Amendments to Sterility Test Requirements for Biological Products, 36019-36027 [2011-15346]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(Lat. 42°54′29″ N., long. 106°27′52″ W.)
Within a 4.3-mile radius of Natrona County
International Airport. This Class E airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
Paragraph 6004 Class E airspace designated
as an extension to a Class D surface area.
*
*
*
*
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas
extending upward from 700 feet or more
above the surface of the earth.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
*
*
*
*
ANM WY E5 Casper, WY [Amended]
Casper, Natrona County International
Airport, WY
(Lat. 42°54′29″ N., long. 106°27′52″ W.)
Muddy Mountain VORTAC
(Lat. 43°05′27″ N., long. 106°16′37″ W.)
Casper ASR
(Lat. 42°55′16″ N., long. 106°27′15″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700
feet above the surface within a 23.5-mile
radius of the Casper ASR; that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the
surface within the 37.5-mile radius of the
Casper ASR, and within an area extending
from the 37.5-mile radius to the 36.6-mile
radius of the Muddy Mountain VORTAC,
bounded on the north by the Muddy
Mountain VORTAC 060° radial and on the
south by the Muddy Mountain VORTAC 111°
radial; that airspace extending upward from
11,500 feet MSL extending from the 37.5mile radius to the 52.2-mile radius of the
Muddy Mountain VORTAC, bounded on the
east by the west edge of V–19 and on the
south by the north edge of V–298.
Paragraph 6006
areas.
En route domestic airspace
*
*
*
*
*
ANM WY E6 Casper, WY [New]
Casper, Natrona County International
Airport, WY
(Lat. 42°54′29″ N., long. 106°27′52″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from
1,200 feet above the surface within a 85-mile
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Issued in Seattle, Washington, on June 14,
2011.
William Buck,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group,
Western Service enter.
[FR Doc. 2011–15393 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
*
ANM WY E4 Casper, WY [Amended]
Casper, Natrona County International
Airport, WY
(Lat. 42°54′29″ N., long. 106°27′52″ W.)
Muddy Mountain VORTAC
(Lat. 43°05′27″ N., long. 106°16′37″ W.)
Johno LOM
(Lat. 42°54′26″ N., long. 106°34′12″ W.)
That airspace extending upward from the
surface within 4.3 miles each side of the
Muddy Mountain VORTAC 216° radial
extending from the VORTAC to 29 miles
southwest of the VORTAC, and within 2.7
miles each side of the ILS localizer west
course extending from .9 miles east to 9 miles
west of the Johno LOM. This Class E airspace
area is effective during the specific dates and
times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the
Airport/Facility Directory.
*
radius of Natrona County International
Airport; excluding existing controlled
airspace 7,100 feet MSL and above.
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 600, 610, and 680
[Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0080]
Amendments to Sterility Test
Requirements for Biological Products
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) proposes to
amend the sterility test requirements for
biological products. This proposed rule
is intended to provide manufacturers of
biological products greater flexibility
and to encourage use of the most
appropriate and state-of-the-art test
methods for assuring the safety of
biological products. We are taking this
action as part of our continuing effort to
review and, as necessary, update the
biologics regulations.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments on this proposed rule
by September 19, 2011. See section X of
this document for the proposed effective
date of any final rule that may publish
based on this proposal.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2011–N–
0080, by any of the following methods:
SUMMARY:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the
following ways:
• FAX: 301–827–6870.
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (For
paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Agency name and
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36019
Docket No. FDA–2011–0080 for this
rulemaking. All comments received may
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul
E. Levine, Jr., Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (HFM–17),
Food and Drug Administration, 1401
Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville,
MD 20852–1448, 301–827–6210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Any product that purports to be
sterile should be free of viable
contaminating microorganisms to assure
product safety (§ 600.3(q) (21 CFR
600.3(q)). Absolute sterility of a lot
cannot be practically demonstrated
without complete destruction of every
finished article in that lot (United States
Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter 1211).
Therefore, sterility assurance is
accomplished primarily by validation of
the sterilization process or of the aseptic
processing procedures under current
good manufacturing practice (CGMP),
and is supported by sterility testing
using validated and verified test
methods. (See e.g., USP Chapter 71>,
European Pharmacopeia 2.6.2.)
In the Federal Register of November
20, 1973 (38 FR 32048), we reorganized
and republished the biologics
regulations, which included regulations
governing sterility testing, as title 21 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
subchapter F, parts 600 through 680 (21
CFR parts 600 through 680). Section
610.12 currently requires manufacturers
to perform sterility tests for both bulk
and final container material of most
biological products 1 for the detection of
1 Sterility tests are not currently required to be
performed for Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated
Antihemophilic Factor (AHF), Platelets, Red Blood
Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox Vaccine,
Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-Human Globulin, or
Blood Grouping Reagents; or in cases where the
Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research (CBER) or the Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research (CDER), as appropriate, determines
that the mode of administration, method of
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
Continued
21JNP1
36020
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
viable contaminating microorganisms
(e.g., bacteria, molds, and/or yeasts).
Over the years, FDA has amended the
biologics regulations, as necessary, to
clarify and update the sterility test
requirements. On March 11, 1976 (41 FR
10427) and March 2, 1979 (44 FR
11754), we updated § 610.12 to clarify
the procedures for repeat testing. On
April 18, 1984 (49 FR 15186), we
amended § 610.12 by removing and
reserving paragraph (g)(3) previously
entitled Different Tests Equal or
Superior and by adding § 610.9 entitled
Equivalent methods and processes to
provide manufacturers of licensed
biological products the flexibility to use
alternate test methods or manufacturing
processes that provide assurances of
safety, purity, potency, and
effectiveness equal or greater than those
provided by the methods or processes
specified in the regulations under parts
610 through 680. On December 15, 1986
(51 FR 44903), we clarified and updated
certain requirements for sterility testing
to ensure the reliability of the growthpromoting qualities of the sterility test
culture media and to provide greater
consistency with the requirements of
USP Chapter XXI. Finally, on September
15, 1997 (62 FR 48174), we incorporated
by reference the 1995 ed. of the USP
concerning the procedures for the
membrane filtration test method.
Section 610.12 currently requires that
the sterility of most licensed biological
products 2 be demonstrated through the
performance of tests prescribed in
§ 610.12(a) and (b). Specifically,
§ 610.12 requires that the sterility of
each lot of each product, with the
exception of certain products,3 be
demonstrated by the performance of
prescribed sterility tests for both bulk
and final container material, unless
different sterility tests are prescribed in
the license (see § 610.12(g)(1)) or the
manufacturer submits adequate data 4
establishing that the mode of
administration, the method of
preparation, or the special nature of the
product precludes or does not require a
sterility test, or that the sterility of the
lot is not necessary to assure the safety,
preparation, or special nature of the product
precludes or does not require a sterility test or that
the sterility of the lot is not necessary to assure the
safety, purity, and potency of the product. (See 21
CFR 610.12(g)(4).)
2 See list of exemptions in § 610.12(g)(4).
3 Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated AHF, Platelets,
Red Blood Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox
Vaccine, Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-Human
Globulin, or Blood Grouping Reagents
(§ 610.12(g)(4)(i)).
4 The Director of CBER or CDER, as appropriate,
will determine the adequacy of the data
(§ 610.12(g)(4)(ii)).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
purity, and potency of the product
(§ 610.12(g)(4)(ii)).
The regulation, under § 610.12, also
specifies the test method and culture
media to be used. For instance, the
prescribed sterility test methods rely
upon culture media (either Fluid
Thioglycollate Medium or SoybeanCasein Digest Medium) to detect growth
of microorganisms (§ 610.12(a)(1) and
(a)(2)). Moreover, § 610.12 specifies
criteria, such as incubation conditions
(time and temperature) to be used
during testing, suitable test organisms
for the evaluation of the growthpromoting qualities of the culture
media, storage and maintenance of test
organism cultures, and storage and
condition of media.
Manufacturers of innovative products,
such as cell and gene therapy products,
as well as manufacturers of currently
approved products, may benefit from
sterility test methods with rapid and
advanced detection capabilities.
Advances in technology in recent years
have allowed the development of new
sterility test methods that yield accurate
and reliable test results in less time and
with less operator intervention than the
currently prescribed methods. Some
examples of novel methods with the
potential to detect viable contaminating
microorganisms include the Adenosine
Triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence,
chemiluminescence, and carbon dioxide
head space measurement.
We are proposing to amend § 610.12
to promote improvement and
innovation in the development of
sterility test methods, to address the
challenges of novel products that may
be introduced to the market in the
future, and to potentially enhance
sterility testing of currently approved
products. This proposed revision would
provide manufacturers the flexibility to
take advantage of modern methods as
they become available, provided that
these methods meet certain criteria.
II. Highlights of This Proposed Rule
We are proposing to amend the
sterility test requirements for biological
products to provide manufacturers with
greater flexibility to encourage use of
the most appropriate and state-of-the-art
test methods. The most significant
proposed changes include the following:
• Elimination of specified sterility
test methods, culture media formulae
(or formulations), and culture media test
requirements;
• Elimination of specified membrane
filtration procedure requirement for
certain products;
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Elimination of specified sterility
test requirements for most bulk
material; 5
• Modification of the repeat sterility
test requirements, so that repeat tests
would occur only once for each lot.
These tests would be limited to
situations when the quality control unit
conclusively determines, after
conducting an investigation upon
detection of viable microbial
contamination during the initial test of
the lot, that the contamination is the
result of laboratory error or faulty
materials used in conducting the
sterility test;
• Replacement of the storage and
maintenance requirements for cultures
of test organisms used to determine the
‘‘growth-promoting qualities’’ of culture
media with: (1) Validation requirements
specifying that any sterility test used is
able to consistently detect the presence
of viable contaminating microorganisms
and (2) verification of ‘‘growthpromoting properties’’ 6 or
microorganism-detection capabilities of
test and test components;
• Replacement of the sample size or
amount requirement with a requirement
that the sample be appropriate to the
material being tested;
• Replacement of the Interpretation of
test results paragraph under § 610.12(c)
with a requirement that manufacturers
establish, implement, and follow
written procedures for sterility testing
that describe, at a minimum, the test
method used, the method of sampling,
and the written specifications for
acceptance or rejection of each lot; and
• Simplification of the Exceptions
paragraph under § 610.12(c).
III. Description of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to
promote improvement and innovation
in the development of sterility test
methods by allowing manufacturers
flexibility needed for sterility testing of
some novel products that may be
introduced to the market, to enhance
sterility testing of currently approved
products, and to encourage
manufacturers to benefit from scientific
and technological advances in sterility
test methods as they become available.
A. When is sterility testing required?
Currently, sterility testing must be
performed, with certain limited
5 See section III.A of this document for a detailed
discussion of when sterility testing of bulk material
may be necessary and appropriate.
6 We are proposing to refer to ‘‘growth-promoting
properties’’ rather than ‘‘growth-promoting
qualities’’ as we believe ‘‘growth-promoting
properties’’ may reflect more accurate and current
terminology. However, we invite comments on
which term is most appropriate.
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
exceptions, on both bulk and final
container material for each lot of each
biological product prior to release of
that lot (§§ 610.1 and 610.12). A lot is
defined as that quantity of uniform
material identified by the manufacturer
as having been thoroughly mixed in a
single vessel (§ 600.3(x)).
