I’d like to know people’s thoughts on what makes a batch a ‘representative batch’ for stability studies. I think it is straight forward for post-approval stability, but if you’re making batches in R&D, isn’t it more like ‘expected to be representative batch’ – until you’ve collected a good amount of data? Anyway, if you use a list of criteria (same/similar formulation, same process, etc.) to determine what is representative and what is not, I’d be interested in discussing it.
By the way, everything I say here are my own opinions and not necessarily those of my employer.
Are you asking what makes a development batch a potentially representative batch for a material / product that eventually goes commercial or for another development batch or just in general?
That is a fairly general question with a lot of different variables to consider. If you think about formulation, CPPs, CQAs, suppliers, etc. I think it largely depends on what you are comfortable technically justifying and supporting with any appropriate regulations, health authority, USP or other validation / development data as applicable. Wouldn’t it also depend largely also on what your intention was for your lot to be a representative of if not equivalent to? Just thinking you would clearly have more flexibility with A.D. or R&D batches versus registration / commercial.
These are my own thoughts and not those of my employer.
If you have not yet signed up for the StabilityHub newsletter, join hundreds of other stabilitarians to get the latest news, publications, job opportunities and more!
By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive emails from: StabilityHub, You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact