Please Wait
Applying Filters...
Menu
Xls

Digital Content read-more

Create Content with PharmaCompass, ask us

DATA COMPILATION #PharmaFlow

read-more
read-more
CEP Q1 2026 Update: CEP 2.0, EDQM’s new guidelines strengthen ecosystem; Indian firms top list of CEPs issued
PharmaCompass is introducing a new regulatory update that tracks developments in Certificates of Suitability to the Monographs of the European Pharmacopoeia, referred to as CEPs. These certificates are a critical regulatory instrument in the global pharmaceutical supply chain.Also known as a Certification of Suitability (COS), CEPs are issued by the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and HealthCare (EDQM), with or without inspection of the manufacturing site. A CEP must be renewed every five years from its original issue date to remain valid, regardless of any revisions made during the interim period. However, a CEP does not replace Good Manufacturing Practice certification.CEPs are recognized as a trusted reference for API quality, thereby simplifying global registration strategies. Apart from Europe, the CEP system is widely used by many regulatory authorities, including those in Canada, Australia, Brazil, Singapore and South Africa. View CEPs Issued in Q1 2026 (Power BI Dashboard, Free Excel Available)CEP 2.0 enhances regulatory clarity, brings efficiency, global interoperability There are several types of CEPs, depending on the nature of the substance and evaluation. The most common type is the Chemical CEP, which confirms that a chemically synthesized API meets standards for purity and impurity control. Then there are Herbal CEPs for herbal substances and preparations.Another key category is the TSE CEP, which addresses risks associated with transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in animal-derived materials. In addition, there are Combined CEPs that may cover multiple aspects, such as chemical quality, TSE risk, and sterility. However, biological products such as vaccines and blood products fall outside the scope of the CEP framework.In 2023, the CEP system underwent a major transformation with the introduction of CEP 2.0, which marks a shift from a largely document-based system to a more structured, transparent, and digitally aligned model. This makes it easier for companies to manage compliance while improving trust among global regulators.While increasing data and compliance requirements for API manufacturers, CEP 2.0 enables better regulatory clarity, streamlined dossier integration, and stronger global acceptance. Overall, CEP 2.0 is designed to enhance regulatory clarity while making the system more efficient and globally interoperable. View CEPs Issued in Q1 2026 (Power BI Dashboard, Free Excel Available)Indian firms issued maximum CEPs; Sun Pharma and its subsidiaries, Jubilant Biosys top listIndia topped the charts for CEPs issued, both in terms of new CEPs and revisions in the first quarter (Q1) of 2026. Indian companies were issued 81 new CEPs in Q1 2026 (as against 40 in Q1 2025) and 203 revisions (as against 129 in Q1 2025). In comparison, Chinese companies were issued 42 new CEPs in Q1 2026 (against 25 in Q1 2025) and 53 revisions (against 67 in Q1 2025). Italy came a distant third, followed by Germany and Spain.India’s Sun Pharmaceuticals and its subsidiaries topped the list of companies with the maximum number of CEPs issued— while no new CEP was issued, 27 CEPs were revised in Q1 2026. At second place was Jubilant Biosys — 21 CEPs were revised in Q1 2026.In terms of products, the maximum CEPs were issued for amlodipine besylate (a calcium channel blocker used for treating hypertension), followed by sitagliptin phosphate (a type 2 diabetes medicine) and pregabalin (a drug used to treat neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, seizures, and generalized anxiety disorder). Both amlodipine besylate and sitagliptin phosphate had not been issued new CEPs or revisions in Q1 2025. View CEPs Issued in Q1 2026 (Power BI Dashboard, Free Excel Available)EDQM introduces new guidelines to accelerate CEP assessments The EDQM charges fees for various services related to CEPs that depend on the type of request or regulatory activity involved. In general, fees apply to handling CEP applications, revisions or renewals and for offering technical advice (where applicants seek scientific or regulatory guidance).In March 2026, the EDQM introduced two new guidelines aimed at accelerating CEP assessments. The first is a reliance-based assessment pathway, which allows regulators to leverage prior approvals from trusted authorities, such as those in the EU, UK, Australia, Canada, and the WHO pre-qualification program. The second is a fast-track assessment route designed to expedite reviews in situations such as medicine shortages and to support initiatives like the EU Critical Medicines Act.Timelines have been significantly compressed under these new pathways. Initial evaluations are completed within 46 working days, compared to up to 115 days under the standard procedure. Applicants are given 30 calendar days to respond to queries, after which regulators complete the final assessment within 23 working days.Another important regulatory update relates to electronic submissions. From April 1, 2026, the EDQM will reject non-compliant CEP applications at the point of submission. All applications must include a validated electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) dossier along with a proper validation report, submitted in line with the updated Common European Submission Portal (CESP) guidelines. Taken together, these developments signal a more rigorous yet efficient CEP ecosystem. View CEPs Issued in Q1 2026 (Power BI Dashboard, Free Excel Available)Our viewThe shift to CEP 2.0 signals a move toward greater transparency, digitalization, and global regulatory alignment. Though enhanced disclosure and stricter e-submission requirements may increase the compliance burden, especially for smaller manufacturers, the long-term gains are expected to be significant. Going forward, companies that invest in data quality and regulatory readiness stand to gain from these changes.