We propose to eliminate the sterility
test requirement for most bulk materials.
We have determined that, in most cases,
for purposes of sterility testing, the most
appropriate test material is the final
container material. We recognize that,
due to the nature of some biological
products, testing the final container
material may not always be feasible or
appropriate. Thus, proposed § 610.12
would require that prior to release,
manufacturers of biological products
must perform sterility testing of each lot
of each biological product’s final
container material or other material
(e.g., bulk material or active
pharmaceutical ingredient (API), inprocess material, stock concentrate
material) as appropriate and as
approved in the biologics license
application (BLA) or BLA supplement.
For example, certain allergenic and cell
and gene therapy products may need to
be tested for sterility at an in-process
stage or some other stage of the
manufacturing process (e.g.,
intermediate, API, bulk drug substance)
instead of the final container material,
because the final container material may
interfere with the sterility test. Likewise,
some cell therapy products and cellbased gene therapy products may need
to be tested for sterility at an in-process
stage or some other stage of
manufacturing process because low
production volumes may result in an
insufficient final container material
sample for sterility testing or a short
product shelf-life may necessitate
administration of the final product to a
patient before sterility test results on the
final container material are available. If
it is determined that sterility testing
needs to be performed on material other
than the final product, due to the nature
of the final product, we would expect
the manufacturer, in its BLA or BLA
supplement, to: (1) Describe the details
of the sterility test method, including
the procedure for testing the alternate
material instead of the final container
material and (2) provide the scientific
rationale for selecting the specific test
material.
If this proposed rule is finalized, a
manufacturer who desires to utilize an
alternate sterility test method other than
the one approved in its BLA must
submit a BLA supplement in accordance
with § 601.12(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
B. What are the sterility test
requirements?
1. Test Methods
Currently, § 610.12(a), (b), and (e)
prescribe the culture-based test method
to be used for sterility testing, including
the acceptable culture media (either
Fluid Thioglycollate Medium or
Soybean-Casein Digest Medium) and
incubation conditions (time and
temperature) to be used during testing,
with exceptions provided in § 610.12(g).
In addition, § 610.12(f) provides that a
membrane filtration test method, set
forth in (USP 23d revision, 1995), may
be used to test bulk and final container
materials or products containing oil
products in water-insoluble ointments.
We propose to eliminate references to
specific test methods and culture media
for sterility testing, and instead require
that the sterility test be appropriate to
the material being tested such that the
material does not interfere with or
otherwise hinder the test. We believe
that this revision recognizes current
practices and provides manufacturers
the flexibility to take advantage of
suitable modern sterility test methods
and keep pace with advances in science
and technology. Because we are
proposing to expand potentially
acceptable sterility test methods to
include non-culture-based methods in
addition to culture-based methods, we
also propose to remove the definition of
a lot of culture medium currently
defined in § 610.12(e)(2)(i) as ‘‘* * *
that quantity of uniform material
identified as having been thoroughly
mixed in a single vessel, dispensed into
a group of vessels of the same
composition and design, sterilized in a
single autoclave run, and identified in a
manner to distinguish one lot from
another. * * *’’ Although we still
consider this definition to apply, we
believe that this concept is captured by
the definition of ‘‘lot’’ in § 600.3(x). This
change also reflects our recognition that
prepared culture media may be
purchased, in which case a lot may be
predetermined by the vendor.
Section 610.12(e)(2)(i) currently
provides an exception to the growthpromoting test requirements for
dehydrated culture media provided that
the manufacturer has an approved
validation program for autoclaves used
to sterilize these media and the
manufacturer has received approval for
this practice from the Director of CBER
or CDER, as appropriate. We propose to
eliminate this exception. Proposed
§ 610.12(h)(2) provides that all
manufacturers seeking an exemption
from the sterility test requirements must
submit, in their BLA or BLA
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36021
supplement, data that adequately
establish that the route of
administration, the method of
preparation, or any other aspect of the
product precludes or does not
necessitate a sterility test.
Additionally, current § 610.12(e)(2)(ii)
stipulates the test organisms, strains,
characteristics, identity, and verification
to be used. We propose to eliminate the
requirement to test culture media with
specific test organisms and to eliminate
the requirement regarding the number of
organisms that must be used to
demonstrate the growth-promoting
qualities of the culture media. This
flexibility would allow manufacturers to
use sterility test methods that are either
culture-based or non-culture-based,
which may necessitate different
verification activities. Thus, instead of
specifying the number and type of test
organisms, proposed § 610.12(b) would
require the following: (1) Use of a
sterility test method that is appropriate
to the material being tested such that the
material does not interfere with or
otherwise hinder the test; (2) validation
studies to demonstrate that the sterility
test method used is capable of
consistently detecting the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms;
and (3) verification that the sterility test
method and test components used can
detect the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms.
Due to the variety of currently
available and potential future sterility
test methods, we propose to eliminate
specified incubation conditions (time
and temperature) and visual
examination requirements currently
prescribed in § 610.12. Because we
propose to allow any validated sterility
test method that is appropriate to the
material being tested, rather than
specifying the test and the media used,
we also propose to eliminate the Fluid
Thioglycollate Medium incubation
temperatures prescribed in
§ 610.12(a)(1)(ii) for the final container
material containing a mercurial
preservative.
2. Validation
The International Conference on
Harmonisation (ICH) Q2(R1)
‘‘Validation of Analytical Procedures:
Text and Methodology’’ dated
November 2005, states that ‘‘[t]he
objective of validation of an analytical
procedure is to demonstrate that it is
suitable for its intended purpose.’’ 7
7 This text was previously named ‘‘Text on
Validation of Analytical Procedures’’ (Q2A)
(approved by the Steering Committee in October
1994). An accompanying ‘‘Guideline on Validation
of Analytical Procedures: Methodology’’ (Q2B) was
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
Continued
21JNP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
36022
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Similarly, USP General Chapter 1223,
‘‘Validation of Alternative
Microbiological Methods,’’ states:
‘‘Validation of a microbiological method
is the process by which it is
experimentally established that the
performance characteristics of the
method meet the requirements for the
intended application.’’ For sterility
testing, this means that the test can
consistently detect the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms.
We propose to eliminate the
prescribed sterility test methods found
in current § 610.12 and instead allow
the use of sterility test methods that are
validated in accordance with
established protocols, to be capable of
consistently detecting the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms. If
an established USP compendial sterility
test method is used, a manufacturer
must verify that this established method
is suitable for application to the specific
product; however, FDA considers
established USP compendial sterility
test methods to already have been
validated using an established
validation protocol, so their accuracy,
specificity, and reproducibility need not
be re-established to fulfill the proposed
validation requirement. In contrast,
novel methods and any methods that
deviate from the USP compendial
sterility test methods would require the
detailed validation discussed in the
following paragraphs.
Proposed § 610.12 allows the use of a
material sample that does not interfere
with or otherwise hinder the sterility
test from detecting viable contaminating
microorganisms. This requirement is
crucial, because the material itself or
substances added to the material during
formulation may make some sterility
tests inappropriate for use. A validated
sterility test method is a critical element
in assuring the safety and quality of the
product. USP General Chapter 1223, as
well as the ICH Guideline for Industry
(Text on Analytical Procedures),
provide general descriptions of typical
validation parameters, how they are
determined, and which subset of each
parameter is required to demonstrate
validity, based on the method’s
intended use. Validation of each test
method should be performed on a caseby-case basis, to ensure that the
parameters are appropriate for the
method’s intended use. In the context of
subsequently developed and approved by the
Steering Committee in November 1996. The parent
guideline is now renamed Q2(R1) as the Guideline
Q2B on Methodology has been incorporated into
the parent guideline. See https://www.ich.org/
fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/
Guidelines/Quality/Q2_R1/Step4/
Q2_R1__Guideline.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
reviewing sterility test methods as part
of BLAs and BLA supplements, FDA
may decide, as appropriate, to
encourage the use of the compendial
method as a benchmark or starting point
for validation of novel methods and
certain other methods. FDA is
specifically seeking comments on
whether the proposed requirements are
sufficient to ensure adequate validation
of novel sterility test methods or
whether additional criteria or guidance
is needed.
It is important to consider validation
principles, such as limit of detection,
specificity, ruggedness, and robustness,
while developing the validation
protocol and performing validation
studies. These terms are defined as
follows:
• The limit of detection reflects the
lowest number of microorganisms that
can be detected by the method in a
sample matrix. This is necessary to
define what is considered contaminated.
• Specificity is the ability of the test
method to detect a range of organisms
necessary for the method to be suitable
for its intended use. This is
demonstrated by challenging the
sterility test with a panel of relevant
organisms in the sample matrix.
• Ruggedness is the degree of
reproducibility of results obtained by
analysis of the same sample under a
variety of normal test conditions, such
as different analysts, different
instruments, and different reagent lots.
• Robustness is the capacity of the
test method to remain unaffected by
small, but deliberate variations in
method parameters, such as changes in
reagent concentration or incubation
temperatures.
Under 21 CFR 211.160(b), laboratory
controls must include the establishment
of scientifically sound and appropriate
specifications, standards, sampling
plans, and test procedures designed to
assure that components, drug product
containers, closures, in-process
materials, labeling, and drug products
conform to appropriate standards of
identity, strength, quality, and purity.
We consider such laboratory controls to
be needed for both culture-based and
non-culture-based sterility test methods.
The manufacturer must establish and
document the test method’s accuracy,
sensitivity, specificity, and
reproducibility (§ 211.165(e) (21 CFR
211.165(e)), as specified in the BLA or
BLA supplement (§§ 601.2 and 601.12).
For sterility tests, FDA believes that a
validation protocol that would meet
these standards would, at a minimum,
include samples of the material to be
marketed, and incorporate appropriate
viable contaminating microorganisms to
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
demonstrate the sterility test’s growthpromoting properties or the method’s
detection system capabilities,
depending on the type of test method
used. In addition, validation protocols
for culture-based methods should
include both aerobic and anaerobic
microorganisms when selecting test
organisms and include microorganisms
that grow at differing rates so that
manufacturers can establish that the test
media are capable of supporting the
growth of a wide range of
microorganisms.
When utilizing culture-based
methods, validation protocols should
require that challenge organisms be
added directly to the product prior to
membrane filtration or direct
inoculation. If this is not possible due
to inhibition by the product, then
validation protocols should require that
the challenge organism be added to the
final portion of sterile diluent used to
rinse the filter if a membrane filtration
test method is used, or directly to the
media containing the product if a direct
inoculation test method is used. For
non-culture-based methods, the
feasibility of identifying microorganisms
from a contaminated sample should be
evaluated during validation. If a method
does not have the capability to identify
microorganisms to the species level, the
validation protocol should require that
an additional method for species
identification be utilized for
investigation of detected contaminants.
The test organisms selected should
reflect organisms that could be found in
the product, process, or manufacturing
environment.
The validation study design should
contain the appropriate controls to
evaluate the product sample’s potential
to generate false positive and false
negative results. Validation of the
sterility test should be performed on all
new products, and repeated whenever
there are changes in the test method that
could potentially inhibit or enhance
detection of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
3. Verification
Verification is the confirmation that
specified requirements have been
fulfilled as determined by examination
and provision of objective evidence.
