Search

This article discusses the need for improved labeling recommendations for medications used during pregnancy and breastfeeding. Currently, there is a lack of data on the safety and efficacy of drugs for these populations, as they are often excluded from drug development programs. The article highlights the value of Model Informed Drug Development (MIDD) in generating data and improving accessibility to safe and effective medicines. Regulatory developments and advancements in nonclinical drug development methodologies and MIDD are expected to enhance the safe use of medicines during pregnancy and breastfeeding. However, challenges remain, including limited experience with MIDD in this context and the uncertainty associated with model predictions. Efforts are being made to improve knowledge through data collection and the development of new methods. European regulators are open to discussions to improve labeling for medicines used during pregnancy and breastfeeding. [Extracted from the article]

Adopted guidelines reflect a harmonised European approach to a specific scientific issue and should reflect the most recent scientific knowledge. However, whilst EU regulations are mandatory for all member states and EU directives must be followed by national laws in line with the directive, EMA guidelines do not have legal force and alternative approaches may be taken, but these obviously require more justification. This new series of the BJCP, developed in collaboration with the EMA, aims to address this issue by providing an annotated version of some relevant EMA guidelines and regulatory documents by experts. Hopefully, this will help in promoting their diffusion and in opening a forum for discussion with our readers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the last 10 years the European Medicines Agency (EMA) organized a number of workshops on modeling and simulation, working towards greater integration of modeling and simulation (M&S) in the development and regulatory assessment of medicines. In the 2011 EMA - European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) Workshop on Modelling and Simulation, European regulators agreed to the necessity to build expertise to be able to review M&S data provided by companies in their dossier. This led to the establishment of the EMA Modelling and Simulation Working Group (MSWG). Also, there was agreement reached on the need for harmonization on good M&S practices and for continuing dialog across all parties. The MSWG acknowledges the initiative of the EFPIA Model-Informed Drug Discovery and Development (MID3) group in promoting greater consistency in practice, application, and documentation of M&S and considers the paper is an important contribution towards achieving this objective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the launch of the qualification process in 2009, the CHMP reviewed/is reviewing 48 requests for qualification advice or opinion (as of Sept 2013) related to biomarkers (BM) or other novel drug development tools (e.g. patient reported outcome measures, modeling, and statistical methods). The qualification opinions are available on the EMA website (Qualification of novel methodologies for medicine development, http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/regulation/document_listing/document_listing_000319.jsp&mid=WC0b01ac0580022bb0#section2 , 2013). Also there is a trend of increasing numbers of qualification requests to CHMP, indicative of the pace that targeted drug development and personalized medicine is gaining and the need to bring the new tools from research to drug development and clinical use. This chapter will focus on the regulatory experience gained so far from the CHMP qualification procedure. Basic qualification principles will be presented. Through qualification examples, we will elaborate on common grounds and divergences between the different stakeholders.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) qualification process is a new, voluntary, scientific pathway leading to either a Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) opinion or a Scientific Advice on innovative methods or drug development tools: (i) CHMP Qualification Opinion on the acceptability of a specific use of the proposed method, based on the assessment of submitted data and (ii) CHMP Qualification Advice on future protocols and methods for further method development towards qualification, based on the evaluation of the scientific rationale and on preliminary data submitted. The qualification procedure was established as a response to the drug development bottlenecks and inefficiencies, but also to the availability of new methodologies, not yet integrated in the drug development and clinical management paradigm. The qualification process addresses innovative methods developed by consortia, networks, public/private partnerships, learned societies or pharmaceutical industry. It is expected to facilitate communication between the scientific community and the regulators and to address challenges with the development and use of medicines. In this article, we will present an overview of the process and the up to now scientific advice working party (SAWP) experience., (Copyright © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)