Tell us about your search experience on the TGA website - complete our short survey
TGA Internet site archive
The content on this page and other TGA archive pages is provided to assist research and may contain references to activities or policies that have no current application.
On this page: Introduction | Streamlined submission process project | Contact the BPR team
Introduction
The February edition of the Prescription medicine BPR update newsletter focuses on the streamlined submission process project.
In this edition:
- progress to date under the streamlined submission process, including TGA performance against milestones
- common problems with PPFs
- guidance for an effective submission.
The TGA is pleased with progress to date under the 12-month transition period, and is engaged in ongoing work to ensure documents specifying the regulatory requirements for the streamlined submission process are updated as necessary in light of experience with the new process.
The TGA appreciates the feedback it has been receiving on the streamlined submission process from sponsors and encourages sponsors to email the BPR project with any questions. The information gathered from this process assists in refining the regulatory documents and supporting material.
The Prescription medicine BPR update newsletter (BPR update) reports on progress in the BPR program. Each month, the BPR update reports on the progress of the streamlined submission process. Each quarter, an update is provided on the PI/CMI project and the AusPAR project.
Streamlined submission process project
In this section: Progress to date | PPF - regulatory requirements | Guidance for an effective submission
Progress to date
The following table provides a summary of the November, December, January, and February batches of PPFs received under the streamlined submission process, and the TGA's performance against milestones 1 and 2.
| Batch | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Item | November | December | January | February |
| Pre-submission planning forms | ||||
| Date processing PPFs commenced | 1 Nov 10 | 1 Dec 10 | 1 Jan 11 | 1 Feb 11 |
| Number of PPFs received by processing date | 28 | 33 | 24 | 25 |
| Section 31 response period - sponsor nominated 60 day | 46% | 70% | 48% | 48% |
| Assessment status | ||||
| Number incomplete | 5 | 3 | pending | pending |
| Number with minor deficiencies (48 hours to address) | To be included in future reports | |||
| Progress to planning letter | 23 | 30 | pending | pending |
| Application type | ||||
| New entity - A | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| New fixed dose combination - B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Extension of indication - C | 10 | 3 | 5 | 0 |
| Generic - D | 8 | 9 | 8 | 11 |
| Minor variation - J, G, H | 4 | 9 | 6 | 7 |
| Major variation - F | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 |
| (multiple application types) | 2 with 3 | 1 with 2 | 4 with 2 | - |
| M1 - Outcome of pre-submission sent | ||||
| M1 target date | 15 Dec 10 | 15 Jan 11 | 15 Feb 11 | 15 Mar 11 |
| Number met target date | 23 | 30 | on track | pending |
| M2 - Outcome of submission consideration sent | ||||
| M2 target date | 31 Jan 10 | 28 Feb 11 | 31 Mar 11 | 30 Apr 11 |
| Number with minor deficiencies (48 hours to address) | 15 | pending | pending | pending |
| Number met target date | 21* | pending | pending | pending |
| Number effective notification letter | 20 | |||
| Number not effective notification letter | 3 | pending | pending | pending |
* Note: all sponsors, with the exception of two, were advised by email on the status of their submission prior to this milestone date. The TGA was unable to email the two sponsors due to problems with sponsor email. Fifteen submissions qualified for the 48-hour response time to address submission deficiencies and all complied with this requirement to enable the consideration of submissions and delivery of notification letters on 7 February 2011 as advised in the initial email contact.
Pre-submission planning form - regulatory requirements
There are a number of documents which outline the regulatory requirements for a pre-submission planning form (PPF), including:
- Information for sponsors completing the pre-submission planning form
- Pre-submission planning form
- Transitional prescription medicine streamlined submission process - January 2011
The following information draws on common issues identified with PPFs submitted in the November, December, January, and February batches. This information will assist sponsors in meeting the regulatory requirements of the streamlined submission process.
| Problem | TGA requirement |
|---|---|
| Attachments missing | The TGA has received PPFs with the following attachments missing:
See The pre-submission planning form identifies the attachments required. Compulsory attachments are marked with a double asterisk. |
| GMP issues | Some issues identified with GMP information include:
See Appendix C of Information for sponsors completing the pre-submission planning form. |
| Sections of PPF not completed | Some sections of the PFF are not complete, including:
See Information for sponsors completing the pre-submission planning form. |
Guidance for an effective submission
The TGA has considered 20 submissions from the November batch to be effective and therefore accepted for evaluation. Three submissions from the November batch were considered not effective and not accepted for evaluation.
At the time of submitting a PPF, sponsors sign a declaration that confirms their understanding of the regulatory requirements for an effective submission dossier.
These regulatory requirements are set out in a suite of documents, including:
- Transitional mandatory requirements for effective submissions
- CTD Module 1 - Administrative information and prescribing information for Australia.
In addition, documents outline the regulatory requirements for modules 2 to 5.
In response to a call for further clarification on the regulatory requirements for electronic submissions and active links, the TGA will be publishing an updated version of:
The following information identifies some regulatory requirements which are not being met, thereby risking that a submission will be considered not effective.
| Problem | TGA requirement |
|---|---|
| Submission dossier substantially different from information provided in PPF | If there is a discrepancy between the PPF and the actual scope and scale of the submission provided, the TGA will consider whether the submission dossier is sufficiently different from the information provided in the PPF to justify the submission being considered not effective. Where there is a discrepancy that does not affect the scope and scale of the submission, sponsors must account for the discrepancy in module 1.8.3, and also highlight the issue in the submission cover letter. Where the scope and scale of a submission is affected (for example, the number of volumes submitted is different to that specified in the PPF), sponsors must account for the discrepancy in the cover letter. For example, a table that indicates planned volumes versus actual volumes, and provides an explanation, is acceptable. See
|
| Module 1 forms not completed | The transitional draft CTD Module 1 - January 2011 specifies the forms required for Module 1. There have been some delays in publishing the new streamlined submission process forms and letter templates separately on the TGA website. Until these are published, sponsors should use the versions provided in the November 2008 version of CTD Module 1. |
| No active links in the table of contents of electronic copy of submission dossier | For electronic submission dossiers submitted in NeeS format, all documents are to be linked from a table of contents. The Guidance for industry on providing regulatory information in electronic format: Non-eCTD electronic submissions (NeeS) for human medicinal products will be updated shortly to make this requirement clearer. |
| Mandatory requirements not met | Some common issues concern:
|
| Packaging requirements | Packaging requirements The TGA is required by law to retain submission dossiers for 70 years. To ensure dossiers remain intact and legible throughout this period, the TGA stores dossiers in acid-free archival boxes. Sponsors should ensure their submission dossiers are acid-free (including the binders and inserts). Other requirements relating to the packaging and presentation of information include:
See Further information is provided in transitional draft CTD Module 1 - January 2011. |
Contact the BPR team
PO Box 100
Woden ACT 2602
- Telephone: 02 6232 8250
- Facsimile: 02 6232 8140
- Email: bpr.project@tga.gov.au
- Email: streamlinedsubmission@tga.gov.au (for current PPFs and submissions under streamlined process)
© Commonwealth of Australia 2011
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney General's Department, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 or posted at http://www.ag.gov.au/
Print version
Related content
- Safety updatesPrescription medicine BPR update newsletter, January 2011
- Safety updatesPrescription medicine BPR update newsletter, March 2011
- Safety updatesPrescription medicine BPR update newsletter, April 2011