Comparison of regulatory pathways for the approval of advanced therapies in the European Union and the United States

Background aimsRegulatory agencies in the European Union (EU) and in the United States of America (USA) have adapted and launched regulatory pathways to accelerate patient access to innovative therapies, such as advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs). The aim of this study is to analyze similarities and differences between regulatory pathways followed by the approved ATMPs in both regions.MethodsA retrospective analysis of the ATMPs approved by EU and US regulatory agencies was carried out until May 31, 2020. Data were collected on the features and timing of orphan drug designation (ODD), scientific advice (SA), expedited program designation (EP), marketing authorization application (MAA) and marketing authorization (MA) for both regions.ResultsIn the EU, a total of fifteen ATMPs were approved (eight gene therapies, three somatic cell therapies, three tissue-engineered products and one combined ATMP), whereas in the USA, a total of nine were approved (five gene therapies and four cell therapies); seven of these were authorized in both regions. No statistical differences were found in the mean time between having the ODD or EP granted and the start of the pivotal clinical trial or MAA in the EU and USA, although the USA required less time for MAA assessment than the EU (mean difference, 5.44, P = 0.012). The MAA assessment was shorter for those products with a PRIME or breakthrough designation.. No differences were found in the percentage of ATMPs with expedited MAA assessment between the EU and the USA (33.3% versus 55.5%, respectively, P = 0.285) or in the time required for the MAA expedited review (mean difference 4.41, P = 0.105). Approximately half of the products in both regions required an Advisory Committee during the MAA review, and 60% required an oral explanation in the EU. More than half of the approved ATMPs (67% and 55.55% in the EU and the USA, respectively) were granted an ODD, 70% by submitting preliminary clinical data in the EU. The mean number of SA and protocol assistance per product conducted by the European Medicines Agency was 1.71 and 3.75, respectively, and only 13% included parallel advice with health technology assessment bodies. A total of 53.33% of the products conducted the first SA after the pivotal clinical study had started, reporting more protocol amendments. Finally, of the seven ATMPs authorized in both regions, the type of MA differed for only two ATMPs (28.6%), and four out of eight products non-commercialized in the USA had a non-standard MA in the EU.ConclusionsThe current approved ATMPs mainly target orphan diseases. Although EU and US regulatory procedures may differ, the main regulatory milestones reached by the approved ATMPs are similar in both regions, with the exception of the time for MAA evaluation, the number of authorized products in the regions and the type of authorization for some products. More global regulatory convergence might further simplify and expedite current ATMP development in these regions.     

Advanced therapy medicinal product manufacturing under the hospital exemption and other exemption pathways in seven European Union countries

Background aimsAs part of the advanced therapy medicinal product (ATMP) regulation, the hospital exemption (HE) was enacted to accommodate manufacturing of custom-made ATMPs for treatment purposes in the European Union (EU). However, how the HE pathway has been used in practice is largely unknown.MethodsUsing a survey and interviews, we provide the product characteristics, scale and motivation for ATMP manufacturing under HE and other, non-ATMP-specific exemption pathways in seven European countries.ResultsResults show that ATMPs were manufactured under HE by public facilities located in Finland, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, which enabled availability of a modest number of ATMPs (n = 12) between 2009 and 2017. These ATMPs were shown to have close proximity to clinical practice, and manufacturing was primarily motivated by clinical needs and clinical experience. Public facilities used HE when patients could not obtain treatment in ongoing or future trials. Regulatory aspects motivated (Finland, Italy, the Netherlands) or limited (Belgium, Germany) HE utilization, whereas financial resources generally limited HE utilization by public facilities. Public facilities manufactured other ATMPs (n = 11) under named patient use (NPU) between 2015 and 2017 and used NPU in a similar fashion as HE. The scale of manufacturing under HE over 9 years was shown to be rather limited in comparison to manufacturing under NPU over 3 years. In Germany, ATMPs were mainly manufactured by facilities of private companies under HE.ConclusionsThe HE enables availability of ATMPs with close proximity to clinical practice. Yet in some countries, HE provisions limit utilization, whereas commercial developments could be undermined by private HE licenses in Germany. Transparency through a public EU-wide registry and guidance for distinguishing between ATMPs that are or are not commercially viable as well as public-private engagements are needed to optimize the use of the HE pathway and regulatory pathways for commercial development in a complementary fashion.     

