Comparison of guidelines for biological ancillary materials used for the manufacture of gene and cellular therapy products in Asia.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Although biologiocal ancillay materials (AMs) have specific risk associated with their derivations, it plays key role to manufature cell and gene therapy (CGT) products. It is important to understand the regulation relevant to AMs for developers. METHODS: The authors investigated the guidelines and pharmacopeia (hereinafter referred to as "guidelines") for biological AMs used for the manufacture of CGT products in Asia (China, India, Japan, Korea and Taiwan). In addition, the authors benchmarked the relevant guidelines in the United States (US) and European Union (EU). RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: The guidelines could be classified into two types based on whether specific AMs are scoped: (i) general guidelines for risk assessment of AMs and (ii) guidelines for specific AMs. The authors compared the risk categories for each type of AM provided in the general guidelines between the US and China and the specific requirements for bovine serum and trypsin in the guidelines of China, Japan, Taiwan, US and EU. The authors further compiled in-depth descriptions of the respective regulations in China, India, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. There is limited availability of some guidelines for specific AMs. Moreover, there are no common requirements established across the surveyed countries and regions. Therefore, the authors suggest a risk assessment approach for AMs with consideration of their biological origin and traceability, production steps applied and ability to control or remove AMs from the final medicinal product over the CGT manufacturing process.

Non-clinical, quality and environmental impact assessments of cell and gene therapy products: Report on the 5th Asia Partnership Conference of Regenerative Medicine - April 7, 2022.

The 5th Asia Partnership Conference of Regenerative Medicine (APACRM) was held online on April 7, 2022 to promote regulatory harmonization of regenerative medicine products throughout Asia. The recognition of domestic regulatory guidelines within each country and region and the underpinning rationales are important initial steps toward the harmonization of regulations. The 5th APACRM featured open dialog regarding non-clinical, quality and environmental impact assessment settings for cell and gene therapy products through presentations from the industry and panel discussions with regulatory agencies. The latest updates on regenerative medicine fields in each country and region were also introduced. This paper summarizes the proceedings of the 5th APACRM for public dissemination to foster future discussion.

Nonclinical and quality assessment of cell therapy products: Report on the 4th Asia Partnership Conference of Regenerative Medicine, April 15, 2021.

The 4th Asia Partnership Conference of Regenerative Medicine (APACRM) was held online on April 15, 2021, to promote regulatory harmonization of regenerative medicine products throughout Asia. Recognizing domestic regulatory guidelines within each country and region, and their underpinning rationales, is an important initial step toward a convergence of regulations. The 4th APACRM consisted of an open dialog with regulatory agencies regarding nonclinical and quality settings for cell therapy products (CTPs) through industry presentations and panel discussions with regulatory agencies. The latest updates on regenerative medicine fields in each country and region, and specific regulatory schematics in Japan, were also introduced. The objective of this paper is to summarize the proceedings of the 4th APACRM for public dissemination and to foster further discussion in the future.

Non-clinical assessment of cell therapy products: the perspective from five Asian countries/regions based on regulatory guidelines and the underpinning rationales.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Cell-based regenerative medicine is an innovative field that can potentially alter the overall survival and quality of life of patients with devastating diseases. Several cell therapy products (CTPs) have been approved within the last two decades, and more are under development. The establishment of an effective developmental strategy in accordance with the regulatory bodies of each country/region is crucial for fast delivery of each respective CTP. In particular, facilitating investigational new drug (IND) approval is important for accelerating the transition from non-clinical to clinical research/trial phases. METHODS: Here the authors compared the non-clinical prerequisites for initiating clinical studies in five Asian countries/regions (India, China, Korea, Taiwan and Japan) from an industry viewpoint. The authors first identified the differences and tried to clarify the perspectives/considerations underpinning the different requirements. RESULTS: The authors' findings revealed that differences in regulations and development experiences, especially with CTPs, have led to clear differences in the non-clinical study package and its corresponding study design. CONCLUSIONS: By sharing experiences of the research and development of CTPs among Asian countries/regions and including not only industry but also regulatory authorities, we will be able to expedite cross-border IND approval and eventually contribute to the early delivery of innovative CTPs to many Asian patients.

Gaps between Asian regulations for eligibility of human mesenchymal stromal cells as starting materials of cell therapy products and comparability of mesenchymal stromal cell-based products subject to changes in their manufacturing process.

Working group 2 (WG2) of the Asia Partnership Conference of Regenerative Medicine has discussed eligibility of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) as starting cells for the manufacture of cell therapy products, and comparability before and after changes in their manufacturing process. Asian countries and regions have their own regulations on the quality of starting cells, and these regulations are not harmonized. As cell therapy products are being developed across countries and regions, we propose a risk-based approach based on donor location, window period of virus test, and additional virus tests on the master cell bank to fill the gaps in regulation while controlling the risk of viral contamination. Moreover, a standard procedure of comparability assessment after changes in the manufacturing process of MSC-based products does not exist. The WG2 discussed points of comparability assessment specifically for MSC-based products considering the similarities and differences with parallel assessments for protein and polypeptide products, which are within the scope of the International Council for Harmonization Q5E guideline. We also summarize possible characterization procedures for MSC-based products and report our discussion on stability evaluations under accelerated and stress conditions for comparability assessment of cell therapy products.