| Literature DB >> 26877192 |
Alexander Amberg1, Lisa Beilke2, Joel Bercu3, Dave Bower4, Alessandro Brigo5, Kevin P Cross4, Laura Custer6, Krista Dobo7, Eric Dowdy3, Kevin A Ford8, Susanne Glowienke9, Jacky Van Gompel10, James Harvey11, Catrin Hasselgren4, Masamitsu Honma12, Robert Jolly13, Raymond Kemper14, Michelle Kenyon7, Naomi Kruhlak15, Penny Leavitt6, Scott Miller4, Wolfgang Muster5, John Nicolette16, Andreja Plaper17, Mark Powley15, Donald P Quigley4, M Vijayaraj Reddy18, Hans-Peter Spirkl1, Lidiya Stavitskaya15, Andrew Teasdale19, Sandy Weiner20, Dennie S Welch16, Angela White11, Joerg Wichard21, Glenn J Myatt22.
Abstract
The ICH M7 guideline describes a consistent approach to identify, categorize, and control DNA reactive, mutagenic, impurities in pharmaceutical products to limit the potential carcinogenic risk related to such impurities. This paper outlines a series of principles and procedures to consider when generating (Q)SAR assessments aligned with the ICH M7 guideline to be included in a regulatory submission. In the absence of adequate experimental data, the results from two complementary (Q)SAR methodologies may be combined to support an initial hazard classification. This may be followed by an assessment of additional information that serves as the basis for an expert review to support or refute the predictions. This paper elucidates scenarios where additional expert knowledge may be beneficial, what such an expert review may contain, and how the results and accompanying considerations may be documented. Furthermore, the use of these principles and procedures to yield a consistent and robust (Q)SAR-based argument to support impurity qualification for regulatory purposes is described in this manuscript.Entities:
Keywords: (Q)SAR; Ames test; Expert review; ICH M7; Impurities; Mutagenic impurities; Toxicity databases
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26877192 DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2016.02.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ISSN: 0273-2300 Impact factor: 3.271