Comparison of new Brazilian legislation for the approval of advanced therapy medicinal products with existing systems in the USA,European Union and Japan

Background aimsAdvanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are a class of biological products for human use that are based on genes, cells and tissues. The first ATMP received marketing authorization in Europe in 2009, whereas Brazil granted the first authorization in 2020. The objective of this study was to compare the regulatory models adopted by Brazil, the USA, Japan and the European Union, which comprise the member countries of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, with regard to the marketing authorization of ATMPs.MethodsThe authors performed a review of the scientific literature and official documents of the regulatory agencies in the aforementioned countries.ResultsThe legislation and regulatory guidelines adopted by the regulatory agencies exhibit similarities and differences. It was not possible to assess whether these differences can be translated into divergent final recommendations by regulatory authorities upon a request for marketing authorization.ConclusionsIn the future, it will be appropriate to start a progressive process of harmonization between these agencies in terms of terminology, legal recommendations and characterization requirements. This is particularly important for emerging countries such as Brazil. In this sense, some measures can be taken to achieve alignment between regulators.     

International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy Position Paper: Key considerations to support evidence-based cell and gene therapies and oppose marketing of unproven products

The field of regenerative medicine, including cellular immunotherapies, is on a remarkable growth trajectory. Dozens of cell-, tissue- and gene-based products have received marketing authorization worldwide while hundreds-to-thousands are either in preclinical development or under clinical investigation in phased clinical trials. However, the promise of regenerative therapies has also given rise to a global industry of direct-to-consumer offerings of prematurely commercialized cell and cell-based products with unknown safety and efficacy profiles. Since its inception, the International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy Committee on the Ethics of Cell and Gene Therapy has opposed the premature commercialization of unproven cell- and gene-based interventions and supported the development of evidence-based advanced therapy products. In the present Guide, targeted at International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy members, we analyze this industry, focusing in particular on distinctive features of unproven cell and cell-based products and the use of tokens of scientific legitimacy as persuasive marketing devices. We also provide an overview of reporting mechanisms for patients who believe they have been harmed by administration of unapproved and unproven products and suggest practical strategies to address the direct-to-consumer marketing of such products. Development of this Guide epitomizes our continued support for the ethical and rigorous development of cell and cell-based products with patient safety and therapeutic benefit as guiding principles.     

An assessment of the hospital exemption landscape across European Member States: regulatory frameworks,use and impact

The hospital exemption (HE) (Article 28(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007; the “ATMP Regulation”) rule allows the invaluable opportunity to provide patients with access to innovative, potentially life-saving treatments in situations of unmet clinical need. Unlicensed, developmental advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) - cell-, gene- or tissue-based therapies - can be used to treat patients under certain conditions. Such products should be produced on a non-routine basis, custom-made for an individual patient under the responsibility of the requesting physician, for use in a hospital setting within the same Member State in which they are manufactured. The HE rule, and the specific requirements permitting its use, is further regulated at the Member State level, which has led to divergence in the implementation of HE across the European Union (EU). As a result, HE use varies significantly across Member States depending on their respective national legal implementation, policy makers’ interpretation of HE, clarity of guidance at the national level, reimbursement opportunities and level of ATMP research and development activities carried out by academic and commercial organizations. With important variations in how quality, safety and efficacy standards are implemented and controlled across EU Member States for ATMPs provided via the HE rule and a lack of transparency around its use, the HE rule draws concern around its potential impact on public health. In this article, the authors report results of a legal analysis of the implementation of HE across the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland and the Netherlands and research findings on its current utilization, highlighting divergences across countries as well as gaps in legislation and control in these countries. The significance of these divergences and the differing levels of enforcement are discussed as well as their associated impact on patients, industry and health care professionals.     

