Combating Alcohol Adduct Impurity in Immunosuppressant Drug Product Manufacturing: A Scientific Investigation for Enhanced Process Control.

OBJECTIVE: This research aims to elucidate critical impurities in process validation batches of tacrolimus injection formulations, focusing on identification and characterization of previously unreported impurity at RRT 0.42, identified as the tacrolimus alcohol adduct. The potential root causes for the formation of new impurity was determined using structured risk assessment by cause and effect fishbone diagram. The primary objective was to propose mitigation plan and demonstrate the control of impurities with 6 month accelerated stability results in development batches. METHODS: The investigation utilizes method validation and characterization studies to affirm the accuracy of quantifying the tacrolimus alcohol adduct. The research methodology employed different characterization techniques like rotational rheometer, ICP‒MS, MALDI-MS, 1H NMR, 13C NMR, and DEPT-135 NMR for structural elucidation. Additionally, the exact mass of the impurity is validated using electrospray ionization mass spectra. RESULTS: Results indicate successful identification and characterization of the tacrolimus alcohol adduct. The study further explores the transformation of Tacrolimus monohydrate under various conditions, unveiling the formation of Tacrolimus hydroxy acid and proposing the existence of a novel degradation product, the Tacrolimus alcohol adduct. Six-month data from development lots utilizing Manufacturing Process II demonstrate significantly lower levels of alcohol adducts. CONCLUSIONS: Manufacturing Process II, selectively locates Tacrolimus within the micellar core of HCO-60, this prevent direct contact of ethanol with Tacrolimus which minimizes impurity alcohol adduct formation. This research contributes to the understanding of tacrolimus formulations, offering ways to safeguard product integrity and stability during manufacturing and storage.

Summary workshop report: Facilitating oral product development and reducing regulatory burden through novel approaches to assess bioavailability/bioequivalence.

This summary workshop report highlights presentations and over-arching themes from an October 2011 workshop. Discussions focused on best practices in the application of biopharmaceutics in oral drug product development and evolving bioequivalence approaches. Best practices leverage biopharmaceutic data and other drug, formulation, and patient/disease data to identify drug development challenges in yielding a successfully performing product. Quality by design and product developability paradigms were discussed. Development tools include early development strategies to identify critical absorption factors and oral absorption modeling. An ongoing theme was the desire to comprehensively and systematically assess risk of product failure via the quality target product profile and root cause and risk analysis. However, a parallel need is reduced timelines and fewer resources. Several presentations discussed applying Biopharmaceutics Classification System (BCS) and in vitro-in vivo correlations in development and in post-development and discussed both resource savings and best scientific practices. The workshop also focused on evolving bioequivalence approaches, with emphasis on highly variable products (HVDP), as well as specialized modified-release products. In USA, two bioequivalence approaches for HVDP are the reference-scaled average bioequivalence approach and the two-stage group-sequential design. An adaptive sequential design approach is also acceptable in Canada. In European Union, two approaches for HVDP are a two-stage design and an approach to widen C (max) acceptance limits. For some specialized modified-release products, FDA now requests partial area under the curve. Rationale and limitations of such metrics were discussed (e.g., zolpidem and methylphenidate). A common theme was the benefit of the scientific and regulatory community developing, validating, and harmonizing newer bioequivalence methodologies (e.g., BCS-based waivers and HVDP trial designs).

The use of stratefied sampling of blend and dosage units to demonstrate adequacy of mix for powder blends.

In response to concerns expressed by applicants regarding inconsistent policies in establishing blend uniformity acceptance criteria to demonstrate adequacy of mix, the FDA Office of Generic Drugs (OGD) issued the draft document Guidance for Industry, ANDAs: Blend Uniformity Analysis (August 1999). Both generic and innovator pharmaceutical companies raised a number of concerns following the publication of this document. As a result, the Product Quality Research Institute (PQRI) Blend Uniformity Working Group (BUWG) was established in February 2000. One of the primary goals of this group was to draft a scientifically based alternative to the OGD document. The resulting recommendation addresses both FDA and industry concerns by substantially enhancing product quality assurance without increasing regulatory burden. The PQRI BUWG recommends that these blend and dosage unit uniformity requirements be administered uniformly throughout the industry. PQRI submitted the following recommendation to the FDA on December 31, 2002, providing the Agency with an alternative strategy to consider when drafting future regulatory policy to assess blend and dosage unit uniformity.