With over a decade of experience and after multiple successful submissions and responses to regulatory questions (RTQs), here are some things to consider when preparing to engage with regulators:
Dose Rationale That Actually Makes Sense Anchor it in evidence. E.g. If there is no exposure–response, don’t waste time and effort creating a model with no clinical utility. Sometimes the data clearly shows there is no need for expensive modeling, but companies still do it - often out of habit or bad advice. Just because you can model it doesn’t mean you should.
Fit-for-Submission Data Regulators don’t just want results, they want to see how you got there. Submission review can stall when model datasets or outputs aren’t traceable or reproducible. Build a data package that is transparent, auditable, and clearly defined.
Future-Focused Modeling Design Without the right strategy, modeling often gets treated as “we’ll cross that bridge when we get there”. Instead, your modeling plan should anticipate your full program needs, where appropriate. Eventually want pediatric labeling? Make sure the assumptions and models that you are building can be adaptable and efficiently evolve as needed.
Proactive Risk Management Don’t wait for regulatory questions. You should already have a plan to defend or address any perceived gaps in your modeling. Too often model inadequacies and their implications on the entire clinical program are not addressed until queries are received from the agency. Having someone who can pressure-test the model against different scenarios adds a layer of readiness and helps you proactively prepare for regulatory scrutiny.
At Emerald City Pharma Consulting, we help biotech companies without in-house MIDD expertise build FDA-ready strategies from IND to BLA, preventing costly delays and reducing regulatory pushback.
Looking to align your modeling strategy with regulatory expectations from the start?