On 4 May 2020, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) issued a guidance to support development and regulatory approval for treatments and vaccines for COVID-19 with the involvement of the dedicated EMA Pandemic Task Force (COVID-ETF). It sets out the available regulatory pathways to fast-track assessment of both new or repurposed methods of treating or preventing COVID-19.

Background

This guidance is part of EMA’s efforts to support the development and availability of medicinal products for COVID-19 to address this public health emergency. See also EMA’s guidance on clinical management trials (which we have summarised in a prior Advisory)

This latest guidance is based on the existing and established regulatory procedures to accelerate regulatory review and approval with appropriate adaptations  in direct response to COVID-19 pandemic.
Continue Reading EMA Guidance on fast-tracking the development and approval of treatments and vaccines for COVID-19

The EMA and the competent authorities of the EU Member States have issued guidance to manage the conduct of clinical trials and the supply of medicinal products during the COVID-19 pandemic. This Guidance is particularly important for all sponsors conducting studies in the EU and for pharmaceutical companies supplying medicines in the EU. We discuss

On 13 December 2019, the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) published a Questions and Answers document (“Q&A”) providing guidance on the conduct of comparability exercise for advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”). The Q&A addresses various regulatory questions that arise in situations in which companies developing or marketing ATMPs introduce changes to the manufacturing process and need to generate related comparability data.

Background

EMA’s experience suggests that changes to the manufacturing of ATMPs are “frequent” and even more so in the development of the medicinal product. These changes need, however, to be introduced in accordance with the Good Manufacturing Practices (“GMP”). Moreover, the changes may require a variation of the marketing authorisation for authorised ATMPs or substantial amendments to the clinical trial protocol for ATMPs used in clinical trials.

In addition, the changes to the manufacturing of the ATMP must be supported by the data generated in a comparability exercise. This exercise should focus on the characteristics of the ATMP prior and after the introduction of the manufacturing change. This is valid for both investigational ATMPs and authorised ATMPs.

The position of the EMA is that changes to the manufacturing of the ATMP should not undermine or impact adversely the quality, efficacy or safety of the medicinal product or the related risk-benefit balance. The objective of the comparability exercise is to facilitate the assessment and demonstration of this.


Continue Reading EMA Guidance on Comparability Exercise for ATMPs

Earlier this month, the European Commission and representatives of the EU Member States discussed potential revisions to the European Commission’s Note on handling of duplicate marketing authorisation applications (the 2011 Note). According to the information published by the Commission, the discussion took place on 7 November 2019 during the latest Pharmaceutical Committee meeting. The discussion was intended to be focussed on duplicate marketing authorisations for biological medicinal products and the outcome of the related public consultation that took place in 2018.

Background

As we set out in our previous blog, the 2011 Note provides guidance on how the European Commission handles requests for duplicate marketing authorisations submitted through the centralised marketing authorisation procedure in accordance with Article 82.1 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 which was motivated by concerns that several MA’s granted for the same product could lead to partitioning of the market. As a general principle, the Regulation contemplates the existence of duplicate marketing authorisations only in two situations; first, where co-marketing with an independent company is envisaged and secondly “where there are objective verifiable reasons relating to public health regarding the availability of medicinal products to health-care professionals and/or patients”. In this latter case the Commission has required the applicant to demonstrate that the grant of a duplicate marketing authorisation will result in improved availability of the medicinal product in the EU. The 2011 Note states that, in principle, the grant on “public health” grounds of a duplicate marketing authorisation for a “first generic” granted to an originator (known as an “authorised generic” in the USA) is possible because of its potentially positive impact on the availability of the medicinal product.


Continue Reading Update on EU Duplicate Marketing Authorisations

Last week, the Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG) published two new guidance documents under the Medical Devices Regulation (MDR) and In Vitro Diagnostic Devices Regulation (IVDR). These concern the “person responsible for regulatory compliance” and the “implant card” required under the new Medical Devices Regulations (MDR).

These are the latest of the guidance published by the MDCG and collated on the European Commission’s website before the Regulations come into force in May 2020 (for medical devices) and May 2022 (for in vitro diagnostic medical devices).

Persons Responsible for Regulatory Compliance

Under Article 15 of the MDR and Article 15 of the IVDR, “Manufacturers shall have available within their organisation at least one person responsible for regulatory compliance who possesses the requisite expertise in the field of medical devices.” While the Regulations set out requirements on the qualification of the PRRC and an overview of their responsibilities, the guidance adds additional detail to these requirements, and clarifies the PRRC requirements for manufacturers and authorised representatives (AR), notably that:


Continue Reading New guidance under the EU MDR

The Falsified Medicines Directive 2011/62/EU (FMD) introduced a new requirement for safety features to appear on the packaging of all prescription-only medicinal products: a unique product identifier and an anti-tampering device (ATD). Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/161 sets out technical detail around the characteristics of the safety features, how authenticity should be verified and by whom.

With the deadline to demonstrate compliance with the Delegated Regulation fast approaching (9 February 2019), we draw your attention to recent revisions to the “Question and Answers” guidance document (Version 13) published by the European Commission in January 2019, which contains amendments to some previous questions and a number of new Q&As. In particular:


Continue Reading Revised guidance on implementation of the EU Falsified Medicines Directive

As we approach one year to go before the application of Regulations (EU) 745/2017 (Medical Devices) and 746/2017 (In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices) (applicable in May 2020 and May 2022, respectively), the European Commission has updated its website to collate all of its guidance on the legislation. This includes a recently published series of nine non-binding practical reference guides, which is now available in a new section of the website entitled “Spread the word” – part of the Commission’s campaign to “inform as many stakeholders as possible about their roles and responsibilities under the new Regulations“. In particular, they consist of:

Continue Reading New guidance on the European Medical Devices and In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Regulations

As a New Year present to us all, on 3 January 2019, the MHRA published updated guidance on the regulation of medicines, medical devices and clinical trials in the event that the UK leaves the EU on 29 March 2019 without a deal, known as a “hard Brexit”.

Following publication of the technical notice in August 2018, which we considered in an earlier blog, a consultation was launched in order to seek views on the mechanics behind some of the proposals. The consultation ended on 1 November 2018; the responses were reviewed and the technical notice updated. However, the notice states in a number of places that further guidance will be published in due course.


Continue Reading MHRA’s updated guidance on a hard-Brexit

Arnold & Porter’s Future Pharma Forum invites you to a complimentary regulatory seminar aimed at junior lawyers and new joiners in the UK/EU life sciences industry. We will provide a comprehensive introduction to key EU regulatory law topics from an in-house practitioner’s perspective and touch on the implications of Brexit.

Topics

  • Overview of the EU

Publication of clinical trial data and results continues to be a hot topic in the EU. A recent BMJ article investigated the level of compliance with the European Commission’s requirement that the results of all trials are published within 12 months of completion. The Commission guidance expands on the obligations in the Clinical Trials Directive, and states that for all trials (paediatric and non-paediatric), result-related information should be supplied and made public within 12 months of the completion of the trial (not after grant of the marketing authorisation), including a summary of the results and conclusions.

The retrospective cohort study found that despite the Commission guidance, of the 7,274 trials where results were due, only 49.5% reported results, although trials with a commercial sponsor were substantially more likely to post results than those with a non-commercial sponsor (68.1% compared to 11.0%).


Continue Reading Update on Clinical Trials Transparency in the EU