The true challenge of eCTD migration is your impact analysis (i.e. downtime, architectural changes and environmental changes) and determining whether or not your selected vendor supports unwritten Agency rules. Bear in mind that subtle differences exist among vendors who have implemented eCTD systems. You need to ensure that your chosen vendor has experience migrating submissions, not only from your existing system, but from all systems that generated eCTD that you now have to manage.
Many international regulatory affairs professionals have come to dread the phrase “Module 1 Change” in the past decade. What looks like a simple reshuffling of leaf titles or the addition of a few new submission types grows into a much more complex problem to solve. Those of you in regulatory operations see on thing in large red letters – VALIDATION. The European Union is taking its turn in 2016. The EU M1 v3.0 final specification was published in October 2015 and is set to take effect July 1, 2016. The specifications become mandatory on October 1, 2016.
The U.S. FDA and Health Canada have each updated their submission requirements for Drug Master Files (DMFs). Understanding each agency’s requirements will be critical to compliance in the coming months as eCTD mandates go into effect.
The current FDA specifications governing grouped submissions state that Application Type and Submission Type have to agree. Accordingly, you would have no trouble grouping NDA labeling supplements.
A grouped submission eliminates the need to submit multiple, identical submissions to different applications. For example, a manufacturing part change might impact a dozen applications. In the age of grouped submissions, a new sequence would be created to note the part change, and that sequence would then point to all other applications affected.