Latest / DDReg Knowledge Capsule / Why Gene Therapy Manufacturing Fails FDA

Transcript

Why Gene Therapy Manufacturing Fails FDA · DDReg Knowledge Capsule

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Imagine for a second, you're developing a miracle cure. You know,
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: you're targeting this devastating genetic disease. You run your clinical
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: trials and you hit one hundred percent success.
• 0:10
  Speaker 2: Rate, right the absolute dream scenario.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Exactly, Like patients are literally walking out of the hospital cure.
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: This science is flawless. So you know, you pop the champagne,
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: you submit your data to the FDA, and you wait
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: for your inevitable approval. Yeah, but instead your application gets
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: completely rejected. And it's not because the drug doesn't work.
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: It's because you change the size of the mixing vat
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: in your manufacturing facility by a few hundred leaders and
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: you couldn't prove the new batch was identical to the
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: old one. Welcome to DDRAG knowledge capsule. It is.
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: It's a brutal reality check, but honestly, it happens so
• 0:47
  Speaker 2: much more often than anyone outside the industry realizes. I mean,
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: the transition from discovering a genetic cure to you know,
• 0:55
  Speaker 2: actually getting it approved for commercial sale. It requires a
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: total paradigm shift.
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: Which is really the core mission of our deep dives today.
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: We're unpacking this really comprehensive and frankly kind of eye
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: opening guide published by Dre Pharma on August twenty first,
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty six. It's a great source, it really is.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: The document maps out this agonizing, high stakes journey of
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: getting a gene therapy approved by the FDA, specifically through
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: what's called the Biologics License Application or BLA.
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: Right the BLA, And for.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: You listening, I mean, we constantly hear about gene therapies
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: in the news, right, these absolute game changers, but we
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: rarely hear about the regulatory gauntlet that actually dictates whether
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: these therapies ever reach you the patient.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: No, we don't. And I think the central illusion most
• 1:42
  Speaker 2: people have, and honestly even some developers have, this is
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: treating drug approval like a final exam.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: Like you just take the test at the end of
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: the semester, exactly.
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: You assume, you do the clinical homework, you bubble in
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: the right answers, you hand your paperwork to the authorities,
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: and you get a passing grade. But the FDA doesn't
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: treat biologics and especially gene therapies, as a final exam.
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: It is this ruling, years long, continuous evaluation of your
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: entire operation.
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's unpack this. Why does gene therapy need a
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: completely different rule book than say, traditional pharmaceuticals. Wow, Because
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: if we think about traditional drugs, like a standard headache
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: pill or a statin, manufacturing them is essentially like printing.
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: A book, right, Yeah, that's a good way to look
• 2:27
  Speaker 2: at it.
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: You write the chemical formula, you set the type on
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: the printing press, and you stamp out millions of perfect
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: identical copies. It's chemistry. It's completely predictable. Right. But reading
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: through the dd RED guide, bringing a gene therapy to
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: market sounds well, less like printing a book and more
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: like trying to train ten thousand different musicians to play
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: a complex symphony perfectly every single.
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: Time, regardless of the venue. Yeah, that symphony analogy captures
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: the volatility perfectly. I think with a traditional chemical pill,
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: you have complete control over the synthesis. If you switch
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: which to a faster pill pressing machine, you just run
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: a mass spectrometry test on the final pill to ensure
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: the molecule hasn't changed.
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: Just to make sure it's the exact same chemical exactly.
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: But gene therapies rely on immense biological complexity. I mean
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: you are dealing with living cells, engineered viral vectors, dynamic
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: protein structures.
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: It's alive, it is.
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: You aren't just combining inert powders. You are orchestrating an
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: entire biological ecosystem within a bioreactor.
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: But okay, I have to play Devil's advocate here for
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: a second, because there's a line in the DDRAG material
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: that sounds almost hyperbolic.
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: Oh which one?
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: It states that quote even the smallest of changes can
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: alter the properties of the product and potency or safety profile.
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, are we really talking about a half degree
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: temperature shift ruining a billion dollar batch? Like? Is biology
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: actually that fragile in an industrial setting?
• 3:53
  Speaker 2: It is actually way more sensitive than most developers want
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: to admit. Wait really, oh, absolutely understand why you have
• 3:59
  Speaker 2: to internalize this golden rule of biomanufacturing. The process is
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: the product.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: The process is the product.
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: Right in your printed book analogy, the book is the product,
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: whether it was printed in New York or London. Sure,
• 4:13
  Speaker 2: but with a viral vector used in gene therapy, if
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: the pH level in your bioreactor shifts by even a
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: fraction of a percent, or say the nutrient broth is
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: slightly altered the living host cells might react to that stress.