Business oriented EU human cell and tissue product legislation will adversely impact Member States’ health care systems

The transplantation of conventional human cell and tissue grafts, such as heart valve replacements and skin for severely burnt patients, has saved many lives over the last decades. The late eighties saw the emergence of tissue engineering with the focus on the development of biological substitutes that restore or improve tissue function. In the nineties, at the height of the tissue engineering hype, industry incited policymakers to create a European regulatory environment, which would facilitate the emergence of a strong single market for tissue engineered products and their starting materials (human cells and tissues). In this paper we analyze the elaboration process of this new European Union (EU) human cell and tissue product regulatory regime—i.e. the EU Cell and Tissue Directives (EUCTDs) and the Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product (ATMP) Regulation and evaluate its impact on Member States’ health care systems. We demonstrate that the successful lobbying on key areas of regulatory and policy processes by industry, in congruence with Europe’s risk aversion and urge to promote growth and jobs, led to excessively business oriented legislation. Expensive industry oriented requirements were introduced and contentious social and ethical issues were excluded. We found indications that this new EU safety and health legislation will adversely impact Member States’ health care systems; since 30 December 2012 (the end of the ATMP transitional period) there is a clear threat to the sustainability of some lifesaving and established ATMPs that were provided by public health institutions and small and medium-sized enterprises under the frame of the EUCTDs. In the light of the current economic crisis it is not clear how social security systems will cope with the inflation of costs associated with this new regulatory regime and how priorities will be set with regard to reimbursement decisions. We argue that the ATMP Regulation should urgently be revised to focus on delivering affordable therapies to all who are in need of them and this without necessarily going to the market. The most rapid and elegant way to achieve this would be for the European Commission to publish an interpretative document on “placing on the market of ATMPs,” which keeps tailor-made and niche ATMPs outside of the scope of the medicinal product regulation.     

Cell,tissue and gene products with marketing authorization in 2018 worldwide

Cell and gene therapies (CGTs) are progressively entering into clinical practice in different parts of the world. The International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy (ISCT), a global scientific society, has been committed since 1992 to supporting and developing knowledge on clinical applications of CGTs. Considering the number of products that have been progressively approved and, in some cases, withdrawn in recent years, the ISCT would like to present a brief annual report on CGTs with marketing authorization (MA) in different regions. This article reflects the dynamic momentum around authorized CGTs coinciding with the parallel increase of unproven approaches where cells are delivered without appropriate and rigorous scientific and regulatory assessment and authorization. This is intended to be a living document with a yearly update linked to a dedicated section of the ISCT website for faster adjustments. The aim is to ultimately inform, by periodic snapshots, the scientific community, healthcare stakeholders and patient associations on authorized CGT products as a way to increase communication around the approved therapeutic approaches charged with heightened expectations.     

Options for imaging cellular therapeutics in vivo: a multi-stakeholder perspective

Cell-based therapies have been making great advances toward clinical reality. Despite the increase in trial activity, few therapies have successfully navigated late-phase clinical trials and received market authorization. One possible explanation for this is that additional tools and technologies to enable their development have only recently become available. To support the safety evaluation of cell therapies, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute Cell Therapy—Tracking, Circulation and Safety Committee, a multisector collaborative committee, polled the attendees of the 2017 International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy conference in London, UK, to understand the gaps and needs that cell therapy developers have encountered regarding safety evaluations in vivo. The goal of the survey was to collect information to inform stakeholders of areas of interest that can help ensure the safe use of cellular therapeutics in the clinic. This review is a response to the cellular imaging interests of those respondents. The authors offer a brief overview of available technologies and then highlight the areas of interest from the survey by describing how imaging technologies can meet those needs. The areas of interest include imaging of cells over time, sensitivity of imaging modalities, ability to quantify cells, imaging cellular survival and differentiation and safety concerns around adding imaging agents to cellular therapy protocols. The Health and Environmental Sciences Institute Cell Therapy—Tracking, Circulation and Safety Committee believes that the ability to understand therapeutic cell fate is vital for determining and understanding cell therapy efficacy and safety and offers this review to aid in those needs. An aim of this article is to share the available imaging technologies with the cell therapy community to demonstrate how these technologies can accomplish unmet needs throughout the translational process and strengthen the understanding of cellular therapeutics.     

An International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy working group short report on the future of expanded access to unapproved cell and gene therapies

Patient interest in non-trial access pathways to investigational cell-and gene-based interventions, such as expanded access in the USA, is increasing, while the regulatory and business environments for non-trial access in the cell and gene therapy field are shifting. Against this background, in 2022 the International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy (ISCT) established a Working Group on Expanded Access to identify practical, ethical, and regulatory issues emerging from the use (and possible misuse) of the expanded access pathway in the cell and gene therapy field. In this Short Report, the Working Group sets the stage for its future activities by analyzing the history of expanded access and identifying three examples of questions that we anticipate arising as uses of expanded access for investigational cell and gene-based interventions increase and evolve.     

