Appropriate documentary standards and reference materials are crucial building blocks for the development of innovative products. In order to support the emerging sector of nanomedicine, relevant standards must be identified and/or developed before the products will enter into the regulatory approval process. The anticipation of standardization needs requires a good understanding on the regulatory information requirements that can be triggered by the particularities of nanomedicines. However, robust datasets allowing firm conclusions on regulatory demands are not yet available due to a lack of regulatory experience with innovative products. Such a catch‐22 situation can only be advanced in an iterative process by monitoring continuously the scientific evidence and by promoting intensive knowledge exchange between all involved stakeholders. In this study, we have compiled information requirements released by regulatory scientists so far and mapped it against available standards that could be of relevance for nanomedicines. Our gap analysis clearly demonstrated that for some endpoints such as drug release/loading and the interaction of nanomedicines with the immune system no standards are available so far. The emerging nanomedicine sector could benefit from cross‐sector collaboration and review the suitability of standards that have been developed for nanomaterials used for other industrial applications. Only a concerted action of all parties can lead to a smooth translation of nanomedicines to clinical application and to the market. This is in particular important because nanotechnology‐based drug delivery systems are key for the development and implementation of personalized medicine.This article is characterized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Regulatory and Policy Issues in Nanomedicine

The application of nanotechnology to emerging medicinal products is a crucial parameter for the implementation of personalized medicine. For example, sophisticated drug delivery systems can target the diseased tissue by recognizing patient-specific biomarkers while carrying pharmacologically active molecules. However, such nanomedicines can be recognized by the immune system as foreign triggering unexpected biological reactions. The anticipation of the immunogenic potential of emerging nanotechnology-based products in the preclinical phase is challenging due to high interspecies variations between the immune systems of laboratory animals and humans. A close monitoring of the scientific literature is required to better understand the relationship between various immune reactions and the diversity of nanomedicines currently in the development pipeline. We have reviewed the most frequent immune reactions induced by the nanomaterials in vivo and have identified the main effects triggered by lipid-based, polymer-based and inorganic nanoparticles, as the main categories of nanomaterials used in medicine. According to our results, almost 50% of the investigated nanomaterials induced effects related to the activation of the immune system. Among them, complement activation-related hypersensitivity reactions and activation of adaptive immune response were the most frequent effects reported for the lipid-based nanoparticles. However, many of these effects are not or are only partially covered by the current regulatory framework applicable for nanomedicines. In addition, we extracted the most relevant nanospecific properties responsible for the observed biological effects. Our analysis led to identification of the most prevalent measurement endpoints relevant for the assessment of the immunotoxic potential of the nanotechnology-based products and will support the smooth and safe translation of the new formulations to clinical applications.

Nanotechnology-based health products are providing innovative solutions in health technologies and the pharmaceutical field, responding to unmet clinical needs. However, suitable standardised methods need to be available for quality and safety assessments of these innovative products prior to their translation into the clinic and for monitoring their performance when manufacturing processes are changed. The question arises which technological solutions are currently available within the scientific community to support the requested characterisation of nanotechnology-based products, and which methodological developments should be prioritized to support product developers in their regulatory assessment. To this end, the work presented here explored the state-of-the-art methods to identify methodological gaps associated with the preclinical characterisation of nanotechnology-based medicinal products and medical devices. The regulatory information needs, as expressed by regulatory authorities, were extracted from the guidance documents released so far for nanotechnology-based health products and mapped against available methods, thus allowing an analysis of methodological gaps and needs. In the first step, only standardised methods were considered, leading to the identification of methodological needs in five areas of characterisation, including: (i) surface properties, (ii) drug loading and release, (iii) kinetic properties in complex biological media, (iv) ADME (absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion) parameters and (v) interaction with blood and the immune system. In the second step, a detailed gap analysis included analytical approaches in earlier stages of development, and standardised test methods from outside of the nanotechnology field that could address the identified areas of gaps. Based on this analysis, three categories of methodological needs were identified, including (i) method optimisation/adaptation to nanotechnological platforms, (ii) method validation/standardisation and (iii) method development for those areas where no technological solutions currently exist. The results of the analysis presented in this work should raise awareness within the scientific community on existing and emerging methodological needs, setting priorities for the development and standardisation of relevant analytical and toxicological methods allowing the development of a robust testing strategy for nanotechnology-based health products.

The application of nanotechnology in health care is widely accepted as a potential driver of biomedical innovation. By exploiting their unique physicochemical properties, nanomedicines can monitor, repair, and control biological systems in order to address diseases for which currently no or only insufficient diagnostic and therapeutic tools are available. Nevertheless, the opportunities of nanotechnologies in the health sector are accompanied by challenges in the regulation of these products. Sufficient knowledge on their quality, safety, and efficacy must be gained and standardised methods must be made available to support the regulatory decision making and allow a smooth translation towards clinical applications. We have conducted a survey among regulatory authorities with the aim to obtain a general overview on the status and regulatory needs of nanomedicines and to indicate some trends on future requirements. The outcome has demonstrated strong regional differences in the regulation of nanomedicines and confirmed the need for the harmonisation of information requirements on nano‐specific properties. In addition, a number of critical physicochemical properties that have already been proposed in the scientific literature were verified in the survey as relevant for regulatory decision making. Finally, the survey has demonstrated an interest of regulatory agencies in an independent nanomedicine characterisation facility that can support regulators in the evaluation of these systems and at the same time assess the performance of existing and new test methods for their application to the field of nanomedicine.

As nanomedicines have the potential to address many currently unmet medical needs, the early identification of regulatory requirements that could hamper a smooth translation of nanomedicines from the laboratory environment to clinical applications is of utmost importance. The blood system is especially relevant as many nanomedicinal products that are currently under development are designed for intravenous administration and cells of the blood system will be among the first biological systems exposed to the injected nanomedicine. This review collects and summarizes the current knowledge related to the blood compatibility of nanomedicines and nanomaterials with a potential use in biomedical applications. Different types of nanomedicines were analyzed for their toxicity to the blood system, and the role of their physicochemical properties was further elucidated. Trends were identified related to: (a) the nature of the most frequently occurring blood incompatibilities such as thrombogenicity and complement activation, (b) the contribution of physicochemical properties to these blood incompatibilities, and (c) the similarities between data retrieved from in vivo and in vitro studies. Finally, we provide an overview of available standards that allow evaluating the compatibility of a material with the blood system.This article is categorized under: Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Toxicology of Nanomaterials Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Emerging Technologies Toxicology and Regulatory Issues in Nanomedicine > Regulatory and Policy Issues in Nanomedicine

An early dialogue between nanomedicine developers and regulatory authorities are of utmost importance to anticipate quality and safety requirements for these innovative health products. In order to stimulate interactions between the various communities involved in a translation of nanomedicines to clinical applications, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre hosted a workshop titled "Bridging communities in the field of Nanomedicine" in Ispra/Italy on the 27th -28th September 2017. Experts from regulatory bodies, research institutions and industry came together to discuss the next generation of nanomedicines and their needs to obtain regulatory approval. The workshop participants came up with recommendations highlighting methodological gaps that should be addressed in ongoing projects addressing the regulatory science of nanomedicines. In addition, individual opinions of experts relevant to progress of the regulatory science in the field of nanomedicine were summarised in the format of a survey.