While validation of a sterility test
method is the initial process of
demonstrating that the procedure is
suitable to detect viable contaminating
microorganisms, verification occurs
over the lifetime of the sterility test
method and is the process of confirming
that the sterility test and test
components continue to be capable of
consistently detecting viable
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
contaminating microorganisms in the
samples analyzed. This verification
activity may be necessary periodically
or each time a sample is tested,
depending upon the test method used.
We propose to require that the sterility
test and test components be verified, as
appropriate, to demonstrate that they
can continue to consistently detect
viable contaminating microorganisms.
(See section III.E.2 of this document for
a more detailed discussion of
verification.)
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
C. What information is needed in
written procedures for sterility testing?
We propose to replace the
requirement for Interpretation of test
results in § 610.12(c) with the
requirement that manufacturers
establish, implement, and follow
written procedures for sterility testing.
Written procedures are essential to
ensure consistency in sampling, testing,
and interpretation of results, and to
provide prospective acceptance criteria
for the sterility test. Written procedures
should include all steps to be followed
in the sterility test method for initial
and repeat tests. Procedures should be
detailed and clear to eliminate
ambiguity. Under the CGMP regulations,
manufacturers are required to document
that a drug product satisfactorily
conforms to final specifications for the
drug product (§ 211.165(a)). As such,
scientifically sound and appropriate
specifications, standards, sampling
plans, and test procedures must be
designed and written to ensure that
materials conform to appropriate
standards of sterility; and written
procedures must include a description
of the sampling method and the number
of units per batch to be tested. (See
§ 211.165(c).)
Proposed § 610.12 allows the use of
either culture-based or non-culturebased sterility test methods to evaluate
material for sterility. There are marked
differences between culture-based and
non-culture-based sterility tests.
Proposed § 610.12(c) provides the
following minimum critical
considerations that must be included in
written procedures for both culturebased and non-culture-based sterility
tests:
• The sterility test method to be used;
• The method of sampling, including
the number, volume, and size of articles
to be tested;
• Written specifications for the
acceptance or rejection of each lot; and
• A statement of any other function
critical to the particular sterility test
method to ensure consistent and
accurate results.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
For culture-based sterility test
methods, FDA believes the minimum
critical considerations include the
composition of media, growth
promotion test requirements, and
incubation conditions (time and
temperature). For non-culture-based
sterility test methods, the Agency
believes critical considerations include
the composition of test components, test
parameters, and the controls used to
verify the test method’s ability to
consistently detect the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms.
D. What is an appropriate sample for
sterility testing?
Selection of an appropriate sample of
a lot is critical for purposes of sterility
testing. Current § 610.12(d) prescribes
the number of samples for testing bulk
and final container material. Due to the
variety of products covered under
§ 610.12, including innovative products
that may be introduced to the market in
the future, such as cell and gene therapy
products, we propose to eliminate the
sample number requirement and instead
require that the sample be appropriate
to the material being tested. In selecting
an appropriate sample size, proposed
§ 610.12(d) requires that the following
minimal criteria be considered:
• The size or volume of the final
product lot. For example, a final
product lot size of 100,000 units would
necessitate a greater number of samples
to be evaluated than a final product lot
size of 5,000 units;
• The duration of manufacturing of
the drug product.8 For example,
samples should be taken at different
points of manufacture, which, at a
minimum should include the beginning,
middle, and end of manufacturing, in an
effort to provide evidence of sterility of
the drug product throughout the
duration of the manufacturing process;
• The final container configuration
and size. We believe this will ensure
appropriate representation of the lot;
• The quantities or concentrations of
inhibitors, neutralizers, and
preservatives, if present, in the test
material;
• For a culture-based test method, the
volume of test material that results in a
dilution of the product that was
determined not to be bacteriostatic or
fungistatic; and
• For a non-culture-based test
method, the volume of test material that
results in a dilution of the product that
does not inhibit or otherwise hinder the
detection of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
8 See
21 CFR 210.3(b)(4) for definition of ‘‘drug
product.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36023
E. What is required to verify the sterility
test?
Verification activities are necessary to
demonstrate that sterility test methods
can continue to reliably and
consistently detect viable contaminating
microorganisms. The degree of
verification necessary depends upon the
sterility test method employed.
Depending upon the sterility test
method, verification of each individual
test might be appropriate. On the other
hand, some sterility test methods may
only need verification activities
performed on the selected culture media
or test organisms. We propose under
§ 610.12(e) that manufacturers perform
verification activities appropriate for the
sterility test method chosen as follows:
1. For culture-based test methods,
manufacturers must conduct tests to
demonstrate that the performance of the
test organisms and culture media are
acceptable to consistently detect the
presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms, including tests for each
lot of culture media to verify its growthpromoting properties over the shelf-life
of the media. Growth-promotion testing
is important to demonstrate that the
culture media are capable of supporting
the growth of microorganisms.
2. For non-culture-based test methods,
manufacturers must include, within the
test itself, appropriate controls to
demonstrate the ability of the test
method to continue to reliably and
consistently detect the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms.
F. Can a sterility test be repeated?
Current regulations in § 610.12(b)
allow one time repeat testing of the bulk
material to verify results after a positive
initial test. Repeat testing for final
container sterility testing is permitted
twice, provided there was no evidence
of growth in any test of the bulk
material. Under current § 610.12(c), a lot
meets the test requirements for sterility
if no growth appears during the repeat
tests. We propose to eliminate the
reference to repeat testing of bulk
material, because we are proposing that
sterility testing will not be required on
bulk material in most instances.9 We
further propose to modify the provision
for repeat testing to harmonize our
regulatory expectations with current
scientific understanding of quality
manufacturing controls by eliminating
the use of a second repeat test for final
container material.
Consistent with USP Chapter 71, we
propose that if the initial test indicates
9 See section III.A of this document for discussion
of when sterility testing of bulk material may be
appropriate.
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
36024
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the presence of microorganisms, then
the product being examined does not
comply with the sterility test
requirements, unless a thorough
investigation by the quality control unit
can conclusively ascribe the initial
evidence of microbial presence to a
laboratory error or faulty materials used
in conducting the test. If the test of the
initial sample is found to be invalid,
due to laboratory error or faulty test
materials, the sterility test may be
repeated one time. If no evidence of
microorganisms is found in the repeat
test, the product examined complies
with the test requirements for sterility;
if evidence of microorganisms is found
in the repeat test, the product examined
does not comply with the test
requirements for sterility (USP Chapter
71).10
We further propose that for repeat
testing, comparable product that is
reflective of the initial sample in terms
of sample location and the stage in the
manufacturing process from which it
was taken, and the same sterility test
method must be used for both the initial
and repeat tests. This is intended to
ensure that the same volume of material
is used for the initial test and each
repeat test, and that the interpretation of
the results is conducted in the same
manner.
This proposed rule, if finalized, could
result in the need for some
manufacturers to modify their repeat
test procedures. We consider these
modifications to be minor changes in
accordance with § 601.12(d) and to have
a minimal potential for an adverse effect
on the identity, strength, quality, purity,
or potency of the product as they may
relate to the safety or effectiveness of the
product. Therefore, such changes must
be reported in an annual report within
60 days of the anniversary date of
approval of the BLA.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
G. What records must be kept relating to
sterility testing?
Currently, § 610.12(h) incorporates by
reference the recordkeeping and
maintenance requirements contained in
21 CFR 211.167 and 211.194. We
propose to continue to maintain these
requirements. This is intended to assure
that data derived from sterility tests
comply with established specifications.
This includes describing the samples
10 See also Barr, Fish, and Schwemer, Application
of Pharmaceutical CGMPs, the Food and Drug Law
Institute, p. 149, (‘‘In the case of a clearly identified
laboratory error, the retest results substitute for the
original test results * * * If, on the other hand, no
laboratory error could be identified in the first test,
then there is no scientific basis for discarding the
initial out-of-specification results in favor of
passing retest results’’), 1997.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
received for testing, stating the method
used to test the samples, identifying the
location of relevant validation or
verification data, recording all
calculations performed, and stating how
the results of tests performed compare
to set specifications.
H. Are there any exceptions to sterility
test requirements?
We propose to maintain the current
exceptions to the sterility test
requirements in § 610.12(g)(4)(i) for
Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated AHF,
Platelets, Red Blood Cells, Plasma,
Source Plasma, Smallpox Vaccine,
Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-Human
Globulin, and Blood Grouping Reagent.
However, we request comment on
whether any of these current exceptions
should be removed. For example, we
specifically request comment on
whether to remove the exemption for
platelets. Bacterial contamination of
platelets is a recognized public health
risk and the blood collection industry
has already called for and implemented
methods to detect and limit or inactivate
bacteria in platelet components.
Requiring testing for platelets would be
consistent with these industry practices.
We propose to make minor
modifications to the current exception
in § 610.12(g)(4)(ii), under which the
Director of CBER or CDER, as
appropriate, determines that data
submitted adequately establish that the
mode of administration, the method of
preparation, or the special nature of the
product precludes or does not require a
sterility test or that the sterility of the lot
is not necessary to assure the safety,
purity, and potency of the product.
Specifically, we refer to the ‘‘route of
administration’’ rather than the ‘‘mode
of administration’’ and to the ‘‘any other
aspect of the product’’ rather than ‘‘the
special nature of the product’’ in
proposed § 610.12(h)(2) so as to account
for novel products that may be
introduced to the market in the future,
such as cell and gene therapy products.
This proposed exception allows the
Director of CBER or CDER, as
appropriate, to exempt biological
material from the sterility test
requirements of this section if, based
upon the scientific evidence presented
in the BLA or BLA supplement, the data
adequately establish that the route of
administration, method of preparation,
or any other aspect of the product
precludes or does not necessitate a
sterility test to assure the safety, purity,
and potency of the product. This
proposed exception also would allow
the Director of CBER or CDER, as
appropriate, to require sterility testing of
the bulk material subject to any
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
conditions necessary to assure the
safety, purity, and potency of the
product.
We propose to eliminate the current
exceptions under § 610.12(g)(1) and
(g)(2) because they are no longer
necessary given the flexibility built into
this proposal. Specifically, the current
exception in § 610.12(g)(1) allows for
the use of different sterility test methods
prescribed for certain products. We
further propose to eliminate the current
exception under § 610.12(g)(2), for using
two sterility tests, one at incubation
temperatures of 18° to 22 °C and one at
30° to 37 °C, in lieu of performing one
test using an incubation temperature of
30° to 35 °C. The proposed language in
§ 610.12(b) requires the sterility test
used to be ‘‘* * * appropriate to the
material being tested * * *’’ and
proposed § 610.12(c) requires
manufacturers to specify incubation
conditions (time and temperature) in
written procedures for sterility testing
when culture-based media are used.
These proposed changes are intended to
provide sufficient flexibility for the use
of different sterility test methods, as
appropriate.
We propose to eliminate the current
exceptions for Number of final
containers more than 20, less than 200
(§ 610.12(g)(5)), Number of final
containers—20 or less, (§ 610.12(g)(6)),
Samples—large volume of product in
final containers, (§ 610.12(g)(7)), and
Immune globulin preparations.
(§ 610.12(g)(9)). Instead, we propose to
require manufacturers to determine the
appropriate sample volume and size for
the material being tested. (See proposed
§ 610.12(d).) Similarly, we propose to
eliminate the special requirements in
the Diagnostic biological products not
intended for injection exception
(§ 610.12(g)(8)). We believe the special
requirements in current § 610.12(g)(8)
are no longer necessary because
proposed § 610.12(b)(1) requires the
sterility test to be ‘‘appropriate to the
material being tested’’ and proposed
§ 610.12(d) requires manufacturers to
determine the appropriate sample
volume and size for the material being
tested.