Antibodies to watch in 2017

Over 50 investigational monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutics are currently undergoing evaluation in late-stage clinical studies, which is expected to drive a trend toward first marketing approvals of at least 6–9 mAbs per year in the near-term. In the United States (US), a total of 6 and 9 mAbs were granted first approvals during 2014 and 2015, respectively; all these products are also approved in the European Union (EU). As of December 1, 2016, 6 mAbs (atezolizumab, olaratumab, reslizumab, ixekizumab, bezlotoxumab, oblitoxaximab) had been granted first approvals during 2016 in either the EU or US. Brodalumab, was granted a first approval in Japan in July 2016. Regulatory actions on marketing applications for brodalumab in the EU and US are not expected until 2017. In 2017, first EU or US approvals may also be granted for at least nine mAbs (ocrelizumab, avelumab, Xilonix, inotuzumab ozogamicin, dupilumab, sirukumab, sarilumab, guselkumab, romosozumab) that are not yet approved in any country. Based on announcements of company plans for regulatory submissions and the estimated completion dates for late-stage clinical studies, and assuming the study results are positive, marketing applications for at least 6 antibody therapeutics (benralizumab, tildrakizumab, emicizumab, galcanezumab, ibalizumab, PRO-140) that are now being evaluated in late-stage clinical studies may be submitted during December 2016* or 2017. Other ‘antibodies to watch' in 2017 include 20 mAbs are undergoing evaluation in pivotal studies that have estimated primary completion dates in late 2016 or during 2017. Of these, 5 mAbs are for cancer (durvalumab, JNJ-56022473, ublituximab, anetumab ravtansine, glembatumumab vedotin) and 15 mAbs are for non-cancer indications (caplacizumab, lanadelumab, roledumab, tralokinumab, risankizumab, SA237, emapalumab, suptavumab, erenumab, eptinezumab, fremanezumab, fasinumab, tanezumab, lampalizumab, brolucizumab). Positive results from these studies may enable submission of marketing applications in 2017 or 2018, or provide justification for additional studies. *See note added in proof for update through December 31, 2016.     

Préparations magistrales en radiopharmacie : contraintes liées à la mise en place

Use of radiopharmaceuticals in French nuclear medicine departments depends on marketing authorization and their development may be compromised by a limited return on investment. As an alternative, radiopharmaceuticals may also be prepared in the form of a magistral preparation, like in some European countries. In this case, these preparations are subjected to restrictions and requirements for radiopharmacies relating to quality assurance, facilities and equipment, quality of starting materials and final radiopharmaceutical products defined in French good preparation practice. Labelled tracers used as magistral preparations have to be prepared under the full responsibility of a radiopharmacist and used under the responsibility of the prescribing physician. Conditions of sufficient guarantees for the safety of the patient and adherence to pharmaceutical rules must be evaluated individually. However, this form of preparation intends to supply specific medical needs for an individual patient and is not an answer in the framework of development of radiopharmaceuticals.     

Gene therapy legislation in The Netherlands

Several regulatory organisations are involved in the assessment of clinical gene therapy trials involving genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in The Netherlands. Medical, ethical and scientific aspects are, for instance, evaluated by the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO). The Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment (VROM) is the competent authority for the environmental risk assessment according to the deliberate release Directive 2001/18/EC. A Gene Therapy Office has been established in order to streamline the different national review processes and to enable the official procedures to be completed as quickly as possible. Although the Gene Therapy Office improved the application process at the national level, there is a difference of opinion between the EU member states with respect to the EU Directive according to which gene therapy trials are assessed, that urges for harmonisation. This review summarises the gene therapy legislation in The Netherlands and in particular The Netherlands rationale to follow Directive 2001/18/EC for the environmental risk assessment.     