Impressions: 2594

https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-blog/cep-q1-2026-update-cep-2-0-edqm-s-new-guidelines-strengthen-ecosystem-indian-firms-top-list-of-ceps-issued

#PharmaFlow by PHARMACOMPASS
09 Apr 2026

WEEKLY NEWS RECAP #Phispers

read-more
read-more
FDA proposes limits on ‘sartan’ nitrosamine impurities; Text messages add new twist to US generic price fixing litigation
In our final Phispers of 2018, we bring you news on how the big pharmaceutical companies in the US plan to ring in the new year with price hikes. In the price fixing case, three drugmakers are being accused of working in collusion to hike the price of nystatin, a generic anti-fungal drug. At the heart of this allegation is a text message from an employee working at Heritage Pharmaceuticals.  FTC has approved an application by Teva to reopen and modify its decision and order in connection with the 2012 merger of Watson Pharmaceuticals and Actavis. In the sartan adulteration saga, Torrent has voluntarily recalled two lots of losartan potassium tablets due to the detection of NDEA impurity. Meanwhile, FDA has proposed limits on nitrosamine impurities in angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) for drugmakers to use. And after last year, EU inspectors have uncovered data integrity violations at Kores India once again. A ‘smiley-faced’ text message is at the center of generic price fixing lawsuit   In the US, three drugmakers have been accused of working in collusion to hike the price of a decades-old generic anti-fungal medicine, known as nystatin. According to a major federal lawsuit, the drugmakers colluded to increase the price of nystatin back in 2014.  At the heart of this accusation is a ‘smiley-faced’ text message from an employee working for the New Jersey drugmaker Heritage Pharmaceuticals. The text message was sent to an employee of a rival company. It read: “Work news: we are raising price on Nystatin. Just letting you know. :),”  According to the attorneys, post receiving that text message, the competitor (Indian drugmaker Sun Pharmaceuticals) also started increasing the price of its nystatin. A Sun representative, however, said the allegations were meritless and that the company would continue to defend itself “vigorously.” The complaint alleges that rival companies shared information about price increases by way of phone calls and text messages, and often doubled drug prices in unison. This large civil antitrust complaint includes communications between employees. According to the complaint, nystatin was made by at least three generic drugmakers, all of which had employees in close contact and exchanged notes on the ensuing price hike. Forms of nystatin are used to treat common fungal infections such as yeast infections and diaper rash. The attorneys general claim that conversations between two nystatin manufacturers Teva and Heritage date back to mid-2013. They allege the price increases had been broached internally at Teva first. However, the Teva employee who headed the pricing team initially opposed them. Teva said in a statement that it denied the allegations and “will continue to vigorously defend itself.” Other medications outlined in the complaint treat conditions like epilepsy, heart failure, anxiety, insomnia, hypertension, diabetes, asthma, and arthritis. While Heritage fired its former president and CEO in 2016 after an internal investigation revealed “serious misconduct”, it said it is also suing a former executive in a separate ongoing suit. The high-ranking employees of former Heritage Pharmaceuticals, who also happen to be brothers-in-law — Jason Malek, its former president, and Jeffrey Glazer, its former CEO — have previously pleaded guilty to price-fixing and other charges in separate criminal cases. FDA proposes limits on nitrosamine impurities; Torrent recalls losartan made with Hetero’s API   Last month, Sandoz Inc had issued a voluntary recall of one lot of losartan potassium and hydrochlorothiazide due to the detection of trace amounts of NDEA (N-Nitrosodiethylamine) impurity found in the API which was manufactured by Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceutical Co Limited. And last week, there was news that Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited too is voluntarily recalling two lots of losartan potassium tablets to the consumer level due to the detection of trace amounts of the same impurity — NDEA — in its API manufactured by Hetero Labs Limited. To date, Torrent Pharmaceuticals has not received any reports of adverse events related to this recall, FDA said. Losartan is used in the treatment of hypertension and hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. It is also used to treat nephropathy in type 2 diabetes. Meanwhile, the agency has also published interim acceptable intake levels of nitrosamine impurities in angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) for manufacturers to use. This should help ensure their finished drug products are safe for patients. The agency evaluated safety data for N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and NDEA to determine an interim acceptable intake level for these impurities. The agency will use the interim limits to recommend manufacturers to conduct a voluntary recall if laboratory testing confirms the presence of nitrosamine impurities in their finished drug product. FDA’s Interim Limits for NDMA and NDEA in Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers (ARBs) Drug Maximum Daily Dose (mg/day) Acceptable Intake NDMA (ng/day)*    Acceptable Intake NDMA (ppm)** Acceptable Intake NDEA (ng/day)*     Acceptable Intake NDEA (ppm)** Valsartan 320 96 0.3 26.5 0.083 Losartan 100 96 0.96 26.5 0.27 Irbesartan 300 96 0.32 26.5 0.088 Azilsartan 80 96 1.2 26.5 0.33 Olmesartan 40 96 2.4 26.5 0.66 Eprosartan 800 96 0.12 26.5 0.033 Candesartan 32 96 3.0 26.5 0.83 Telmisartan 80 96 1.2 26.5 0.33 * The acceptable intake is a daily exposure to a compound such as NDMA or NDEA that results in a 1:100,000 cancer risk after 70 years exposure  ** These values are based on a drug's maximum daily dose as reflected in the drug label In the US, big pharma to ring in the new year with price hikes   Pharmaceutical companies in the US have been under pressure from the Trump administration to lower drug prices. But it seems like they don’t intend to cower down to that pressure anymore. Thirty drug companies, including AstraZeneca Plc., Biogen Inc., Allergan, GlaxoSmithKline Plc, Amgen, Novartis AG and Bayer AG, have taken steps to raise the prices of their medicines in January. Several drugmakers filed notifications with California agencies in early November disclosing that they planned to raise prices in the next 60 days or more. Under a state law passed last year, companies are required to notify payers in California if they intend to raise the US list price on any drug by more than 16 percent over a two-year period. Drug behemoth Pfizer has also announced plans to hike prices on 41 of its drugs in mid-January. In July, Pfizer had rolled back planned price increases after President Trump said in a tweet that the drugmaker “should be ashamed” and that his administration would respond to the hikes. Novartis is planning to raise prices on more than 100 indications of over 30 different drugs in January, with increases ranging from 4.5 percent to 9.9 percent. Drugs on the list are expected to account for more than US$ 20 billion of Novartis’ revenue this year and include multiple sclerosis drug Gilenya, psoriatic arthritis treatment Cosentyx, and leukemia treatment Tasigna. The list also includes Novartis’ Diovan, the brand name version of blood pressure treatment valsartan. Generic versions of Diovan have been facing shortages ever since a potential carcinogen was detected in its active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) made in China, prompting widespread recalls. Similarly, Bayer filed notifications with California agencies to increase prices on six of its drugs in January, many of which are birth control products. Most of these price increases are 5 percent. The hikes scheduled for next month will pose a new challenge to the Trump administration and its pledge to lower the costs of prescription drugs. FTC opens Teva’s plea to modify decision regarding Watson’s acquisition of Actavis   In the US, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has approved an application by Teva to reopen and modify its decision and order in connection with the 2012 merger of Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Actavis Inc. The Commission had alleged that the merger might lessen future competition for a number of generic drugs, including the generic version of the abuse-resistant opioid painkiller sold under the brand name Embeda. The 2012 decision and order required Watson and Actavis to supply Embeda to Pfizer for four years after Pfizer’s relaunch of Embeda, which occurred in January 2015.  The decision and order also required Watson and Actavis to assist in the transfer of technology for manufacturing Embeda to Pfizer or a third party. In 2016, Teva acquired Actavis’ rights and obligations under the Embeda supply agreement. At Pfizer’s request, Teva sought to extend the Embeda supply agreement for an additional period as Pfizer has not yet completed the technology transfer for Embeda manufacturing to a third party. Without Teva’s supply of Embeda, Pfizer will be unable to supply patients with Embeda after December 2018. This year too, EU inspectors uncover data integrity violations at Kores India    In 2017, an inspection by Italian health authorities at the API manufacturing facilities of Kores (India) Limited uncovered “serious GMP non-compliance”. The inspectors found major deficiencies related to electronic and paper analytical data integrity.  The inspection was performed in the framework of the CEP (certificate of suitability) dossier for the manufacture of ambroxol hydrochloride and the inspection team recommended the suspension of all CEPs from the manufacturing site. A year later, in October 2018, the French health agency (ANSM) came to inspect the manufacturing process of ambroxol at Kores and once again uncovered data integrity violations. The French inspectors also raised concern over the cross contamination risk pertaining to the production equipment. As a follow-up to the inspection, the EDQM will consider the withdrawal of the CEPs n°2013-115 Ambroxol HCl, n°2015-012 Ambroxol HCl and n°2015-224 Glimepiride. The inspection report states that the deficiencies found could affect the other APIs manufactured at the site. These include Doxofylline, Etofylline, Acefylline, Glimepiride, 3-Methylxanthine, 2-Amino-3,5-dibromobenzaldehyde, 8-ChloroTheophylline, 8-Benzyl Theophylline, Theobromine, Acebrophylline, Theophylline, Piperazine/Acepifylline, Pamabrom, Ivabradine HCl, Dorzolamide Hydrochloride.

