Therapeutic Peptides Control Strategy: Perspective on Current Industry Practices

There is currently a lack of harmonization from health agencies on the control strategies that should be implemented for the manufacture of synthetic peptide active pharmaceutical ingredients throughout clinical development and commercialization. In this Perspective, we use the term “peptide” to refer to an α-amino acid polymer with a specific defined sequence without regard to the total number of amino acids that it contains. In the U.S., the FDA currently defines “proteins” that are subject to biological product licensure as follows: “A protein is any alpha amino acid polymer with a specific, defined sequence that is greater than 40 amino acids in size. When two or more amino acid chains in an amino acid polymer are associated with each other in a manner that occurs in nature, the size of the amino acid polymer for purposes of this paragraph (h)(6) will be based on the total number of amino acids in those chains, and will not be limited to the number of amino acids in a contiguous sequence” [21 CFR 600.3(h)(6)]. In contrast, other regulatory authorities apply requirements based on the method of manufacture, resulting in regulatory risks of disparate requirements depending on the jurisdiction. To provide visibility into current industry practices on the control strategies applied to synthetic peptides, a benchmark survey of member companies of the IQ Consortium was conducted. This work provides a comprehensive analysis of the survey results. The compiled responses from 10 companies reveal that while most follow similar control strategies for identification, purity, and assay testing, none of the survey questions received a unanimous response. Interestingly, the number and type of analytical techniques utilized for each test differed when comparing the phase of development, the number of amino acids in the peptide, and whether it was for the drug substance or drug product. Additionally, the limits set for impurity reporting, identification, and qualification thresholds throughout development varied widely. The knowledge acquired from the survey in combination with previously published literature and individual company experiences enables the IQ Consortium to put forth appropriate recommendations to achieve harmonization of control strategies for synthetic peptides with regard to assay, identity, impurity reporting and identification thresholds, bioassay, and comparability assessments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Organic Process Research & Development
Published
2025-01-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.oprd.4c00386
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Protein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.22
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Therapeutic Peptides Control Strategy: Perspective on Current Industry Practices

Osama Chahrour, Brandon C. Wood, Sheng Yao, Brian W. Pack et al.
4 citations
Organic Process Research & Development
Protein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides
3.22
article

Therapeutic Peptides Control Strategy: Perspective on Current Industry Practices

Osama Chahrour, Brandon C. Wood, Sheng Yao, Brian W. Pack, Jeremy Manheim, U. Vogel, Limin Zhang
article en
4 citations

Abstract

There is currently a lack of harmonization from health agencies on the control strategies that should be implemented for the manufacture of synthetic peptide active pharmaceutical ingredients throughout clinical development and commercialization. In this Perspective, we use the term “peptide” to refer to an α-amino acid polymer with a specific defined sequence without regard to the total number of amino acids that it contains. In the U.S., the FDA currently defines “proteins” that are subject to biological product licensure as follows: “A protein is any alpha amino acid polymer with a specific, defined sequence that is greater than 40 amino acids in size. When two or more amino acid chains in an amino acid polymer are associated with each other in a manner that occurs in nature, the size of the amino acid polymer for purposes of this paragraph (h)(6) will be based on the total number of amino acids in those chains, and will not be limited to the number of amino acids in a contiguous sequence” [21 CFR 600.3(h)(6)]. In contrast, other regulatory authorities apply requirements based on the method of manufacture, resulting in regulatory risks of disparate requirements depending on the jurisdiction. To provide visibility into current industry practices on the control strategies applied to synthetic peptides, a benchmark survey of member companies of the IQ Consortium was conducted. This work provides a comprehensive analysis of the survey results. The compiled responses from 10 companies reveal that while most follow similar control strategies for identification, purity, and assay testing, none of the survey questions received a unanimous response. Interestingly, the number and type of analytical techniques utilized for each test differed when comparing the phase of development, the number of amino acids in the peptide, and whether it was for the drug substance or drug product. Additionally, the limits set for impurity reporting, identification, and qualification thresholds throughout development varied widely. The knowledge acquired from the survey in combination with previously published literature and individual company experiences enables the IQ Consortium to put forth appropriate recommendations to achieve harmonization of control strategies for synthetic peptides with regard to assay, identity, impurity reporting and identification thresholds, bioassay, and comparability assessments.

Organic Process Research & DevelopmentVol. 29(2)
AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB), Roche (Switzerland) (CH), Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Germany) (DE), Eli Lilly (United States) (US), Bristol-Myers Squibb (United States) (US), Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science (GB), Analytical Engineering (United States) (US), AstraZeneca (Brazil) (BR), Pharmaceutical Product Development (India) (IN), Teva Pharmaceuticals (United States) (US), Teva Pharmaceuticals (Spain) (ES), Milwaukee School of Engineering (US)
Industry, innovation and infrastructure
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Protein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides
3.22
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.