IV. Proposed Revisions to Other
Regulations
In addition to the revisions to the
sterility regulation in § 610.12, we are
also proposing revisions to two other
FDA regulations as a result of this
proposed rule. These proposed revisions
are as follows:
• Section 600.3(q): Current § 600.3(q)
defines ‘‘sterility’’ to mean ‘‘* * *
freedom from viable contaminating
microorganisms, as determined by the
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
tests prescribed in § 610.12 of this
chapter.’’ We are proposing to reword
this definition to eliminate the term
‘‘prescribed’’ since, as proposed,
§ 610.12 would not prescribe specific
test methods. Thus, we are proposing to
amend § 600.3(q) to define ‘‘sterility’’ as
‘‘* * * freedom from viable
contaminating microorganisms, as
determined by tests conducted under
§ 610.12 of this chapter.’’
• Section 680.3(c): Currently,
§ 680.3(c) states that: ‘‘A sterility test
shall be performed on each lot of each
Allergenic Product, as prescribed in
§ 610.12 of this chapter, with the
following exceptions: * * * When bulk
material is not prepared, the sterility
test prescribed for bulk material shall be
performed on each container of each
stock concentrate at the time a stock
concentrate is prepared, and the test
sample shall be no less than 1 ml. from
each stock concentrate container. * * *
For lots consisting of no more than 5
final containers, the final container test
shall be performed in accordance with
§ 610.12(g)(6) of this chapter using the
sample therein prescribed or using a
sample of no less than 0.25 ml. of
product from each final container,
divided in approximately equal
proportions for testing in Fluid
Thioglycollate and Soybean-Casein
Digest Media. The test sample in the
later alternative method may be an
overfill in the final container. * * * For
products prepared in sets of individual
dilution series, a test sample of 0.25 ml.
shall be taken from a final container of
each dilution, which samples may be
pooled and one half of the pooled
material used for the test with Fluid
Thioglycollate Medium and one half
used for the test with Soybean-Casein
Digest Medium. * * * Tablets and
capsules need not be tested for sterility
provided aseptic techniques are
employed in their manufacture.’’
We are proposing to amend § 680.3(c)
to eliminate the term ‘‘prescribed’’. As
proposed, § 680.3(c) would say that ‘‘a
sterility test shall be performed on each
lot of each Allergenic Product, as
required by § 610.12 of this chapter.’’
Additionally, we are proposing to
eliminate § 680.3(c)(1) through (c)(4),
because these exceptions would no
longer be necessary under the proposed
revisions to § 610.12. As proposed
§ 610.12 would eliminate the sterility
test requirement on most bulk material,
so the exception in § 680.3(c)(1) of how
to test allergenic products when bulk
material is not prepared, would no
longer be needed. To the extent it is
appropriate to perform the sterility test
on bulk product for allergenics, the
approach for such testing will be
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
explained in the BLA or BLA
supplement that is submitted by the
manufacturer and approved by FDA.
Moreover, § 610.12, as proposed, would
not prescribe a specific sample number
and would not contain the specific
exemption in § 610.12(g)(6) referenced
in § 680.3(c)(2). The proposed
requirement that the sample be
appropriate to the materials being tested
would accommodate the situation
envisioned by current § 680.83(c)(2) for
lots consisting of no more than five final
containers. Current § 680.83(c)(3)
should similarly be accommodated by
the flexible language of the proposal
such that sterility tests for sets of
individual dilution series can be done
on test samples that are appropriate to
these material and thus a specific
exception would no longer be needed
for the sterility testing of these products.
Finally, current § 680.83(c)(4) would be
accommodated by the general exception
in proposed § 610.12(h)(2) and thus this
fourth exception would also be rendered
unnecessary.
V. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under
the biological products provisions of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262
and 264) and the drugs and general
administrative provisions of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (sections
201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 701,
and 704) (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360, 371, and 374). Under
these provisions of the Public Health
Service Act and the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act, we have the authority
to issue and enforce regulations
designed to ensure that biological
products are safe, effective, pure, and
potent, and to prevent the introduction,
transmission, and spread of
communicable disease.
VI. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the
proposed rule under Executive Order
12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public
Law 104–4). Executive Order 12866
directs Agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). The Agency
believes that this proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
by the Executive order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires Agencies to analyze regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36025
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because this proposed rule
generally increases flexibility for
sterility testing and codifies an
approach for retesting similar to the
approach prescribed by the USP, and
does not add any new regulatory
responsibilities, the Agency proposes to
certify that the final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year.’’ The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $135
million, using the most current (2009)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this proposed rule to result in any 1year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
These amendments would generally
provide manufacturers of biological
products with more flexibility as to how
they evaluate the sterility of their
products and reduce the number of
evaluations required. The net effect
would be to reduce costs.
One part of these proposed
amendments might impose some
additional costs on manufacturers,
however. Under the current regulations,
if a biological product fails a sterility
test, the test may be repeated. If the
product passes a subsequent test, it is
inferred that the first test was flawed
and only the later results are used.
Under the new regulations, the test may
be repeated only if it is possible to
‘‘ascribe definitively’’ the initial failure
to ‘‘a laboratory error or faulty materials
used in conducting the sterility testing.’’
This change could increase costs for
manufacturers because of the additional
products that would be discarded. The
size of the increase would be
determined by the number of additional
lots discarded, the lot sizes and the
production costs per unit. Some or all
of the costs of this change would be
mitigated by the reduction in losses
associated with the provision of
contaminated products.
This change is expected to affect few
manufacturers. The method for sterility
testing described in Chapter 71 of USP
33–NF 28 already limits the repetition
of tests to circumstances similar to those
described in these amendments. It is
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
36026
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
anticipated that, in the absence of these
amendments, the majority of
manufacturers would limit the
repetition of sterility tests in order to
comply with USP Chapter 71. The
Agency invites comment on the
frequency with which manufacturers
diverge from the retesting protocol of
these amendments and the costs that
limiting retests will impose.
The benefit of limiting retests would
be fewer illnesses caused by
contaminated biological products. We
are unable to quantify the value of the
reduction in illnesses because we do not
have an estimate of the risk of illness
from contaminated biological products
or the decline in that risk associated
with limiting retests.
VII. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.31(h) that this action is of a type
that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement
is required.
VIII. The Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995
This proposed rule refers to
previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520). The collections of information in
§§ 211.165 and 610.12 have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0139. Therefore, FDA tentatively
concludes that the proposed
requirements in this document are not
subject to review by OMB because they
do not constitute a ‘‘new collection of
information’’ under the PRA.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
IX. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA
has determined that the proposed rule
does not contain policies that have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Accordingly, the
Agency has concluded that the
proposed rule does not contain policies
that have federalism implications as
defined in the Executive order and,
consequently, a federalism summary
impact statement is not required.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
X. Proposed Effective Date
§ 610.12
FDA is proposing that any final rule
that may issue based on this proposal be
effective 90 days after the date of its
publication in the Federal Register.
XI. Request for Comments
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written
comments regarding this document. It is
only necessary to send one set of
comments. It is no longer necessary to
send two copies of mailed comments.
Identify comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 600
Biologics, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 610
Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 680
Biologics, Blood, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public
Health Service Act, and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, it is proposed that 21 CFR
parts 600, 610, and 680 be amended as
follows:
PART 600—BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS:
GENERAL
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 600 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 360, 360i, 371, 374; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262,
263, 263a, 264, 300aa–25.
§ 600.3
[Amended]
2. Section 600.3 is amended in
paragraph (q) by removing the phrase
‘‘prescribed in’’ and by adding in its
place the phrase ‘‘conducted under’’.
PART 610—GENERAL BIOLOGICAL
PRODUCTS STANDARDS
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 610 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360, 360c, 360d, 360h, 360i, 371,
372, 374, 381; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
4. Section 610.12 is revised to read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Sterility.
(a) The test. Except as provided in
paragraph (h) of this section,
manufacturers of biological products
must perform sterility testing of each lot
of each biological product’s final
container material or other material, as
appropriate and as approved in the
biologics license application or
supplement for that product.
(b) Test requirements. (1) The sterility
test must be appropriate to the material
being tested such that the material does
not interfere with or otherwise hinder
the test.
(2) The sterility test must be validated
to demonstrate that the test is capable of
reliably and consistently detecting the
presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
(3) The sterility test and test
components must be verified to
demonstrate that the test method can
consistently detect the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms.
(c) Written procedures. Manufacturers
must establish, implement, and follow
written procedures for sterility testing
that describe, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) The sterility test method to be
used;
(i) If culture-based test methods are
used, include, at a minimum:
(A) Composition of the culture media;
(B) Growth-promotion test
requirements; and
(C) Incubation conditions (time and
temperature).
(ii) If non-culture-based test methods
are used, include, at a minimum:
(A) Composition of test components;
(B) Test parameters, including
acceptance criteria; and
(C) Controls used to verify the
method’s ability to detect the presence
of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
(2) The method of sampling,
including the number, volume, and size
of articles to be tested;
(3) Written specifications for the
acceptance or rejection of each lot; and
(4) A statement of any other function
critical to the particular sterility test
method to ensure consistent and
accurate results.
(d) The sample. The sample must be
appropriate to the material being tested,
considering, at a minimum:
(1) The size and volume of the final
product lot;
(2) The duration of manufacturing of
the drug product;
(3) The final container configuration
and size;
(4) The quantity or concentration of
inhibitors, neutralizers, and
preservatives, if present, in the tested
material;
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Proposed Rules
(5) For a culture-based test method,
the volume of test material that results
in a dilution of the product that is not
bacteriostatic or fungistatic; and
(6) For a non-culture-based test
method, the volume of test material that
results in a dilution of the product that
does not inhibit or otherwise hinder the
detection of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
(e) Verification. (1) For culture-based
test methods, studies must be conducted
to demonstrate that the performance of
the test organisms and culture media are
suitable to consistently detect the
presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms, including tests for each
lot of culture media to verify its growthpromoting properties over the shelf-life
of the media.
(2) For non-culture-based test
methods, within the test itself,
appropriate controls must be used to
demonstrate the ability of the test
method to continue to consistently
detect the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms.
(f) Repeat Test Procedures. (1) If the
initial test indicates the presence of
microorganisms, the product does not
comply with the sterility test
requirements unless a thorough
investigation by the quality control unit
can ascribe definitively the microbial
presence to a laboratory error or faulty
materials used in conducting the
sterility testing.
(2) If the investigation described in
paragraph (f)(1) of this section finds that
the initial test indicated the presence of
microorganisms due to laboratory error
or the use of faulty materials, a sterility
test may be repeated one time. If no
evidence of microorganisms is found in
the repeat test, the product examined
complies with the sterility test
requirements. If evidence of
microorganisms is found in the repeat
test, the product examined does not
comply with the sterility test
requirements.
(3) If a repeat test is conducted, the
same test method must be used for both
the initial and repeat tests, and the
repeat test must be conducted with
comparable product that is reflective of
the initial sample in terms of sample
location and the stage in the
manufacturing process from which it
was obtained.
(g) Records. The records related to the
test requirements of this section must be
prepared and maintained as required by
21 CFR 211.167 and 211.194 of this
chapter.