Impressions: 5091

https://www.pharmacompass.com/radio-compass-phisper/fda-proposes-limits-on-sartan-nitrosamine-impurities-text-messages-add-new-twist-to-us-generic-price-fixing-litigation

#Phispers by PHARMACOMPASS
27 Dec 2018

NEWS #PharmaBuzz

read-more
read-more
Delhi HC Restores Ban On 2 Diabetes FDCs
Delhi HC Restores Ban On 2 Diabetes FDCs

14 Jan 2026

// ECONOMICTIMES

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/pharmaceuticals/delhi-hc-restores-ban-on-2-diabetes-fdcs/articleshow/126532810.cms

ECONOMICTIMES
14 Jan 2026

https://www.pharmabiz.com/NewsDetails.aspx?aid=182247&sid=1

PHARMABIZ
06 Nov 2025

https://www.pharmacompass.com/pdf/news/enforcement-report-week-of-february-14-2024-75684.pdf

FDA
14 Feb 2024

https://www.pharmacompass.com/pdf/news/enforcement-report-week-of-may-31-2023-56013.pdf

FDA
31 May 2023

https://www.pharmacompass.com/pdf/news/enforcement-report-week-of-may-10-2023-12326.pdf

FDA
10 May 2023

https://www.pharmacompass.com/pdf/news/enforcement-report-week-of-april-12-2023-46659.pdf

FDA
12 Apr 2023