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: They might fold the therapeutic protein differently, or they might
• 4:32
  Speaker 2: attach a different sugar molecule.
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: To the surface, and suddenly you have a completely different drug.
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: Exactly the problem. That seemingly microscopic change means the therapy
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: might not penetrate the patient's target cells, or even worse,
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: it might trigger a severe immune response. Wow, the FDA
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: knows this, So they aren't just looking at your clinical
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: trial results to see if the therapy works. They are
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: interrogating your entire manufacturing ecosystem down to the cellular level,
• 4:58
  Speaker 2: just to see if you can control the chaos of biology.
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: So, if you're a developer in the US and you
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: know you're dealing with this insane level of volatility, who
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: are you actually answering to, Like, who are the gatekeepers
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: demanding this level of control?
• 5:11
  Speaker 2: Well, for gene therapies in the US, you're primarily dealing
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: with the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: It is known as CBER correct.
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: CBER, and specifically, there's a division within CBER called the
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: Office of Therapeutic Products or the OTP.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Okay, the OTP yeah.
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: And their mandate is to evaluate if your therapy meets
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: these incredibly rigorous standards for purity, safety, and potency.
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: And the dd RED guide makes this massive point about
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: when you actually talk to the OTP, because, I mean,
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: the old school mindset is to kind of hide in
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: your lap, gather all your clinical data over five years,
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: and then just drop this massive binder on the FDA's desk.
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: But the source material insists that approach is basically a
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: death sentence for a gene therapy.
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: It is waiting until the end is well. It's regulatory suicide.
• 6:01
  Speaker 2: Really yeah, I mean, if you wait until you have
• 6:04
  Speaker 2: phase three data to ask the FDA what they expect
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: from your manufacturing process, you'll inevitably discover that you measured
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: the wrong things or you use the wrong analytical tools
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: like three years ago.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Oh man, so you can't go back in time.
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: To fix it exactly. The OTP wants to map out
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: the regulatory risks with you long before you ever begin
• 6:22
  Speaker 2: drafting the BLA.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the architecture of a successful strategy.
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: The guide outlines four critical pillars for BLA readiness, and honestly,
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: if I'm a developer looking at these feels pretty daunting.
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: They are heavy lifts.
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: The first is early regulatory alignment, which we just covered
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: getting in the room with the OTP immediately. But the
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: second pillar is clinical data readiness. And this is where
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: the requirements diverge wildly from normal drugs because it's not
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: just about proving it works. It's about long term follow up.
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: Yeah, And what's fascinating here is the sheer duration of
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: that follow up. I mean, the FDA requires incredibly long
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: term monitoring for gene therapies, sometimes up to fifteen years.
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: Fifteen years, I mean, why is that so critical? Is
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: it because the delivery mechanisms, like the viral vectors might
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: cause some kind of delayed toxicity.
• 7:11
  Speaker 2: It's mostly because of the permanence of the intervention. Think
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: about it. A standard chemical drug washes out of your system.
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: If you have an adverse reaction, you just stop taking
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: it right right. But gene therapy involves a fundamental, intentional
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: modification of a patient's genetic code. So if you use
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: an integrating vector, which is a virus that actually inserts
• 7:30
  Speaker 2: new DNA into the patient's genome, there is a non
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: zero risk of insertional oncogenesis.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: Meaning the new DNA accidentally inserts itself next to a
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: cancer causing gene and switches it.
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: On precisely the concern, and that kind of devastating side
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: effect might not manifest for a decade. Wow, So the
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: FDA demands rock solid infrastructure to track these patients long
• 7:53
  Speaker 2: after the clinical trial officially ends. You're essentially entering into
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: a decade long marriage with your trial cohort.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: That completely reframed the entire business model. Honestly. Yeah, But
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: I want to pivot to the third and fourth pillars, manufacturing,
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: readiness and CMC, because this is where the DDRA source
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: suggests most companies just hit a brick wall. Oh absolutely,
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: because we all know the structure of a standard BLA.
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: You've got your administrative modules, your non clinical animal data,
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: your clinical human data. But module three, the CMC, which
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: stands for Chemistry, Manufacturing and controls, it seems to be
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: the graveyard where billion dollar gene therapy dreams go to die.
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: It is the absolute heavyweight champion of regulatory hurdles. CMC
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: is where you have to prove definitively that you can
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: manufacture this biological miracle at commercial scale consistently, batch after batch.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: And here's where it gets really interesting. Under CMC, the
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: FDA demands exhaustive quote product characterization, and the list they
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: give is terrifying.
