes and Facilities

In January 2009, the PIC/S (Pharmaceutical Inspection Convention Co-Operation Scheme) published a new Aide-Memoire to provide guidance for inspectors inspecting packaging processes and packing facilities.

The Aide-Memoire PI 028-1 draws attention to the fact that the number of defects in medicinal products attributable to deficiencies in the labelling and packaging process is on the increase. Therefore the PIC/S Seminar 2005 in Bucharest was dedicated to packaging. This Aide-Memoire is the outcome of the PIC/S Seminar 2005.

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance for inspectors in preparation for inspections in packing facilities (primary as well as secondary). It aims to define the minimal requirements acceptable for an inspector as well as the best practices.

The document lists possible questions in tabular form as well as referrings to the corresponding guidelines. The following items are discussed:

Purchasing
Receipt
Storage areas
Quality control
Premises
Packaging equipment and process
Documents
Personnel
Quality assurance
You can find the new document here.

domingo, 22 de marzo de 2009

Productos en Investigacion

EMEA publishes Questions and Answers on the Quality of IMPs


The European Medicines Agency (EMEA) has published new Q&As on the Guideline on the Requirements to the Chemical and Pharmaceutical Quality Documentation Concerning Investigational Medicinal Products in Clinical Trials (CHMP/QWP/185401/2004). Final reference is given for each question.

1. Question: Setting specifications for impurities
On which basis should specifications for related impurities be set?


Answer:
Safety considerations should be taken into account. The limits should be supported by the impurity profiles of batches of active substance used in non-clinical and clinical studies. Results between batches should be consistent (or the clinical batches should show better purity results than non-clinical and previous clinical batches).
Compliance with ICH requirements is not required, if proper justification is provided.


2. Question: Substantial amendments (Chapter 8)
How should industry notify amendments?


Answer:
The table in the Guideline on the Requirements to the Chemical and Pharmaceutical Quality Documentation Concerning IMPs in Clinical Trials (CHMP/QWP/185401/2004) gives examples of what should be notified as substantial amendments and of changes where a notification will not be necessary. The list is not exhaustive, and the Sponsor should decide on a case-by-case basis if an amendment is to be classified as substantial or not.
Substantial amendments should be notified using the Notification of Amendment Form. Relevant updated sections of the documentation should be submitted, not the entire Quality Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD).
For non-substantial amendments the form should not be used. The relevant authorities should be informed about relevant amendments together with an overall IMPD update or a substantial amendment. Documentation should not be submitted, but the relevant documentation should be recorded within the company.

3. Question: Shelf life extensions
Which information should be included in the file in order to make shelf life extensions without notification of a substantial amendment?

Answer:
The criteria based on which it is intended to extend shelf life during an on-going study should be given. The information should include extension protocol limiting the maximum time period for extrapolation. In the case of any significant negative trend for stability data observed during long-term and accelerated testing, the sponsor should commit to notify any shelf life extension as a substantial amendment.

4. Question: Batch data
Are Certificates of Analysis needed?


Answer:
No, tabulated batch results are sufficient. Data for representative batches should be included in the batch analysis table of the IMPD. Results for batches controlled according to previous, (wider) specifications are acceptable if the results comply with the specification for the planned clinical trial. The results should cover the relevant strengths, but the batches do not need to be the same that will be used in the clinical trial.

Source: EMEA Inspections QWP Questions and Answers

miércoles, 11 de marzo de 2009

Tendencias en Inspecciones FDA

Warning Letters Report 2008 - Frequent Deficiencies in Deviation Reviews


During the fiscal year 2008 there was a change in the trend concerning the frequency of warning letters issued with regard to CFR Part 211: compared to the previous fiscal year there was a distinct increase in the number of warning letters issued to drug manufacturers. Medical device manufacturers were also more closely scrutinised by the FDA – here the increase in warning letters is immense. But only five firms specialising in blood products and the processing of blood received warning letters. The following table indicates the development in the number of warning letters issued in the last three fiscal years.



With regard to topics and frequency of GMP deficiencies, it is apparent that similar violations were criticised as in previous years:

Production record review (CFR 211.192
Laboratory controls, general requirements (CFR 211.160)
Written procedures, deviations (CFR 211.100)
Responsibilities of the quality control unit (CFR 211.22)
In its warning letters during the fiscal year 2008 the FDA often criticised deficiencies in batch documentation reviews and in the follow-up of deviations. Another point concerned the non-existence of scientifically-sound and appropriate test procedures in quality control laboratories. Some typical examples are:

"Failure to thoroughly investigate a batch that does not meet its specifications [21 CFR § 211.192]. For example, no adequate laboratory investigation was performed ... "

"Failure to thoroughly investogate unexplained discrepancies or a batch or any of its components not meeting any of its specifications, failure to extend investogations to other batches of the same drug product and other drug products that may have been associated with the specific failure or discrepancy, and failure to ensure that written records of the investigation include conclusions and follow-up [21 C.F.R. § 211.192]."