The control of chemicals used in aquaculture in Europe

A range of chemicals are used in European marine aquaculture and these may be categorized as disinfectants, antifoulants and medicines (includes vaccines). This article provides a review of chemicals used in aquaculture in Europe, their regulatory status, and a checklist of points considered best practice in the use (and avoidance of use) of medicines in marine aquaculture. The release of antifoulants and disinfectants into the marine environment is controlled by local and/or national waste discharge regulations that may in turn be guided by wider environmental quality objectives. The authorization of veterinary medicines, biologicals (vaccines) and pharmaceuticals (chemicals), in Europe is the subject of several EC Directives. Registration dossiers address the issues of product quality, safety and efficacy and include environmental and consumer safety where the product is destined for use in a food‐producing animal. Fish farmers, like all livestock producers, must have access to a range of properly authorized medicines to safeguard animal health and welfare. The distribution and supply of medicines must be appropriately controlled and their authorization appropriately includes environmental risk assessment to a common European Union (EU) or international standard. There is progress towards the harmonization of the authorization process within the EU and this will help to ensure the continued availability of medicines for fish. Consumer safety is addressed by the setting of maximum residue limits (MRLs) derived through toxicological risk assessment and by surveillance of food for residues of veterinary medicines. The system for the environmental risk assessment of chemicals used in aquaculture is being developed and is outlined in the present article. It is recommended that the supply and use of fish medicines is uniformly regulated in the EU and supported by appropriate codes of best practice. A number of codes of practice that include reference to the use of medicines have been produced both at a European level and in member states. It is recommended that all European marine aquaculture producers adopt a code of best practice for the use of medicinal and other chemicals their industry. Medicines are one part of an integrated package in dealing with animal health. This includes environmental conditions, nutrition and hygiene. The best practice guidelines presented here are based on the outcome of three European workshops as part of the EU MARAQUA project that involved industry, government and research scientists. They cover the avoidance and minimizing of the need to use medicines and other chemicals, to recording and monitoring their use and effectiveness (in case of resistance development), exchange of experiences within the industry, and staff training. Recommendations are also included for manufacturers of medicines and other chemicals, and for regulatory authorities. Minimizing the need to use medicines and other chemicals requires attention to a healthy source of fish stock. Staff must be appropriately trained in fish husbandry (to minimize stress), hygiene and disease recognition and treatment, including management of the farm site to keep it disease free. The latter may require single generations of fish per site to allow a fallow period during which a disease or parasite cycle is broken. These recommendations and guidelines are in accordance with the current codes of practice being developed by different sectors of the aquaculture industry in different countries. They do not necessarily involve significantly higher production costs and indeed are more likely to save costs as medicines and disease impacts are very costly to industry.     

Access to Orphan Drugs: A Comprehensive Review of Legislations,Regulations and Policies in 35 Countries

ObjectiveTo review existing regulations and policies utilised by countries to enable patient access to orphan drugs.MethodsA review of the literature (1998 to 2014) was performed to identify relevant, peer-reviewed articles. Using content analysis, we synthesised regulations and policies for access to orphan drugs by type and by country.ResultsFifty seven articles and 35 countries were included in this review. Six broad categories of regulation and policy instruments were identified: national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, incentives, marketing exclusivity, and pricing and reimbursement. The availability of orphan drugs depends on individual country’s legislation and regulations including national orphan drug policies, orphan drug designation, marketing authorization, marketing exclusivity and incentives such as tax credits to ensure research, development and marketing. The majority of countries (27/35) had in place orphan drug legislation. Access to orphan drugs depends on individual country’s pricing and reimbursement policies, which varied widely between countries. High prices and insufficient evidence often limit orphan drugs from meeting the traditional health technology assessment criteria, especially cost-effectiveness, which may influence access.ConclusionsOverall many countries have implemented a combination of legislations, regulations and policies for orphan drugs in the last two decades. While these may enable the availability and access to orphan drugs, there are critical differences between countries in terms of range and types of legislations, regulations and policies implemented. Importantly, China and India, two of the largest countries by population size, both lack national legislation for orphan medicines and rare diseases, which could have substantial negative impacts on their patient populations with rare diseases.     

