1 / 22

Regulated Product Submissions R1

Regulated Product Submissions R1. Overview January 12 th HL7 WGM Jason Rock Jason.Rock@GlobalSubmit.com 215-253-7474. Table of Contents. Overview and background Submission Hierarchy Documentation in submission Submission Reviewing RMIM and XML Instance. Overview and background.

delling-ull
Télécharger la présentation

Regulated Product Submissions R1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regulated Product Submissions R1 Overview January 12th HL7 WGM Jason RockJason.Rock@GlobalSubmit.com 215-253-7474

  2. Table of Contents • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  3. Overview and background • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  4. Goal • Create one model that can be used for the submission of any regulated product • Create a framework that will allow sponsors to send regulatory information using predefined parameters to identify and catalog their content • Reviewers will be able to consistently locate discipline specific information

  5. Scope • Animal and Human products • Including but not limited to food additives, human therapeutics, veterinary products, and medical devices • Worldwide use • Same model for all product types to all regulatory authorities

  6. Out of Scope • Document content will not change • Documentation submitted today will be the same documentation submitted tomorrow • Must work within existing business processes • We hope since Applicants and Regulatory Authorities from varied product types are talking we can learn from each other and enhance our process as it suits our needs

  7. Design Decisions • Clear communication • The meaning of the content that is sent is the same meaning of the content that is received • Submitted documentation will be clearly identified using predefined parameters • Different predefined parameters for different submission types and regulatory authority (controlled vocabulary) • XML catalogs the content (not intended to be read directly)

  8. Work to date • RPS Project initiated June 22nd 2005 • Leveraged existing Human Pharmaceuticals experience (ICH/eCTD) • Draft Standard for Trial Use (DSTU) – Passed May 2006 • Distributed sample message • Testing kick-off June 18th 2006 • First test submission submitted to FDA Sept. 2006 • Harmonized with BRIDG March 2007 • Normative Ballot – Passed April 2007 • ANSI approved – March 2008

  9. Submission Hierarchy • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  10. Submission Hierarchy Application Submission - Original Approved Original Amendment Amendment SubmissionUnit Submission - Supplement Approved Supplement Amendment Amendment

  11. Reviewable Unit SubmissionUnit Submission - Original Approved Tox CMC Efficacy Amendment Amendment Amendment Reviewable Unit

  12. Documentation in submission • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  13. Context of Use Context of Use Submission Unit Protocol Intro Original The collection of files provided to the Regulatory Authority at one time Report

  14. Keywords Context of Use Keywords Study 12345 documentation for Double Blind Protocol documentation for Acme Report documentation for Keywords are used to further define the context of documentation. Types defined by regulatory authority (e.g. manufacturer, study), value define by business (e.g. Acme, Study 12345) Manufacturer Documentation submitted to support a regulatory review

  15. Submission Reviewing • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  16. View Application Submission - Original Original SubmissionUnit Submission - Supplement Supplement Keywords are used to further refine the table of contents.

  17. View (2) Application Submission Submission Unit Keyword Context of Use Reviewable Units are not shown

  18. RMIM and XML Instance • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

  19. RPS Release 1

  20. Controlled vocabulary • For differing submission types and regulatory authorities • Application (MAA, PMA, 510K, etc.) • Submission (original, supplement, etc.) • Submission units (original, amendment, etc.) • Documentation (synopsis, protocol, summary of clinical, etc.) • Created by Regulatory Authorities (GHTF, ICH, working with industry)

  21. Sample Instance

  22. Recap • Overview and background • Submission Hierarchy • Documentation in submission • Submission Reviewing • RMIM and XML Instance

More Related