(h) Exceptions. Sterility testing must
be performed on final container material
or other appropriate material as defined
in the approved biologics license
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 Jun 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
application or supplement and as
described in this section, except as
follows:
(1) Sterility testing is not required for
Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated
Antihemophilic Factor, Platelets, Red
Blood Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma,
Smallpox Vaccine, Reagent Red Blood
Cells, Anti-Human Globulin, and Blood
Grouping Reagents.
(2) A manufacturer is not required to
comply with the sterility test
requirements if the Director of the
Center for Biologics Evaluation and
Research or the Director of the Center
for Devices and Radiological Health, as
appropriate, determines that data
submitted in the biologics license
application or supplement adequately
establish that the route of
administration, the method of
preparation, or any other aspect of the
product precludes or does not
necessitate a sterility test to assure the
safety, purity, and potency of the
product.
PART 680—ADDITIONAL STANDARDS
FOR MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCTS
5. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 680 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 360, 371; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
6. Section 680.3 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 680.3
Tests.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Sterility. A sterility test shall be
performed on each lot of each
Allergenic Product as required by
§ 601.12 of this chapter.
Dated: June 16, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011–15346 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
28 CFR Part 104
[Docket No. CIV 151]
RIN 1105–AB39
James Zadroga 9/11 Health and
Compensation Act of 2010
Department of Justice.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
On January 2, 2011, President
Obama signed into law the James
Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation
Act of 2010 (Zadroga Act). Title II of the
Zadroga Act reactivates the September
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
36027
11th Victim Compensation Fund of
2001 and requires a Special Master,
appointed by the Attorney General, to
provide compensation to any individual
(or a personal representative of a
deceased individual) who suffered
physical harm or was killed as a result
of the terrorist-related aircraft crashes of
September 11, 2001, or the debris
removal efforts that took place in the
immediate aftermath of those crashes.
This rule proposes to amend the
regulations implementing the Fund to
reflect the changes made by the Zadroga
Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
postmarked and electronic comments
must be submitted on or before August
5, 2011. Comments received by mail
will be considered timely if they are
postmarked on or before that date. The
electronic Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) will accept comments
until Midnight Eastern Time at the end
of that day.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to
Kenneth L. Zwick, Director, Office of
Management Programs, Civil Division,
U.S. Department of Justice, Main
Building, Room 3140, 950 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530.
However, the Department encourages
commenters to submit their comments
using https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth L. Zwick, Director, Office of
Management Programs, Civil Division,
U.S. Department of Justice, Main
Building, Room 3140, 950 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20530,
telephone 855–885–1555 (TTY 855–
885–1558).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comment Period: The Department of
Justice has allocated 45 days for public
comment. This timeline is appropriate
in light of the proposed regulations’
substantial incorporation of the
regulations that were previously used,
the Department’s experience in
operating the Victim Compensation
Fund, and the public interest in
beginning operation of the Fund as soon
as possible.
Posting of Public Comments: Please
note that all comments received are
considered part of the public record and
made available for public inspection
online at https://www.regulations.gov.
Such information includes personal
identifying information (such as your
name and address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter.
You are not required to submit
personal identifying information in
order to comment on this rule.
Nevertheless, if you want to submit
personal identifying information (such
E:\FR\FM\21JNP1.SGM
21JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 119 (Tuesday, June 21, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 36019-36027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15346]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 600, 610, and 680
[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0080]
Amendments to Sterility Test Requirements for Biological Products
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposes to amend the
sterility test requirements for biological products. This proposed rule
is intended to provide manufacturers of biological products greater
flexibility and to encourage use of the most appropriate and state-of-
the-art test methods for assuring the safety of biological products. We
are taking this action as part of our continuing effort to review and,
as necessary, update the biologics regulations.
DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on this proposed
rule by September 19, 2011. See section X of this document for the
proposed effective date of any final rule that may publish based on
this proposal.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2011-
N-0080, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the following ways:
FAX: 301-827-6870.
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (For paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions): Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2011-0080 for this rulemaking. All comments received
may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided. For additional information on
submitting comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul E. Levine, Jr., Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM-17), Food and Drug
Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Suite 200N, Rockville, MD 20852-
1448, 301-827-6210.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Any product that purports to be sterile should be free of viable
contaminating microorganisms to assure product safety (Sec. 600.3(q)
(21 CFR 600.3(q)). Absolute sterility of a lot cannot be practically
demonstrated without complete destruction of every finished article in
that lot (United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Chapter 1211). Therefore,
sterility assurance is accomplished primarily by validation of the
sterilization process or of the aseptic processing procedures under
current good manufacturing practice (CGMP), and is supported by
sterility testing using validated and verified test methods. (See e.g.,
USP Chapter 71>, European Pharmacopeia 2.6.2.)
In the Federal Register of November 20, 1973 (38 FR 32048), we
reorganized and republished the biologics regulations, which included
regulations governing sterility testing, as title 21 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), subchapter F, parts 600 through 680 (21 CFR
parts 600 through 680). Section 610.12 currently requires manufacturers
to perform sterility tests for both bulk and final container material
of most biological products \1\ for the detection of
[[Page 36020]]
viable contaminating microorganisms (e.g., bacteria, molds, and/or
yeasts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sterility tests are not currently required to be performed
for Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated Antihemophilic Factor (AHF),
Platelets, Red Blood Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox Vaccine,
Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-Human Globulin, or Blood Grouping
Reagents; or in cases where the Director of the Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER) or the Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research (CDER), as appropriate, determines that the mode of
administration, method of preparation, or special nature of the
product precludes or does not require a sterility test or that the
sterility of the lot is not necessary to assure the safety, purity,
and potency of the product. (See 21 CFR 610.12(g)(4).)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the years, FDA has amended the biologics regulations, as
necessary, to clarify and update the sterility test requirements. On
March 11, 1976 (41 FR 10427) and March 2, 1979 (44 FR 11754), we
updated Sec. 610.12 to clarify the procedures for repeat testing. On
April 18, 1984 (49 FR 15186), we amended Sec. 610.12 by removing and
reserving paragraph (g)(3) previously entitled Different Tests Equal or
Superior and by adding Sec. 610.9 entitled Equivalent methods and
processes to provide manufacturers of licensed biological products the
flexibility to use alternate test methods or manufacturing processes
that provide assurances of safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness
equal or greater than those provided by the methods or processes
specified in the regulations under parts 610 through 680. On December
15, 1986 (51 FR 44903), we clarified and updated certain requirements
for sterility testing to ensure the reliability of the growth-promoting
qualities of the sterility test culture media and to provide greater
consistency with the requirements of USP Chapter XXI. Finally, on
September 15, 1997 (62 FR 48174), we incorporated by reference the 1995
ed. of the USP concerning the procedures for the membrane filtration
test method.
Section 610.12 currently requires that the sterility of most
licensed biological products \2\ be demonstrated through the
performance of tests prescribed in Sec. 610.12(a) and (b).
Specifically, Sec. 610.12 requires that the sterility of each lot of
each product, with the exception of certain products,\3\ be
demonstrated by the performance of prescribed sterility tests for both
bulk and final container material, unless different sterility tests are
prescribed in the license (see Sec. 610.12(g)(1)) or the manufacturer
submits adequate data \4\ establishing that the mode of administration,
the method of preparation, or the special nature of the product
precludes or does not require a sterility test, or that the sterility
of the lot is not necessary to assure the safety, purity, and potency
of the product (Sec. 610.12(g)(4)(ii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See list of exemptions in Sec. 610.12(g)(4).
\3\ Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated AHF, Platelets, Red Blood
Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox Vaccine, Reagent Red Blood
Cells, Anti-Human Globulin, or Blood Grouping Reagents (Sec.
610.12(g)(4)(i)).
\4\ The Director of CBER or CDER, as appropriate, will determine
the adequacy of the data (Sec. 610.12(g)(4)(ii)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulation, under Sec. 610.12, also specifies the test method
and culture media to be used. For instance, the prescribed sterility
test methods rely upon culture media (either Fluid Thioglycollate
Medium or Soybean-Casein Digest Medium) to detect growth of
microorganisms (Sec. 610.12(a)(1) and (a)(2)). Moreover, Sec. 610.12
specifies criteria, such as incubation conditions (time and
temperature) to be used during testing, suitable test organisms for the
evaluation of the growth-promoting qualities of the culture media,
storage and maintenance of test organism cultures, and storage and
condition of media.
Manufacturers of innovative products, such as cell and gene therapy
products, as well as manufacturers of currently approved products, may
benefit from sterility test methods with rapid and advanced detection
capabilities. Advances in technology in recent years have allowed the
development of new sterility test methods that yield accurate and
reliable test results in less time and with less operator intervention
than the currently prescribed methods. Some examples of novel methods
with the potential to detect viable contaminating microorganisms
include the Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence,
chemiluminescence, and carbon dioxide head space measurement.
We are proposing to amend Sec. 610.12 to promote improvement and
innovation in the development of sterility test methods, to address the
challenges of novel products that may be introduced to the market in
the future, and to potentially enhance sterility testing of currently
approved products. This proposed revision would provide manufacturers
the flexibility to take advantage of modern methods as they become
available, provided that these methods meet certain criteria.
II. Highlights of This Proposed Rule
We are proposing to amend the sterility test requirements for
biological products to provide manufacturers with greater flexibility
to encourage use of the most appropriate and state-of-the-art test
methods. The most significant proposed changes include the following:
Elimination of specified sterility test methods, culture
media formulae (or formulations), and culture media test requirements;
Elimination of specified membrane filtration procedure
requirement for certain products;
Elimination of specified sterility test requirements for
most bulk material; \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See section III.A of this document for a detailed discussion
of when sterility testing of bulk material may be necessary and
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modification of the repeat sterility test requirements, so
that repeat tests would occur only once for each lot. These tests would
be limited to situations when the quality control unit conclusively
determines, after conducting an investigation upon detection of viable
microbial contamination during the initial test of the lot, that the
contamination is the result of laboratory error or faulty materials
used in conducting the sterility test;
Replacement of the storage and maintenance requirements
for cultures of test organisms used to determine the ``growth-promoting
qualities'' of culture media with: (1) Validation requirements
specifying that any sterility test used is able to consistently detect
the presence of viable contaminating microorganisms and (2)
verification of ``growth-promoting properties'' \6\ or microorganism-
detection capabilities of test and test components;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ We are proposing to refer to ``growth-promoting properties''
rather than ``growth-promoting qualities'' as we believe ``growth-
promoting properties'' may reflect more accurate and current
terminology. However, we invite comments on which term is most
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacement of the sample size or amount requirement with
a requirement that the sample be appropriate to the material being
tested;
Replacement of the Interpretation of test results
paragraph under Sec. 610.12(c) with a requirement that manufacturers
establish, implement, and follow written procedures for sterility
testing that describe, at a minimum, the test method used, the method
of sampling, and the written specifications for acceptance or rejection
of each lot; and
Simplification of the Exceptions paragraph under Sec.
610.12(c).
III. Description of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule is intended to promote improvement and
innovation in the development of sterility test methods by allowing
manufacturers flexibility needed for sterility testing of some novel
products that may be introduced to the market, to enhance sterility
testing of currently approved products, and to encourage manufacturers
to benefit from scientific and technological advances in sterility test
methods as they become available.