小鼠模型在药物致癌性评价中的应用及研发人源化模型的意义

药物临床前安全性评价中的致癌实验对药物是否能进入临床实验和上市起着至关重要的作用。一些发达国家已经采用小鼠模型的短中期致癌实验作为附加实验,代替了传统的两年期实验。本文主要参考这些模型在致癌实验和药品致癌性评价中的已有数据及资料,对其特点和近年来的应用情况进行了概述。结合现有模型的缺陷,我国新药研发的需求和药物流通日益国际化的现状,得出研发DNA修复系统和细胞周期控制系统缺陷的人源化的转基因模型,是非常有前景的新替代模型。     

A decade of marketing approval of gene and cell-based therapies in the United States,European Union and Japan: An evaluation of regulatory decision-making

There is a widely held expectation of clinical advance with the development of gene and cell-based therapies (GCTs). Yet, establishing benefits and risks is highly uncertain. We examine differences in decision-making for GCT approval between jurisdictions by comparing regulatory assessment procedures in the United States (US), European Union (EU) and Japan. A cohort of 18 assessment procedures was analyzed by comparing product characteristics, evidentiary and non-evidentiary factors considered for approval and post-marketing risk management. Product characteristics are very heterogeneous and only three products are marketed in multiple jurisdictions. Almost half of all approved GCTs received an orphan designation. Overall, confirmatory evidence or indications of clinical benefit were evident in US and EU applications, whereas in Japan approval was solely granted based on non-confirmatory evidence. Due to scientific uncertainties and safety risks, substantial post-marketing risk management activities were requested in the EU and Japan. EU and Japanese authorities often took unmet medical needs into consideration in decision-making for approval. These observations underline the effects of implemented legislation in these two jurisdictions that facilitate an adaptive approach to licensing. In the US, the recent assessments of two chimeric antigen receptor-T cell (CAR-T) products are suggestive of a trend toward a more permissive approach for GCT approval under recent reforms, in contrast to a more binary decision-making approach for previous approvals. It indicates that all three regulatory agencies are currently willing to take risks by approving GCTs with scientific uncertainties and safety risks, urging them to pay accurate attention to post-marketing risk management.     

Concept and organization of a clinical gene therapy lab

Designing a dedicated clinical facility to meet the needs of existing and developing Gene Therapy Protocols presents a unique challenge. Here, we review some of the issues we faced and share some of our design concepts. An optimal Clinical Gene Therapy Lab must meet relevant regulatory guidelines, interface with other hospital labs as well as the clinic and patient care areas, be efficient and flexible in utilization of space, and have the potential to meet future needs without continual renovation. As clinical science expands to include more gene transfer approaches, specific laboratory areas for this type of work will become increasingly necessary.     

Nimotuzumab,a promising therapeutic monoclonal for treatment of tumors of epithelial origin

Nimotuzumab is a humanized therapeutic monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Clinical trials are ongoing globally to evaluate nimotuzumab in different indications. Nimotuzumab has been granted approval for use in squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck (SCCHN), glioma and nasopharyngeal cancer in different countries. This review focuses on the unique functional characteristics of nimotuzumab. Also, it discusses the safety and efficacy data obtained from the Phase IIb clinical trial conducted in India in SCCHN. Post marketing surveillance data from Cuba for the use of nimotuzumab in pediatric and adult glioma is also discussed. Overall, nimotuzumab has immense therapeutic potential in cancers of epithelial origin.Key words: nimotuzumab, EGFR, humanized, monoclonal antibody, SCCHN, glioma, overall survival     

Early Stage Professionals Committee proceedings from the International Society for Cell & Gene Therapy 2022 Annual Meeting

In this Committee Proceedings, representatives from the Early Stage Professional (ESP) committee highlight the innovative discoveries and key take-aways from oral presentations at the 2022 International Society for Cell and Gene Therapy (ISCT) Annual Meeting that cover the following subject categories: Immunotherapy, Exosomes and Extracellular Vesicles, HSC/Progenitor Cells and Engineering, Mesenchymal Stromal Cells, and ISCT Late-Breaking Abstracts.     

Recommendations for procurement of starting materials by apheresis for advanced therapy medicinal products

Activities involved in the production of certain advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) require standardized approaches to mononuclear cell procurement to ensure the highest product quality, safety and process efficiency. These aims must be achieved while meeting regulatory and accreditation requirements for the procurement of mononuclear cells as starting materials. Mononuclear cells constitute the starting materials for many ATMPs, and this article sets out recommendations for procurement by clinical apheresis, addressing the variation among existing working practices and different manufacturers’ requirements that currently poses a challenge when managing multiple different protocols.