Hi,
You do not need to disclose your starting material suppliers in the NDA. However, this information is required in EU and so many other markets.
So, unless you are only targeting the US for your registration, you will end up committing to which ever supplier(s) you are using right now and changing them will require you to notify the regulatory agency based on that country regulatory requirements.
Hope this helps,
------------------------------
Aicha Otmani, PhD., RAC
Director Global Regulatory Affairs, CMC San Francisco CA
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 16-Mar-2023 00:57
From: Jingdong Zhu
Subject: API Starting Materials
Hi Tom,
I don't think it will work like that. Because the starting material is regulated as GMP materials, the manufacturer should be listed or referenced (if a DMF exists) in the dossier. The manufacturer is subject to pre-license or pre-approval inspection and any change to the manufacturer should be reported in a post approval supplement or an IND amendment if it is in clinical development phases.
------------------------------
Gene Zhu
VP, regulatory affairs
Pasadena, CA
USA
Original Message:
Sent: 13-Mar-2023 19:19
From: Anonymous Member
Subject: API Starting Materials
This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
Whether you list suppliers or not the COA for RSM you would probably include in your NDA? Right?
Original Message:
Sent: 13-Mar-2023 17:01
From: Tom Stothoff
Subject: API Starting Materials
We are planning for manufacture of API Registration batches for our IR tablet product. We currently have single suppliers for our 3 Regulatory Starting Materials (RSMs), but would like the flexibility to use other RSM suppliers in the future (ex. Process Validation or commercial). My understanding is that it is acceptable to switch suppliers as long as the RSM specification is met. Therefore my plan is to NOT list the suppliers in the NDA and only provide specifications for each RSM. This would allow using a different RSM supplier for process validation or commercial and would not require any regulatory action (ex. amending a pending NDA or a sNDA to an approved NDA. Is this approach sound acceptable?
Thank you.
------------------------------
Tom Stothoff
Senior Director, Regulatory Affairs CMC
Chicago
------------------------------