A. When is sterility testing required?
Currently, sterility testing must be performed, with certain
limited
[[Page 36021]]
exceptions, on both bulk and final container material for each lot of
each biological product prior to release of that lot (Sec. Sec. 610.1
and 610.12). A lot is defined as that quantity of uniform material
identified by the manufacturer as having been thoroughly mixed in a
single vessel (Sec. 600.3(x)).
We propose to eliminate the sterility test requirement for most
bulk materials. We have determined that, in most cases, for purposes of
sterility testing, the most appropriate test material is the final
container material. We recognize that, due to the nature of some
biological products, testing the final container material may not
always be feasible or appropriate. Thus, proposed Sec. 610.12 would
require that prior to release, manufacturers of biological products
must perform sterility testing of each lot of each biological product's
final container material or other material (e.g., bulk material or
active pharmaceutical ingredient (API), in-process material, stock
concentrate material) as appropriate and as approved in the biologics
license application (BLA) or BLA supplement. For example, certain
allergenic and cell and gene therapy products may need to be tested for
sterility at an in-process stage or some other stage of the
manufacturing process (e.g., intermediate, API, bulk drug substance)
instead of the final container material, because the final container
material may interfere with the sterility test. Likewise, some cell
therapy products and cell-based gene therapy products may need to be
tested for sterility at an in-process stage or some other stage of
manufacturing process because low production volumes may result in an
insufficient final container material sample for sterility testing or a
short product shelf-life may necessitate administration of the final
product to a patient before sterility test results on the final
container material are available. If it is determined that sterility
testing needs to be performed on material other than the final product,
due to the nature of the final product, we would expect the
manufacturer, in its BLA or BLA supplement, to: (1) Describe the
details of the sterility test method, including the procedure for
testing the alternate material instead of the final container material
and (2) provide the scientific rationale for selecting the specific
test material.
If this proposed rule is finalized, a manufacturer who desires to
utilize an alternate sterility test method other than the one approved
in its BLA must submit a BLA supplement in accordance with Sec.
601.12(b).
B. What are the sterility test requirements?
1. Test Methods
Currently, Sec. 610.12(a), (b), and (e) prescribe the culture-
based test method to be used for sterility testing, including the
acceptable culture media (either Fluid Thioglycollate Medium or
Soybean-Casein Digest Medium) and incubation conditions (time and
temperature) to be used during testing, with exceptions provided in
Sec. 610.12(g). In addition, Sec. 610.12(f) provides that a membrane
filtration test method, set forth in (USP 23d revision, 1995), may be
used to test bulk and final container materials or products containing
oil products in water-insoluble ointments. We propose to eliminate
references to specific test methods and culture media for sterility
testing, and instead require that the sterility test be appropriate to
the material being tested such that the material does not interfere
with or otherwise hinder the test. We believe that this revision
recognizes current practices and provides manufacturers the flexibility
to take advantage of suitable modern sterility test methods and keep
pace with advances in science and technology. Because we are proposing
to expand potentially acceptable sterility test methods to include non-
culture-based methods in addition to culture-based methods, we also
propose to remove the definition of a lot of culture medium currently
defined in Sec. 610.12(e)(2)(i) as ``* * * that quantity of uniform
material identified as having been thoroughly mixed in a single vessel,
dispensed into a group of vessels of the same composition and design,
sterilized in a single autoclave run, and identified in a manner to
distinguish one lot from another. * * *'' Although we still consider
this definition to apply, we believe that this concept is captured by
the definition of ``lot'' in Sec. 600.3(x). This change also reflects
our recognition that prepared culture media may be purchased, in which
case a lot may be predetermined by the vendor.
Section 610.12(e)(2)(i) currently provides an exception to the
growth-promoting test requirements for dehydrated culture media
provided that the manufacturer has an approved validation program for
autoclaves used to sterilize these media and the manufacturer has
received approval for this practice from the Director of CBER or CDER,
as appropriate. We propose to eliminate this exception. Proposed Sec.
610.12(h)(2) provides that all manufacturers seeking an exemption from
the sterility test requirements must submit, in their BLA or BLA
supplement, data that adequately establish that the route of
administration, the method of preparation, or any other aspect of the
product precludes or does not necessitate a sterility test.
Additionally, current Sec. 610.12(e)(2)(ii) stipulates the test
organisms, strains, characteristics, identity, and verification to be
used. We propose to eliminate the requirement to test culture media
with specific test organisms and to eliminate the requirement regarding
the number of organisms that must be used to demonstrate the growth-
promoting qualities of the culture media. This flexibility would allow
manufacturers to use sterility test methods that are either culture-
based or non-culture-based, which may necessitate different
verification activities. Thus, instead of specifying the number and
type of test organisms, proposed Sec. 610.12(b) would require the
following: (1) Use of a sterility test method that is appropriate to
the material being tested such that the material does not interfere
with or otherwise hinder the test; (2) validation studies to
demonstrate that the sterility test method used is capable of
consistently detecting the presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms; and (3) verification that the sterility test method and
test components used can detect the presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
Due to the variety of currently available and potential future
sterility test methods, we propose to eliminate specified incubation
conditions (time and temperature) and visual examination requirements
currently prescribed in Sec. 610.12. Because we propose to allow any
validated sterility test method that is appropriate to the material
being tested, rather than specifying the test and the media used, we
also propose to eliminate the Fluid Thioglycollate Medium incubation
temperatures prescribed in Sec. 610.12(a)(1)(ii) for the final
container material containing a mercurial preservative.
2. Validation
The International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) Q2(R1)
``Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology'' dated
November 2005, states that ``[t]he objective of validation of an
analytical procedure is to demonstrate that it is suitable for its
intended purpose.'' \7\
[[Page 36022]]
Similarly, USP General Chapter 1223, ``Validation of Alternative
Microbiological Methods,'' states: ``Validation of a microbiological
method is the process by which it is experimentally established that
the performance characteristics of the method meet the requirements for
the intended application.'' For sterility testing, this means that the
test can consistently detect the presence of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This text was previously named ``Text on Validation of
Analytical Procedures'' (Q2A) (approved by the Steering Committee in
October 1994). An accompanying ``Guideline on Validation of
Analytical Procedures: Methodology'' (Q2B) was subsequently
developed and approved by the Steering Committee in November 1996.
The parent guideline is now renamed Q2(R1) as the Guideline Q2B on
Methodology has been incorporated into the parent guideline. See
https://www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Quality/Q2_R1/Step4/Q2_R1__Guideline.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to eliminate the prescribed sterility test methods found
in current Sec. 610.12 and instead allow the use of sterility test
methods that are validated in accordance with established protocols, to
be capable of consistently detecting the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms. If an established USP compendial
sterility test method is used, a manufacturer must verify that this
established method is suitable for application to the specific product;
however, FDA considers established USP compendial sterility test
methods to already have been validated using an established validation
protocol, so their accuracy, specificity, and reproducibility need not
be re-established to fulfill the proposed validation requirement. In
contrast, novel methods and any methods that deviate from the USP
compendial sterility test methods would require the detailed validation
discussed in the following paragraphs.
Proposed Sec. 610.12 allows the use of a material sample that does
not interfere with or otherwise hinder the sterility test from
detecting viable contaminating microorganisms. This requirement is
crucial, because the material itself or substances added to the
material during formulation may make some sterility tests inappropriate
for use. A validated sterility test method is a critical element in
assuring the safety and quality of the product. USP General Chapter
1223, as well as the ICH Guideline for Industry (Text on Analytical
Procedures), provide general descriptions of typical validation
parameters, how they are determined, and which subset of each parameter
is required to demonstrate validity, based on the method's intended
use. Validation of each test method should be performed on a case-by-
case basis, to ensure that the parameters are appropriate for the
method's intended use. In the context of reviewing sterility test
methods as part of BLAs and BLA supplements, FDA may decide, as
appropriate, to encourage the use of the compendial method as a
benchmark or starting point for validation of novel methods and certain
other methods. FDA is specifically seeking comments on whether the
proposed requirements are sufficient to ensure adequate validation of
novel sterility test methods or whether additional criteria or guidance
is needed.
It is important to consider validation principles, such as limit of
detection, specificity, ruggedness, and robustness, while developing
the validation protocol and performing validation studies. These terms
are defined as follows:
The limit of detection reflects the lowest number of
microorganisms that can be detected by the method in a sample matrix.
This is necessary to define what is considered contaminated.
Specificity is the ability of the test method to detect a
range of organisms necessary for the method to be suitable for its
intended use. This is demonstrated by challenging the sterility test
with a panel of relevant organisms in the sample matrix.
Ruggedness is the degree of reproducibility of results
obtained by analysis of the same sample under a variety of normal test
conditions, such as different analysts, different instruments, and
different reagent lots.
Robustness is the capacity of the test method to remain
unaffected by small, but deliberate variations in method parameters,
such as changes in reagent concentration or incubation temperatures.
Under 21 CFR 211.160(b), laboratory controls must include the
establishment of scientifically sound and appropriate specifications,
standards, sampling plans, and test procedures designed to assure that
components, drug product containers, closures, in-process materials,
labeling, and drug products conform to appropriate standards of
identity, strength, quality, and purity. We consider such laboratory
controls to be needed for both culture-based and non-culture-based
sterility test methods. The manufacturer must establish and document
the test method's accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and
reproducibility (Sec. 211.165(e) (21 CFR 211.165(e)), as specified in
the BLA or BLA supplement (Sec. Sec. 601.2 and 601.12). For sterility
tests, FDA believes that a validation protocol that would meet these
standards would, at a minimum, include samples of the material to be
marketed, and incorporate appropriate viable contaminating
microorganisms to demonstrate the sterility test's growth-promoting
properties or the method's detection system capabilities, depending on
the type of test method used. In addition, validation protocols for
culture-based methods should include both aerobic and anaerobic
microorganisms when selecting test organisms and include microorganisms
that grow at differing rates so that manufacturers can establish that
the test media are capable of supporting the growth of a wide range of
microorganisms.
When utilizing culture-based methods, validation protocols should
require that challenge organisms be added directly to the product prior
to membrane filtration or direct inoculation. If this is not possible
due to inhibition by the product, then validation protocols should
require that the challenge organism be added to the final portion of
sterile diluent used to rinse the filter if a membrane filtration test
method is used, or directly to the media containing the product if a
direct inoculation test method is used. For non-culture-based methods,
the feasibility of identifying microorganisms from a contaminated
sample should be evaluated during validation. If a method does not have
the capability to identify microorganisms to the species level, the
validation protocol should require that an additional method for
species identification be utilized for investigation of detected
contaminants. The test organisms selected should reflect organisms that
could be found in the product, process, or manufacturing environment.
The validation study design should contain the appropriate controls
to evaluate the product sample's potential to generate false positive
and false negative results. Validation of the sterility test should be
performed on all new products, and repeated whenever there are changes
in the test method that could potentially inhibit or enhance detection
of viable contaminating microorganisms.
3. Verification
Verification is the confirmation that specified requirements have
been fulfilled as determined by examination and provision of objective
evidence. While validation of a sterility test method is the initial
process of demonstrating that the procedure is suitable to detect
viable contaminating microorganisms, verification occurs over the
lifetime of the sterility test method and is the process of confirming
that the sterility test and test components continue to be capable of
consistently detecting viable
[[Page 36023]]
contaminating microorganisms in the samples analyzed. This verification
activity may be necessary periodically or each time a sample is tested,
depending upon the test method used. We propose to require that the
sterility test and test components be verified, as appropriate, to
demonstrate that they can continue to consistently detect viable
contaminating microorganisms. (See section III.E.2 of this document for
a more detailed discussion of verification.)
C. What information is needed in written procedures for sterility
testing?
We propose to replace the requirement for Interpretation of test
results in Sec. 610.12(c) with the requirement that manufacturers
establish, implement, and follow written procedures for sterility
testing. Written procedures are essential to ensure consistency in
sampling, testing, and interpretation of results, and to provide
prospective acceptance criteria for the sterility test. Written
procedures should include all steps to be followed in the sterility
test method for initial and repeat tests. Procedures should be detailed
and clear to eliminate ambiguity. Under the CGMP regulations,
manufacturers are required to document that a drug product
satisfactorily conforms to final specifications for the drug product
(Sec. 211.165(a)). As such, scientifically sound and appropriate
specifications, standards, sampling plans, and test procedures must be
designed and written to ensure that materials conform to appropriate
standards of sterility; and written procedures must include a
description of the sampling method and the number of units per batch to
be tested. (See Sec. 211.165(c).)
Proposed Sec. 610.12 allows the use of either culture-based or
non-culture-based sterility test methods to evaluate material for
sterility. There are marked differences between culture-based and non-
culture-based sterility tests. Proposed Sec. 610.12(c) provides the
following minimum critical considerations that must be included in
written procedures for both culture-based and non-culture-based
sterility tests:
The sterility test method to be used;
The method of sampling, including the number, volume, and
size of articles to be tested;
Written specifications for the acceptance or rejection of
each lot; and
A statement of any other function critical to the
particular sterility test method to ensure consistent and accurate
results.
For culture-based sterility test methods, FDA believes the minimum
critical considerations include the composition of media, growth
promotion test requirements, and incubation conditions (time and
temperature). For non-culture-based sterility test methods, the Agency
believes critical considerations include the composition of test
components, test parameters, and the controls used to verify the test
method's ability to consistently detect the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms.
D. What is an appropriate sample for sterility testing?
Selection of an appropriate sample of a lot is critical for
purposes of sterility testing. Current Sec. 610.12(d) prescribes the
number of samples for testing bulk and final container material. Due to
the variety of products covered under Sec. 610.12, including
innovative products that may be introduced to the market in the future,
such as cell and gene therapy products, we propose to eliminate the
sample number requirement and instead require that the sample be
appropriate to the material being tested. In selecting an appropriate
sample size, proposed Sec. 610.12(d) requires that the following
minimal criteria be considered:
The size or volume of the final product lot. For example,
a final product lot size of 100,000 units would necessitate a greater
number of samples to be evaluated than a final product lot size of
5,000 units;
The duration of manufacturing of the drug product.\8\ For
example, samples should be taken at different points of manufacture,
which, at a minimum should include the beginning, middle, and end of
manufacturing, in an effort to provide evidence of sterility of the
drug product throughout the duration of the manufacturing process;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 21 CFR 210.3(b)(4) for definition of ``drug product.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final container configuration and size. We believe
this will ensure appropriate representation of the lot;
The quantities or concentrations of inhibitors,
neutralizers, and preservatives, if present, in the test material;
For a culture-based test method, the volume of test
material that results in a dilution of the product that was determined
not to be bacteriostatic or fungistatic; and
For a non-culture-based test method, the volume of test
material that results in a dilution of the product that does not
inhibit or otherwise hinder the detection of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
E. What is required to verify the sterility test?
Verification activities are necessary to demonstrate that sterility
test methods can continue to reliably and consistently detect viable
contaminating microorganisms. The degree of verification necessary
depends upon the sterility test method employed. Depending upon the
sterility test method, verification of each individual test might be
appropriate. On the other hand, some sterility test methods may only
need verification activities performed on the selected culture media or
test organisms. We propose under Sec. 610.12(e) that manufacturers
perform verification activities appropriate for the sterility test
method chosen as follows:
1. For culture-based test methods, manufacturers must conduct tests
to demonstrate that the performance of the test organisms and culture
media are acceptable to consistently detect the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms, including tests for each lot of culture
media to verify its growth-promoting properties over the shelf-life of
the media. Growth-promotion testing is important to demonstrate that
the culture media are capable of supporting the growth of
microorganisms.
2. For non-culture-based test methods, manufacturers must include,
within the test itself, appropriate controls to demonstrate the ability
of the test method to continue to reliably and consistently detect the
presence of viable contaminating microorganisms.
F. Can a sterility test be repeated?
Current regulations in Sec. 610.12(b) allow one time repeat
testing of the bulk material to verify results after a positive initial
test. Repeat testing for final container sterility testing is permitted
twice, provided there was no evidence of growth in any test of the bulk
material. Under current Sec. 610.12(c), a lot meets the test
requirements for sterility if no growth appears during the repeat
tests. We propose to eliminate the reference to repeat testing of bulk
material, because we are proposing that sterility testing will not be
required on bulk material in most instances.\9\ We further propose to
modify the provision for repeat testing to harmonize our regulatory
expectations with current scientific understanding of quality
manufacturing controls by eliminating the use of a second repeat test
for final container material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See section III.A of this document for discussion of when
sterility testing of bulk material may be appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with USP Chapter 71, we propose that if the initial test
indicates
[[Page 36024]]
the presence of microorganisms, then the product being examined does
not comply with the sterility test requirements, unless a thorough
investigation by the quality control unit can conclusively ascribe the
initial evidence of microbial presence to a laboratory error or faulty
materials used in conducting the test. If the test of the initial
sample is found to be invalid, due to laboratory error or faulty test
materials, the sterility test may be repeated one time. If no evidence
of microorganisms is found in the repeat test, the product examined
complies with the test requirements for sterility; if evidence of
microorganisms is found in the repeat test, the product examined does
not comply with the test requirements for sterility (USP Chapter
71).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See also Barr, Fish, and Schwemer, Application of
Pharmaceutical CGMPs, the Food and Drug Law Institute, p. 149, (``In
the case of a clearly identified laboratory error, the retest
results substitute for the original test results * * * If, on the
other hand, no laboratory error could be identified in the first
test, then there is no scientific basis for discarding the initial
out-of-specification results in favor of passing retest results''),
1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We further propose that for repeat testing, comparable product that
is reflective of the initial sample in terms of sample location and the
stage in the manufacturing process from which it was taken, and the
same sterility test method must be used for both the initial and repeat
tests. This is intended to ensure that the same volume of material is
used for the initial test and each repeat test, and that the
interpretation of the results is conducted in the same manner.
This proposed rule, if finalized, could result in the need for some
manufacturers to modify their repeat test procedures. We consider these
modifications to be minor changes in accordance with Sec. 601.12(d)
and to have a minimal potential for an adverse effect on the identity,
strength, quality, purity, or potency of the product as they may relate
to the safety or effectiveness of the product. Therefore, such changes
must be reported in an annual report within 60 days of the anniversary
date of approval of the BLA.
G. What records must be kept relating to sterility testing?
Currently, Sec. 610.12(h) incorporates by reference the
recordkeeping and maintenance requirements contained in 21 CFR 211.167
and 211.194. We propose to continue to maintain these requirements.
This is intended to assure that data derived from sterility tests
comply with established specifications. This includes describing the
samples received for testing, stating the method used to test the
samples, identifying the location of relevant validation or
verification data, recording all calculations performed, and stating
how the results of tests performed compare to set specifications.
H. Are there any exceptions to sterility test requirements?
We propose to maintain the current exceptions to the sterility test
requirements in Sec. 610.12(g)(4)(i) for Whole Blood, Cryoprecipitated
AHF, Platelets, Red Blood Cells, Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox
Vaccine, Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-Human Globulin, and Blood
Grouping Reagent. However, we request comment on whether any of these
current exceptions should be removed. For example, we specifically
request comment on whether to remove the exemption for platelets.
Bacterial contamination of platelets is a recognized public health risk
and the blood collection industry has already called for and
implemented methods to detect and limit or inactivate bacteria in
platelet components. Requiring testing for platelets would be
consistent with these industry practices.
We propose to make minor modifications to the current exception in
Sec. 610.12(g)(4)(ii), under which the Director of CBER or CDER, as
appropriate, determines that data submitted adequately establish that
the mode of administration, the method of preparation, or the special
nature of the product precludes or does not require a sterility test or
that the sterility of the lot is not necessary to assure the safety,
purity, and potency of the product. Specifically, we refer to the
``route of administration'' rather than the ``mode of administration''
and to the ``any other aspect of the product'' rather than ``the
special nature of the product'' in proposed Sec. 610.12(h)(2) so as to
account for novel products that may be introduced to the market in the
future, such as cell and gene therapy products. This proposed exception
allows the Director of CBER or CDER, as appropriate, to exempt
biological material from the sterility test requirements of this
section if, based upon the scientific evidence presented in the BLA or
BLA supplement, the data adequately establish that the route of
administration, method of preparation, or any other aspect of the
product precludes or does not necessitate a sterility test to assure
the safety, purity, and potency of the product. This proposed exception
also would allow the Director of CBER or CDER, as appropriate, to
require sterility testing of the bulk material subject to any
conditions necessary to assure the safety, purity, and potency of the
product.
We propose to eliminate the current exceptions under Sec.
610.12(g)(1) and (g)(2) because they are no longer necessary given the
flexibility built into this proposal. Specifically, the current
exception in Sec. 610.12(g)(1) allows for the use of different
sterility test methods prescribed for certain products. We further
propose to eliminate the current exception under Sec. 610.12(g)(2),
for using two sterility tests, one at incubation temperatures of
18[deg] to 22 [deg]C and one at 30[deg] to 37 [deg]C, in lieu of
performing one test using an incubation temperature of 30[deg] to 35
[deg]C. The proposed language in Sec. 610.12(b) requires the sterility
test used to be ``* * * appropriate to the material being tested * *
*'' and proposed Sec. 610.12(c) requires manufacturers to specify
incubation conditions (time and temperature) in written procedures for
sterility testing when culture-based media are used. These proposed
changes are intended to provide sufficient flexibility for the use of
different sterility test methods, as appropriate.
We propose to eliminate the current exceptions for Number of final
containers more than 20, less than 200 (Sec. 610.12(g)(5)), Number of
final containers--20 or less, (Sec. 610.12(g)(6)), Samples--large
volume of product in final containers, (Sec. 610.12(g)(7)), and Immune
globulin preparations. (Sec. 610.12(g)(9)). Instead, we propose to
require manufacturers to determine the appropriate sample volume and
size for the material being tested. (See proposed Sec. 610.12(d).)
Similarly, we propose to eliminate the special requirements in the
Diagnostic biological products not intended for injection exception
(Sec. 610.12(g)(8)). We believe the special requirements in current
Sec. 610.12(g)(8) are no longer necessary because proposed Sec.
610.12(b)(1) requires the sterility test to be ``appropriate to the
material being tested'' and proposed Sec. 610.12(d) requires
manufacturers to determine the appropriate sample volume and size for
the material being tested.
IV. Proposed Revisions to Other Regulations
In addition to the revisions to the sterility regulation in Sec.
