Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Investigational New Drug (IND) Application need reanalysis FS Plan ?

Food Safety Plan 21 CFR Part 117 FSMA hazard analysis risk-based preventive controls IND application

Best Answer Scampi, 03 July 2018 - 03:20 PM

I am not familiar to your process, HOWEVER re evaluation is a HACCP requirement

 

So you should run a H.A. on the new product and it's ingredients to ensure it doesn't negatively impacting existing product flows

 

I would think (and i'm not an expert in drug manufacturing at all) that if you're just running a small trial, you can manage that via controls (segregation of raw materials, HOLD tags etc.) until you're sure the final product is going to fly, then reevaluate your HACCP plan

 

You won't know if you have a "significant" change until your hazard analysis is complete (for example, you could have new lines over exposed product, new allergens, new machine with a potential to introduce foreign material etc)

Go to the full post


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 matthewcc

matthewcc

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 69 posts
  • 9 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 July 2018 - 02:58 PM

Hi everyone, does an investigational new drug (IND) application always necessitate reanalysis of a Food Safety Plan under FSMA?

 

'§117.170 Reanalysis' states that one reason that reanalysis would be required is "Whenever a significant change in the activities conducted at your facility creates a reasonable potential for a new hazard or creates a significant increase in a previously identified hazard..."  However, by its very nature an IND is novel and therefore a potential new hazard could be involved.

 

We are regulated under 21 CFR Part 117 and 21 CFR Part 111 in the United States.

 

Thank you,

 

Matthew



#2 Scampi

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,830 posts
  • 774 thanks
337
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 03 July 2018 - 03:20 PM   Best Answer

I am not familiar to your process, HOWEVER re evaluation is a HACCP requirement

 

So you should run a H.A. on the new product and it's ingredients to ensure it doesn't negatively impacting existing product flows

 

I would think (and i'm not an expert in drug manufacturing at all) that if you're just running a small trial, you can manage that via controls (segregation of raw materials, HOLD tags etc.) until you're sure the final product is going to fly, then reevaluate your HACCP plan

 

You won't know if you have a "significant" change until your hazard analysis is complete (for example, you could have new lines over exposed product, new allergens, new machine with a potential to introduce foreign material etc)


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!


Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 16,068 posts
  • 4444 thanks
734
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 03 July 2018 - 04:03 PM

Food Safety/FSMA relates to drugs ? Really ? Manufactured in same Environment ?


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#4 Scampi

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,830 posts
  • 774 thanks
337
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 03 July 2018 - 04:46 PM

FDA= Food AND DRUG administration!


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!


#5 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 16,068 posts
  • 4444 thanks
734
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 03 July 2018 - 04:52 PM

FDA= Food AND DRUG administration!

 

So FSMA should be FDSMA.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C


#6 Scampi

Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,830 posts
  • 774 thanks
337
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 03 July 2018 - 04:55 PM

Yep, when it comes to things like this---salmonella in a supplement

 

https://www.fda.gov/...s/ucm597265.htm


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate