Physiologically based biopharmaceutics modeling (PBBM) is used to elevate drug product quality by providing a more accurate and holistic understanding of how drugs interact with the human body. These models are based on the integration of physiological, pharmacological, and pharmaceutical data to simulate and predict drug behavior in vivo. Effective utilization of PBBM requires a consistent approach to model development, verification, validation, and application. Currently, only one country has a draft guidance document for PBBM, whereas other major regulatory authorities have had limited experience with the review of PBBM. To address this gap, industry submitted confidential PBBM case studies to be reviewed by the regulatory agencies; software companies committed to training. PBBM cases were independently and collaboratively discussed by regulators, and academic colleagues participated in some of the discussions. Successful bioequivalence "safe space" industry case examples are also presented. Overall, six regulatory agencies were involved in the case study exercises, including ANVISA, FDA, Health Canada, MHRA, PMDA, and EMA (experts from Belgium, Germany, Norway, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden), and we believe this is the first time such a collaboration has taken place. The outcomes were presented at this workshop, together with a participant survey on the utility and experience with PBBM submissions, to discuss the best scientific practices for developing, validating, and applying PBBMs. The PBBM case studies enabled industry to receive constructive feedback from global regulators and highlighted clear direction for future PBBM submissions for regulatory consideration.

This Article shares the proceedings from the August 29th, 2023 (day 1) workshop "Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling (PBBM) Best Practices for Drug Product Quality: Regulatory and Industry Perspectives". The focus of the day was on model parametrization; regulatory authorities from Canada, the USA, Sweden, Belgium, and Norway presented their views on PBBM case studies submitted by industry members of the IQ consortium. The presentations shared key questions raised by regulators during the mock exercise, regarding the PBBM input parameters and their justification. These presentations also shed light on the regulatory assessment processes, content, and format requirements for future PBBM regulatory submissions. In addition, the day 1 breakout presentations and discussions gave the opportunity to share best practices around key questions faced by scientists when parametrizing PBBMs. Key questions included measurement and integration of drug substance solubility for crystalline vs amorphous drugs; impact of excipients on apparent drug solubility/supersaturation; modeling of acid-base reactions at the surface of the dissolving drug; choice of dissolution methods according to the formulation and drug properties with a view to predict the in vivo performance; mechanistic modeling of in vitro product dissolution data to predict in vivo dissolution for various patient populations/species; best practices for characterization of drug precipitation from simple or complex formulations and integration of the data in PBBM; incorporation of drug permeability into PBBM for various routes of uptake and prediction of permeability along the GI tract.

This study investigates 3 amorphous technologies to improve the dissolution rate and oral bioavailability of flubendazole (FLU). The selected approaches are (1) a standard spray-dried dispersion with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose (HPMC) E5 or polyvinylpyrrolidone-vinyl acetate 64, both with Vitamin E d-α-tocopheryl polyethylene glycol succinate; (2) a modified process spray-dried dispersion (MPSDD) with either HPMC E3 or hydroxypropylmethylcellulose acetate succinate (HPMCAS-M); and (3) confining FLU in ordered mesoporous silica (OMS). The physicochemical stability and in vitro release of optimized formulations were evaluated following 2 weeks of open conditions at 25°C/60% relative humidity (RH) and 40°C/75% RH. All formulations remained amorphous at 25°C/60% RH. Only the MPSDD formulation containing HPMCAS-M and 3/7 (wt./wt.) FLU/OMS did not crystallize following 40°C/75% RH exposure. The OMS and MPSDD formulations contained the lowest and highest amount of hydrolyzed degradant, respectively. All formulations were dosed to rats at 20 mg/kg in suspension. One FLU/OMS formulation was also dosed as a capsule blend. Plasma concentration profiles were determined following a single dose. In vivo findings show that the OMS capsule and suspension resulted in the overall highest area under the curve and Cmax values, respectively. These results cross-evaluate various amorphous formulations and provide a link to enhanced biopharmaceutical performance.

The proceedings from the 30th August 2023 (Day 2) of the workshop "Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Models (PBBM) Best Practices for Drug Product Quality: Regulatory and Industry Perspectives" are provided herein. Day 2 covered PBBM case studies from six regulatory authorities which provided considerations for model verification, validation, and application based on the context of use (COU) of the model. PBBM case studies to define critical material attribute (CMA) specification settings, such as active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) particle size distributions (PSDs) were shared. PBBM case studies to define critical quality attributes (CQAs) such as the dissolution specification setting or to define the bioequivalence safe space were also discussed. Examples of PBBM using the credibility assessment framework, COU and model risk assessment, as well as scientific learnings from PBBM case studies are provided. Breakout session discussions highlighted current trends and barriers to application of PBBMs including: (a) PBBM credibility assessment framework and level of validation, (b) use of disposition parameters in PBBM and points to consider when iv data are not available, (c) conducting virtual bioequivalence trials and dealing with variability, (d) model acceptance criteria, and (e) application of PBBMs for establishing safe space and failure edges.

A meeting that was organized by the Academy of Pharmaceutical Sciences Biopharmaceutics and Regulatory Sciences focus groups focused on the challenges of Developing Clinically Relevant Dissolution Specifications (CRDS) for Oral Drug Products. Industrial Scientists that were involved in product development shared their experiences with in vitro dissolution and in silico modeling approaches to establish clinically relevant dissolution specifications. The regulators shared their perspectives on the acceptability of these different strategies for the development of acceptable specifications. The meeting also reviewed several collaborative initiatives that were relevant to regulatory biopharmaceutics. Following the scientific presentations, a roundtable session provided an opportunity for delegates to discuss the information that was shared during the presentations, debate key questions, and propose strategies to make progress in this critical area of regulatory biopharmaceutics. It was evident from the presentations and subsequent discussions that progress continues to be made with approaches to establish robust CRDS. Further dialogue between industry and regulatory agencies greatly assisted future developments and key areas for focused discussions on CRDS were identified.

This report summarizes the proceedings for Day 3 of the workshop titled "Physiologically Based Biopharmaceutics Modeling (PBBM) Best Practices for Drug Product Quality: Regulatory and Industry Perspectives". This day focused on the current and future drug product quality applications of PBBM from the innovator and generic industries as well as the regulatory agencies perspectives. The presentations, which included several case studies, covered the applications of PBBM in generic drug product development, applications of virtual bioequivalence trials to support formulation bridging and the utility of absorption modeling in clinical pharmacology assessments. In addition, recent progress in the prediction of colon absorption and in vivo performance of extended-release drug products was shared. The morning session was concluded by representatives from FDA, ANVISA, MHRA, Health Canada, EMA, and PMDA giving their perspectives on the application of PBBM in regulatory submissions. The afternoon breakout sessions focused on four parallel topics: 1) PBBM in generic drug product development; 2) virtual bioequivalence trials applications; 3) safe space and extrapolation; and 4) regional absorption and modified release PBBM applications. This allowed the participants to engage in in-depth discussions of best practices as well to identify key points of consideration to allow further progress on the applications of PBBM.