610.12, we are also proposing revisions to two other FDA regulations as
a result of this proposed rule. These proposed revisions are as
follows:
Section 600.3(q): Current Sec. 600.3(q) defines
``sterility'' to mean ``* * * freedom from viable contaminating
microorganisms, as determined by the
[[Page 36025]]
tests prescribed in Sec. 610.12 of this chapter.'' We are proposing to
reword this definition to eliminate the term ``prescribed'' since, as
proposed, Sec. 610.12 would not prescribe specific test methods. Thus,
we are proposing to amend Sec. 600.3(q) to define ``sterility'' as ``*
* * freedom from viable contaminating microorganisms, as determined by
tests conducted under Sec. 610.12 of this chapter.''
Section 680.3(c): Currently, Sec. 680.3(c) states that:
``A sterility test shall be performed on each lot of each Allergenic
Product, as prescribed in Sec. 610.12 of this chapter, with the
following exceptions: * * * When bulk material is not prepared, the
sterility test prescribed for bulk material shall be performed on each
container of each stock concentrate at the time a stock concentrate is
prepared, and the test sample shall be no less than 1 ml. from each
stock concentrate container. * * * For lots consisting of no more than
5 final containers, the final container test shall be performed in
accordance with Sec. 610.12(g)(6) of this chapter using the sample
therein prescribed or using a sample of no less than 0.25 ml. of
product from each final container, divided in approximately equal
proportions for testing in Fluid Thioglycollate and Soybean-Casein
Digest Media. The test sample in the later alternative method may be an
overfill in the final container. * * * For products prepared in sets of
individual dilution series, a test sample of 0.25 ml. shall be taken
from a final container of each dilution, which samples may be pooled
and one half of the pooled material used for the test with Fluid
Thioglycollate Medium and one half used for the test with Soybean-
Casein Digest Medium. * * * Tablets and capsules need not be tested for
sterility provided aseptic techniques are employed in their
manufacture.''
We are proposing to amend Sec. 680.3(c) to eliminate the term
``prescribed''. As proposed, Sec. 680.3(c) would say that ``a
sterility test shall be performed on each lot of each Allergenic
Product, as required by Sec. 610.12 of this chapter.'' Additionally,
we are proposing to eliminate Sec. 680.3(c)(1) through (c)(4), because
these exceptions would no longer be necessary under the proposed
revisions to Sec. 610.12. As proposed Sec. 610.12 would eliminate the
sterility test requirement on most bulk material, so the exception in
Sec. 680.3(c)(1) of how to test allergenic products when bulk material
is not prepared, would no longer be needed. To the extent it is
appropriate to perform the sterility test on bulk product for
allergenics, the approach for such testing will be explained in the BLA
or BLA supplement that is submitted by the manufacturer and approved by
FDA. Moreover, Sec. 610.12, as proposed, would not prescribe a
specific sample number and would not contain the specific exemption in
Sec. 610.12(g)(6) referenced in Sec. 680.3(c)(2). The proposed
requirement that the sample be appropriate to the materials being
tested would accommodate the situation envisioned by current Sec.
680.83(c)(2) for lots consisting of no more than five final containers.
Current Sec. 680.83(c)(3) should similarly be accommodated by the
flexible language of the proposal such that sterility tests for sets of
individual dilution series can be done on test samples that are
appropriate to these material and thus a specific exception would no
longer be needed for the sterility testing of these products. Finally,
current Sec. 680.83(c)(4) would be accommodated by the general
exception in proposed Sec. 610.12(h)(2) and thus this fourth exception
would also be rendered unnecessary.
V. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under the biological products
provisions of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264) and
the drugs and general administrative provisions of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (sections 201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510,
701, and 704) (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 371, and
374). Under these provisions of the Public Health Service Act and the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, we have the authority to issue
and enforce regulations designed to ensure that biological products are
safe, effective, pure, and potent, and to prevent the introduction,
transmission, and spread of communicable disease.
VI. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). Executive
Order 12866 directs Agencies to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Agency believes that
this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by
the Executive order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because this proposed rule generally increases
flexibility for sterility testing and codifies an approach for
retesting similar to the approach prescribed by the USP, and does not
add any new regulatory responsibilities, the Agency proposes to certify
that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment
of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $135 million, using the most current (2009) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this
proposed rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
These amendments would generally provide manufacturers of
biological products with more flexibility as to how they evaluate the
sterility of their products and reduce the number of evaluations
required. The net effect would be to reduce costs.
One part of these proposed amendments might impose some additional
costs on manufacturers, however. Under the current regulations, if a
biological product fails a sterility test, the test may be repeated. If
the product passes a subsequent test, it is inferred that the first
test was flawed and only the later results are used. Under the new
regulations, the test may be repeated only if it is possible to
``ascribe definitively'' the initial failure to ``a laboratory error or
faulty materials used in conducting the sterility testing.''
This change could increase costs for manufacturers because of the
additional products that would be discarded. The size of the increase
would be determined by the number of additional lots discarded, the lot
sizes and the production costs per unit. Some or all of the costs of
this change would be mitigated by the reduction in losses associated
with the provision of contaminated products.
This change is expected to affect few manufacturers. The method for
sterility testing described in Chapter 71 of USP 33-NF 28 already
limits the repetition of tests to circumstances similar to those
described in these amendments. It is
[[Page 36026]]
anticipated that, in the absence of these amendments, the majority of
manufacturers would limit the repetition of sterility tests in order to
comply with USP Chapter 71. The Agency invites comment on the frequency
with which manufacturers diverge from the retesting protocol of these
amendments and the costs that limiting retests will impose.
The benefit of limiting retests would be fewer illnesses caused by
contaminated biological products. We are unable to quantify the value
of the reduction in illnesses because we do not have an estimate of the
risk of illness from contaminated biological products or the decline in
that risk associated with limiting retests.
VII. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.31(h) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
VIII. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule refers to previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in Sec. Sec. 211.165
and 610.12 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0139.
Therefore, FDA tentatively concludes that the proposed requirements in
this document are not subject to review by OMB because they do not
constitute a ``new collection of information'' under the PRA.
IX. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that
the proposed rule does not contain policies that have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National
Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly,
the Agency has concluded that the proposed rule does not contain
policies that have federalism implications as defined in the Executive
order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not
required.
X. Proposed Effective Date
FDA is proposing that any final rule that may issue based on this
proposal be effective 90 days after the date of its publication in the
Federal Register.
XI. Request for Comments
Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 600
Biologics, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 610
Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 680
Biologics, Blood, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the
Public Health Service Act, and under authority delegated to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that 21 CFR parts 600,
610, and 680 be amended as follows:
PART 600--BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS: GENERAL
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 600 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360i, 371,
374; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264, 300aa-25.
Sec. 600.3 [Amended]
2. Section 600.3 is amended in paragraph (q) by removing the phrase
``prescribed in'' and by adding in its place the phrase ``conducted
under''.
PART 610--GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 610 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c,
360d, 360h, 360i, 371, 372, 374, 381; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
4. Section 610.12 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 610.12 Sterility.
(a) The test. Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this section,
manufacturers of biological products must perform sterility testing of
each lot of each biological product's final container material or other
material, as appropriate and as approved in the biologics license
application or supplement for that product.
(b) Test requirements. (1) The sterility test must be appropriate
to the material being tested such that the material does not interfere
with or otherwise hinder the test.
(2) The sterility test must be validated to demonstrate that the
test is capable of reliably and consistently detecting the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms.
(3) The sterility test and test components must be verified to
demonstrate that the test method can consistently detect the presence
of viable contaminating microorganisms.
(c) Written procedures. Manufacturers must establish, implement,
and follow written procedures for sterility testing that describe, at a
minimum, the following:
(1) The sterility test method to be used;
(i) If culture-based test methods are used, include, at a minimum:
(A) Composition of the culture media;
(B) Growth-promotion test requirements; and
(C) Incubation conditions (time and temperature).
(ii) If non-culture-based test methods are used, include, at a
minimum:
(A) Composition of test components;
(B) Test parameters, including acceptance criteria; and
(C) Controls used to verify the method's ability to detect the
presence of viable contaminating microorganisms.
(2) The method of sampling, including the number, volume, and size
of articles to be tested;
(3) Written specifications for the acceptance or rejection of each
lot; and
(4) A statement of any other function critical to the particular
sterility test method to ensure consistent and accurate results.
(d) The sample. The sample must be appropriate to the material
being tested, considering, at a minimum:
(1) The size and volume of the final product lot;
(2) The duration of manufacturing of the drug product;
(3) The final container configuration and size;
(4) The quantity or concentration of inhibitors, neutralizers, and
preservatives, if present, in the tested material;
[[Page 36027]]
(5) For a culture-based test method, the volume of test material
that results in a dilution of the product that is not bacteriostatic or
fungistatic; and
(6) For a non-culture-based test method, the volume of test
material that results in a dilution of the product that does not
inhibit or otherwise hinder the detection of viable contaminating
microorganisms.
(e) Verification. (1) For culture-based test methods, studies must
be conducted to demonstrate that the performance of the test organisms
and culture media are suitable to consistently detect the presence of
viable contaminating microorganisms, including tests for each lot of
culture media to verify its growth-promoting properties over the shelf-
life of the media.
(2) For non-culture-based test methods, within the test itself,
appropriate controls must be used to demonstrate the ability of the
test method to continue to consistently detect the presence of viable
contaminating microorganisms.
(f) Repeat Test Procedures. (1) If the initial test indicates the
presence of microorganisms, the product does not comply with the
sterility test requirements unless a thorough investigation by the
quality control unit can ascribe definitively the microbial presence to
a laboratory error or faulty materials used in conducting the sterility
testing.
(2) If the investigation described in paragraph (f)(1) of this
section finds that the initial test indicated the presence of
microorganisms due to laboratory error or the use of faulty materials,
a sterility test may be repeated one time. If no evidence of
microorganisms is found in the repeat test, the product examined
complies with the sterility test requirements. If evidence of
microorganisms is found in the repeat test, the product examined does
not comply with the sterility test requirements.
(3) If a repeat test is conducted, the same test method must be
used for both the initial and repeat tests, and the repeat test must be
conducted with comparable product that is reflective of the initial
sample in terms of sample location and the stage in the manufacturing
process from which it was obtained.
(g) Records. The records related to the test requirements of this
section must be prepared and maintained as required by 21 CFR 211.167
and 211.194 of this chapter.
(h) Exceptions. Sterility testing must be performed on final
container material or other appropriate material as defined in the
approved biologics license application or supplement and as described
in this section, except as follows:
(1) Sterility testing is not required for Whole Blood,
Cryoprecipitated Antihemophilic Factor, Platelets, Red Blood Cells,
Plasma, Source Plasma, Smallpox Vaccine, Reagent Red Blood Cells, Anti-
Human Globulin, and Blood Grouping Reagents.
(2) A manufacturer is not required to comply with the sterility
test requirements if the Director of the Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research or the Director of the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, as appropriate, determines that data submitted in
the biologics license application or supplement adequately establish
that the route of administration, the method of preparation, or any
other aspect of the product precludes or does not necessitate a
sterility test to assure the safety, purity, and potency of the
product.
PART 680--ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCTS
5. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 680 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 371; 42
U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264.
6. Section 680.3 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 680.3 Tests.
* * * * *
(c) Sterility. A sterility test shall be performed on each lot of
each Allergenic Product as required by Sec. 601.12 of this chapter.
Dated: June 16, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-15346 Filed 6-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P