Open post

The Under-Appreciated Labeling Discipline

One of the least appreciated disciplines in Drug Development is the development of the product label. The label is one of the most important documents in the regulatory dossier, distilling years of nonclinical and clinical research into a concise, publically available summary of information for the prescriber and patient, to enable the safe and effective use of the product. This key document is also the basis for promotional claims.

Many organizations only really focus their attention on the labeling towards the end of pivotal studies, when preparing the product dossier. Unfortunately, at this point in the development lifecycle, opportunities to create the optimum label have already been limited. The die will already have been cast and the only remaining activities for labeling teams are interpreting the data, summarizing the results, and developing the labeling following the applicable competent authority requirements, formats/templates and schedules. The label will only be as good as the data AND the study design; designs which in most cases were finalized months/years back. So, if at this point, the commercial team decides they want to make claims which had not been discussed before, it’s quite likely that the data from the studies and the resulting label will not be able to support them. The labeling team might then find itself in the cross hairs of commercial teams and/or executives/senior leaders who may be advocating for statements which cannot be supported, not because the product does not work per the wished-for statements, but because the data needed to support these claims was not generated and studies were not designed to collect the requisite information to make the case.

Issues that may lead to a sub-optimal label such as inappropriate primary/secondary endpoints, bad study designs (non-inferiority versus superiority claims), etc. can often be chalked up to lack of labeling discipline. Commercial, Project, Submission and Labeling Teams may be frustrated at the end of the development program because they followed standard operating procedures to a T; there were no audit findings and/or compliance findings; the studies were successful; and yet the label does not support the desired promotional claims. Findings from –lessons-learned activities usually point out that:

  • The label was not considered at the beginning of the development program
  • The Target Product Profile was not clearly defined
  • Commercial, Clinical, Medical and Regulatory were not aligned on the optimal label
  • Not enough information about competitor labels was known
  • Studies were designed independent of commercial, health economics/outcomes research input, etc.

So, what are the characteristics of a good labeling process which organizations must strive to attain? A well-executed labeling process is comprised of:

  • A deliberate and well-planned competitive analysis at the beginning of a development program
  • Alignment of internal cross-functional input and external information into an achievable labeling strategy and Target Product Profile
  • An effective iterative and continuous feedback loop and adjustments as data are collected. Provides direction and focus which may identify the need for additional studies, especially when the pivotal studies are being planned to consider competent authority requirements, feedback, and precedents.
  • The internal cross-functional all hands-on-deck work to develop a core data sheet, containing all essential efficacy and safety data for the product.  The core data sheet should ideally be developed in parallel with the development of country/regional specific prescribing and patient information, to establish the company position on the product data before the first filing is made and facilitate consistency of product information across multiple markets.
  • The coordination of submission activities and internal preparations and planning for implementation of approved prescribing and patient information

So, if you work for an organization that consistently churns out labels that are envy of the industry/therapy area, please thank your labeling professionals the next time you see them! If on the other hand, your organization routinely has labeling issues and commercial teams are always complaining that they aren’t meeting their targets because the label is not optimal, it might be time to put more effort into developing discipline in your labeling process!

Practice Leader

Contact Simbai to learn more about how we can help you succeed.

Open post

Global Labeling Process

Pain Points

The Regulatory Affairs department at a specialty pharmaceutical company was having difficulties developing content for their labels, getting consensus on labeling changes, keeping track of updates and ensuring label changes were implemented. In addition to internal frustrations with an undefined and unclear labeling process, the situation presented a compliance risk for the organization. We were tasked to develop a cross-functional labeling process to mitigate these risks.

Our Solution

In collaboration with regulatory leads, we developed an end to end cross-functional labeling process to ensure an efficient and compliant process. Elements of the end-to-end labeling process included:

  • Clearly defined triggers for labeling development or updates
  • Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for labeling team members
  • Roles and responsibilities for governance teams and committees
  • Tools to be used in the development of the labels, quality checking and proofing, decision tracking and implementation monitoring

Benefits Realized

In addition to many other non-tangible benefits, the Regulatory Affairs department:

  • Was able to develop a business case for a stand-alone labeling department to manage the global labeling process
  • Updated all labels using the newly defined process
  • Had a streamlined process for label development that everyone followed
  • Reduced the risk of inaccurate or inappropriate statements in their labels

Simbai Mudzamba

Practice Leader

Contact Simbai to learn more about how we can help you succeed.

Open post

Labeling Function Development

Pain Points

Our client's R&D organization, specifically the regulatory affairs department, did not have clearly defined roles and responsibilities for developing content for labels, managing the label development process and maintaining approved labels. This created a compliance risk, inefficiency in the end-to-end labeling process and a lack of organizational control of labels for our client.

Strategy Solution

In collaboration with regulatory leads, we were tasked with developing a strategy for the management of the end-to-end labeling process. A major component of the strategy was a business case for a function to manage and control the labeling process. The solution we developed included:

  • Newly defined functional and individual labeling roles and responsibilities
  • High-level benchmarking of organization of labeling departments at other organizations
  • Internal resource assessment and analysis for optimal resourcing of the labeling function
  • A solid business case for a new labeling function within the regulatory affairs department

Benefits Realized

In addition to many other non-tangible benefits, the regulatory affairs department:

  • Launched a new global labeling function responsible for all labels
  • Deployed new tools and technology that improved the efficiency of label development
  • Adopted one source of contact and accountability for labels

Simbai Mudzamba

Practice Leader

Contact Simbai to learn more about how we can help you succeed.

Open post

Process Documents Harmonization

Pain Points

Our client was struggling with managing the standard operating procedures and working instructions their staff where supposed to follow. Their function was assigned many SOPs, some of which were not relevant to their activities. In many cases, the SOPs which were applicable to their function had varied levels of detail, in some cases had activities and steps which did not make sense to the function. In addition to internal frustrations with having to read and sign SOPs with unclear activities, the situation presented a compliance risk for the organization as many employees began to either ignore SOPs or read and sign but not use the SOPs.

Our Solution

In collaboration with the process, training and compliance lead for the function, we convened a team of employees from representative departments and developed a framework for them to assess assigned SOPs. The assessment included checking for applicability to their function and accuracy of assigned activities. Specifically, we led the team in:

  • Reviewing every SOP and identified activities that were applicable to their function
  • Eliminating SOPs that were not applicable to their function and combining some SOPs
  • Assigning SOPs to specific departmental roles
  • Developing an engagement model for the function to interact with the compliance department and the overall SOP development process

Benefits Realized

In addition to many other non-tangible benefits, the function:

  • Reduced the number of SOPs their employees had to read and sign while reducing compliance risk
  • Streamlined the process for providing subject matter expertise input to SOP development teams

Simbai Mudzamba

Practice Leader

Contact Simbai to learn more about how we can help you succeed.