Impurity Qualification Thresholds: An IQ Survey on Emerging Industry Experience with Health Authority Feedback

An important objective during pharmaceutical development is minimizing impurities in drug substances and drug products to levels that minimize patient risk. Regulatory guidelines such as ICH Q3A and ICH Q3B provide impurity qualification thresholds for nonmutagenic impurities, but these guidelines are intended for commercial products and when applied during early clinical development this can lead to increased drug development time and resource use. This publication presents the results of a survey conducted by the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development DruSafe member companies, which aimed to gather industry experiences using non-ICH Q3A/B impurity qualification thresholds. The survey revealed that many companies implement higher qualification thresholds during early development phases, with a shift toward strict ICH Q3A/B controls in later phases. Justifications for higher thresholds often include scientific rationale based on literature, Health Authority (HA) guidance, and toxicological principles. The findings suggest that global HAs are generally accepting of higher qualification thresholds during early development, provided there is an adequate justification. This publication discusses the implications of these findings for impurity management strategies and the potential for harmonizing regulatory approaches to impurity qualification.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Organic Process Research & Development
Published
2025-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.oprd.5c00300
Primary Topic
Health, Environment, Cognitive Aging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impurity Qualification Thresholds: An IQ Survey on Emerging Industry Experience with Health Authority Feedback

Elizabeth A. Martin, Teresa C. Wegesser, Kate Arnot, Srinivasan Anand et al.
Organic Process Research & Development
Health, Environment, Cognitive Aging
article

Impurity Qualification Thresholds: An IQ Survey on Emerging Industry Experience with Health Authority Feedback

Elizabeth A. Martin, Teresa C. Wegesser, Kate Arnot, Srinivasan Anand, Mayur S. Mitra, Alejandra Trejo‐Martin, Kaushik Datta, Joel P. Bercu, Jennifer Alleva, John Nicolette
article en

Abstract

An important objective during pharmaceutical development is minimizing impurities in drug substances and drug products to levels that minimize patient risk. Regulatory guidelines such as ICH Q3A and ICH Q3B provide impurity qualification thresholds for nonmutagenic impurities, but these guidelines are intended for commercial products and when applied during early clinical development this can lead to increased drug development time and resource use. This publication presents the results of a survey conducted by the International Consortium for Innovation and Quality in Pharmaceutical Development DruSafe member companies, which aimed to gather industry experiences using non-ICH Q3A/B impurity qualification thresholds. The survey revealed that many companies implement higher qualification thresholds during early development phases, with a shift toward strict ICH Q3A/B controls in later phases. Justifications for higher thresholds often include scientific rationale based on literature, Health Authority (HA) guidance, and toxicological principles. The findings suggest that global HAs are generally accepting of higher qualification thresholds during early development, provided there is an adequate justification. This publication discusses the implications of these findings for impurity management strategies and the potential for harmonizing regulatory approaches to impurity qualification.

Organic Process Research & DevelopmentVol. 29(11)
AstraZeneca (United Kingdom) (GB), United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US), Amgen (United States) (US), Johnson & Johnson (United States) (US), Bristol-Myers Squibb (Germany) (DE), BioClinica (United States) (US), AstraZeneca (South Korea) (KR), Centre for Innovation in Regulatory Science (GB), Boehringer Ingelheim (Brazil) (BR), Innovative Clinical Research (US), AstraZeneca (Singapore) (SG), AstraZeneca (Brazil) (BR), Boehringer Ingelheim (Egypt) (EG), Johnson & Johnson (Israel) (IL), AstraZeneca (Poland) (PL), Gilead Sciences (United States) (US), Drug Safety Research Unit (GB), Boehringer Ingelheim (United States) (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Health, Environment, Cognitive Aging
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.