"Laboratory controls do not include the establishment of scientifically sound and appropriate test procedures ... "

"Failure to establish written procedures for production and process control ... "

The following table depicts a comparison between the five most frequent deficiencies in the fiscal years 2006, 2007 and 2008:



As the survey indicates, the topics are mainly the same as found in the most frequently quoted Warning Letters in the last three fiscal years. The areas quality control, batch documentation review, follow-up of deviations as well as the other principal competencies of quality control will most probably be closely scrutinised in future inspections by the FDA. It remains to be seen whether the trend towards issuing more warning letters to drug manufacturers will continue in the future.

A detailed analysis of the Warning Letters is available as FDA Navigator with Warning Letters Report, comprising a CD and a handbook. The package contains

the 200 most important GMP regulations, guidelines and interpretations by FDA - all in all about 5000 pages
the Warning Letters on GMP deviations of the last three years
Warning Letters with detailed analyses
and more

New USP General Chapter on Residual Solvents - Implementation by the FDA?

On 1 July 2008, the USP implemented the new General Chapter <467> - "Residual Solvents", which replaces the former Chapter <467> - "Organic Volatile Impurities". Now, the new General Chapter <467> was also revised in the 1st supplement to USP 32. Since this changeover also affects many products placed on the American market, in August 2008 the FDA issued a Draft Guidance for Industry with the title "Residual Solvents in Drug Products Marketed in the United States".

This FDA guidance defines in which form holders of a marketing authorisation (NDA and ANDA) are meant to inform the FDA of modifications in connection with this changeover.

The FDA expects products with an official USP monograph that are sold on the American market to comply with the requirements of the revised General Chapter <467>.

The FDA also explicitly permits the use of other analytical procedures, apart from those mentioned in the revised Chapter <467>. However, this requires a complete description, validation and verification of the alternative test method.

The FDA starts from the assumption that in most cases where changes are made under NDAs and ANDAs it will be sufficient to report these changes in the Annual Report. Here, the marketing authorisation holder is not supposed to submit detailed data, but rather summaries. However, in case of an inspection, the complete data must be on hand.

The new USP chapter does not apply to medicinal products that do not have to comply with the USP. Here, the FDA refers to the ICH Guideline Q3C Impurities: Residual Solvents.

The complete FDA Draft Guidance document can be found here:
http://www.fda.gov/CDER/guidance/8179dft.pdf

Since in the meantime the implementation of the new USP chapter has caused confusion among ANDA holders, FDA's Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) had to clarify some unanswered questions as well. For this purpose, the document "Residual Solvents in ANDAs: Questions and Answers" was published in October 2008. This document gives answers to 12 frequently asked questions from the OGD's point of view. Examples are:

Which ANDAs and ANDA supplements have to comply with USP <467>?
Which pieces of information have to be submitted in order to demonstrate compliance with USP <467>?
Which data on residual solvents should be included in a statement by the excipient manufacturer?
How should acceptance criteria be laid down for residual solvents that are not listed in USP <467>?
In which cases is the use of a class-1 solvent permissible?
Can "loss on drying" be used to test for class-3 solvents even in the presence of class-2 solvents, provided that 0.5% are not exceeded by both classes?
Do the methods have to be validated or verified?
Can a high-purity solvent be used instead of the USP reference standard?
All questions and answers by FDA can be found following this link:
http://www.fda.gov/cder/ogd/residualsolvents.pdf

Bienvenida

El concepto de Tecnología Farmacéutica Industrial, se encuentra intimamente ligado al de Farmacia Galénica en cuanto a serie de procesos tecnológicos a seguir para la obtención de un medicamento estable, seguro y eficaz, es decir, de calidad. La farmacia preparativa, núcleo central de la Farmacia Galénica, ha derivado de ser magistral a ser industrial debido al cambio que la técnica moderna ha impreso en los actuales métodos de trabajo. Esta derivación de lo manual a lo mecánico, de lo magistral a lo industrial, se ha visto reflejada también en la terminología farmacéutica utilizada. Así, la palabra tecnología (“Tecnos”= Arte, “Logia”= Tratado) seguida del vocablo “farmacéutica”, expresa la parte de la Farmacia Galénica dedicada al arte de elaborar medicamentos; si a ello se suma la palabra “industrial”, se tiene que dicho arte farmacéutico se aplica al medicamento industrializado, es decir, al medicamento que será elaborado de forma seriada y contínua en instalaciones de gran volumen. Este hecho ha provocado un lógico cambio en el planteamiento de la investigación galénica tendente a la obtención de un nuevo medicamento, entendiendo como tal al principio activo medicamentoso dotado de una forma farmacéutica y dispuesto para su administración al paciente. En efecto, es necesario plantear inicialmente una caracterización del principio activo medicamentoso que debe ser convertido en medicamento, desarrollar unos preceptivos estudios de preformulación, diseñar unas formulaciones base a partir de las cuales pueda definirse una formulación definitiva, establecer la tecnología de fabricación óptima y los controles en proceso a efectuar para asegurar la calidad del producto final, validar dicha tecnología, establecer unos controles de producto acabado con sus correspondientes especificaciones y, finalmente, desarrollar los perceptivos estudios de estabilidad del medicamento que den a conocer el período de caducidad del mismo. Por tanto este tipo de investigación e información es el que se brinda en esta web por parte del autor Johnny Aguilar.