• 8:53
  Speaker 2: It's extensive.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: You need validated analytical methods to define the product's exact identity,
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: the purity profile, the biological act, activity, and every possible impurity.
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: You essentially have to know your product at a molecular
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: levels so deeply that nothing can surprise you.
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: And this leads us to the single most treacherous concept
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: in biomanufacturing, which the source highlights really heavily, and that
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: CMC analytical comparability.
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: Okay, break this down for us, because earlier we talked
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: about that symphony analogy. Does comparability just mean like making
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: sure the symphony sounds the same in a different venue.
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: That is a brilliant way to frame it. Actually, think
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: about the life cycle of drug development. Right in phase one,
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: you only need enough drug for maybe ten patients. Okay,
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: you're manufacturing in small batches, perhaps in a modest university lab.
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: It's like playing a.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: Small jazz club right intimate setting.
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: But by the time you reach commercial launch you need
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: to supply ten thousand patients. You are moving to a massive,
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: custom built industrial facility you're upgrading from say fifty liters
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: bioreactors to two thousand liters stainless steel vets. You're playing
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: the stadium, and.
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: The physics of that scale up change the environment for
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: the cells drastically.
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: A two thousand liters VAT requires much larger impellers to
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: stir the nutrient broth just to mix it all up right,
• 10:08
  Speaker 2: and those massive blades create severe sheer stress on the cells.
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: The gas exchange dynamics change, the pressure at the bottom
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: of the VAT is different, and as we established earlier,
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: biology reacts to stress.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: So the cells in the massive commercial VAT might start
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: behaving differently than the cells data in the phase one
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: trial exactly. They might produce more empty viral capsids or
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: shed different proteins, creating a totally new impurity profile.
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: Yes, and this is the comparability trap, because the FDA
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: looks at your phase three clinical data and they say, great,
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: this drug cures the disease. But then they look at
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: your new commercial manufacturing facility and say, prove to us
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: that the drug coming out of these massive vats is
• 10:49
  Speaker 2: biologically identical to the drug you used in phase three
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: aw Man, And if your analytical tools aren't sharp enough
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: to prove absolute comparability. Like if there is even a slow,
• 11:00
  Speaker 2: might unexplained variance in potency or purity, the FDA pulls
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: the emergency break, They halt the approval, They stop it
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: entirely because if the commercial batch isn't strictly comparable to
• 11:09
  Speaker 2: the clinical batch, then your clinical safety data is suddenly meaningless. Wow,
• 11:15
  Speaker 2: you are effectively asking them to approve an untested drug.
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: So let's look at the anatomy of a failure here,
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: armed with everything we know about how delicate this process
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: is what actually happens when a heavily funded, highly publicized
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: gene therapy gets hit with a devastating delay. Because the
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: dd REG guide essentially provides an autopsy report of common
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: submission failure.
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: It does, and it's rarely the fundamental science that fails
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: at that late stage. It is almost always a failure
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: of strategy and control.
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: Right looking at the dd REG breakdown, These failures usually
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: cluster around a few fatal missteps, for instance, weak analytical strategies.
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: A company might spend hundreds of millions scaling up their bioreactors,
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: but they cheap out on the app essays used to
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: measure the drugs potency.
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that happens a lot.
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: And if you can't accurately measure your own product biological activity,
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: I mean, the FDA is never going to trust your data.
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: It's like trying to tune that stadium symphony orchestra using
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: a cheap, broken metronome. I mean, if the measurement tool
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: is flawed, the output is completely untrustworthy.
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: Another massive point of failure highlighted is limited comparability data
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: following manufacturing changes. And this feels like the classic scenario
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: where a company changes suppliers for a key raw material
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: right before submitting their BLA, assuming it won't matter, and
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: then they fail to run the grueling comparability studies to
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: prove the new material didn't alter the final products.
• 12:41
  Speaker 2: Which points to the most systemic failure of all, really,
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: and that's organizational silos.
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: Talk to me about the silos, because the guide emphasizes
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: how a lack of integrated strategy just dooms these applications.
• 12:54
  Speaker 2: If we connect this to the bigger picture, the root
• 12:56
  Speaker 2: cause of incomplete CMC documentation or failed comp isn't usually
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: incompetence in the lab. It's communication breakdown. Interesting, you have
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: a clinical team that's entirely focused on patient outcomes. You
• 13:08
  Speaker 2: have a manufacturing team entirely focused on increasing yield and efficiency,
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: and then you have a regulatory team trying to keep
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: the FDA happy.
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: Let me guess the manufacturing team optimizes a process halfway
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: through phase three to save time, but they don't till
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: the regulatory team.
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: Happens constantly, the manufacturing team switches to, say, a more
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: efficient filtration system. They think they're doing a great job
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: because the yield goes up, right, they're saving money exactly,
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: But the regulatory team doesn't find out until a month
• 13:39
  Speaker 2: before the BLA submission. Oh no, now there is no
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: time to run a proper comparability study to prove that
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: the new filter didn't strip out some vital component of
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: the therapy.
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: So what happens.
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: The FDA sees the undocumented manufacturing change, they see the
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: lack of comparability data, and they issue a complete response letter.
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: The drug is delaid by two years, costing the company
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: hundreds of millions of.
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: Dollars, which is exactly why the DDRAG guide pounds the
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: table on the necessity of dedicated regulatory affair support. And
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: we aren't talking about administrators who just proof free documents
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: in check formatting.
• 14:15
  Speaker 2: No true regulatory affairs in the gene therapy space acts
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: as the central nervous system of the entire development program.
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: They are conducting deep BLA gap assessments years before submission.
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: They are looking across the clinical quality and manufacturing silos
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: and saying, hey, if manufacturing changes that filter, Clinical has
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: to provide a bridging study, and quality has to validate
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: the new assay.
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: They connect all the dots exactly.
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: They build the narrative of control that the FDA demands.
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? Summarizing the sheer density
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: of this d D DRAG pharma guide, it fundamentally shifts
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: how you have to view pharmaceutical development.
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: It really does.
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: A successful gene therapy approval relies just as much on meticulous,
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: almost paranoid manufacturing control and analytical precision as it does
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: on a brilliant scientific breakthrough like the Nobel Prize winning
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: Science gets you in the door, sure, but ironclad manufacturing
• 15:10
  Speaker 1: consistency is the only thing that actually gets the cure
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: into the patient's veins.
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: That is the uncompromising reality of modern biologics. Submitting a
• 15:18
  Speaker 2: gene therapy BLA is not the finish line of a race.
• 15:21
  Speaker 2: It is the culmination of a continuous life cycle strategy
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: that has to be woven into the fabric of the
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: company from the exact moment the therapy leaves the research lab.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: It makes you realize how miraculous it is that any
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: of these therapies make it to market. The invisible architecture
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: required to guarantee that a living biological cure is safe, stable,
• 15:41
  Speaker 1: and identical every single time is staggering.
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: It is a monumental achievement of engineering and regulation. But
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: you know, as the science accelerates, that regulatory architecture is
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: going to face unprecedented stress. Oh yeah, And this raises
• 15:56
  Speaker 2: an important question, something that builds on the very foundation
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: of comparability we've.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: Been dissecting to where's the breaking point?
• 16:01
  Speaker 2: The breaking point is hyper personalization. Think about it. The
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: FDA's entire framework for gene therapy approval currently hinges on
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: proving manufacturing consistency and comparability at a commercial scale.
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: Right, you prove the new huge batch matches the old
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: small batch.
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: But what happens in the very near future with n
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: of one trials?
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: You mean therapies that are bespoke for a single patient.
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: Exactly what happens when a gene therapy is manufactured in
• 16:27
  Speaker 2: a specialized machine right at the patient's hospital bedside, tailored
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: perfectly to that one individual's unique genetic mutation. There is
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: no scale up, there is no historical batch to compare
• 16:38
  Speaker 2: it to. There is only one unique dose manufactured one
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: time for one unique patient.
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: That completely shatters the CMC analytical comparability model. I mean,
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: you can't run a comparability study if there's nothing to
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: compare it to.
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: Exactly how will regulatory bodies adapt to assure safety when
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: the process changes for every single patient by design, That's.
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: A huge problem.
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: Proving control on a bedside end of one environment is
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: going to require a total reinvention of the biological rule book.
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: That is a fascinating frontier to look out toward. You know,
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: we started today thinking about drug approval as a standard
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: final exam, but the reality of gene therapy is this grueling,
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: continuous evaluation of a living system, and tomorrow the test
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: itself might look completely different for every single person.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: The science never stops evolving, and neither can the frameworks
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: that govern it.
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us on this deep
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: dive into the hidden high space world of FDA approvals
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: and biomanufacturing. Keep questioning the systems that bring these medical
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: miracles into our lives, and keep looking for the invisible
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: frameworks holding it all together. Until next time.