Independent · non-commercial · publishes on a quarterly cycle|Current cycle 2026 Q3
Compound Evidence InstituteEvidence synthesis · established 2023Graded assessments of compounds, trials, methods and supply
Document set current to 30 July 2026
Public comment period · §2

Draft standard CEI-MS-20: Photostability assessment of… — submissions

The 4 submissions received, published in full with declared interests and secretariat responses.

Document identifier
CEI-CP-097/2
Series
Public comment period
Version
1.0
Published
26 Jul 2026
Last reviewed
26 Jul 2026
Next review
26 Jul 2027
Identifier
10.71829/cei.cp.97
Certainty
Not rated
Cycle
2026 Q2
Window
18 Apr 2026 – 17 Jun 2026
Status
Closed
Submissions
4

§2Submissions and responses

4 submissions were received. Each is published in full below with its declared interest, the secretariat response and the disposition. The Institute publishes submissions it did not accept in the same form as those it did.

Yusuf Whitmarsh-Obi, PhD (Medicinal Chemistry) University department of public health · industry submission
DRAFT-PHOTOSTABILI/002 received 25 Apr 2026

The document should not describe uses outside the approved indication

The submission is made on behalf of a marketing-authorisation holder. It states that the draft describes uses of the compound that fall outside the approved indication, that such uses are not supported by the sponsor, and that describing them may be read as legitimising them.

The sponsor asks that the sections concerned be removed, or in the alternative that they carry a prominent statement that the sponsor does not support such use.

Declared interest. Is an employee of a marketing-authorisation holder for a compound named in the draft. This submission is made on behalf of that company and is identified as an industry submission throughout.
Secretariat responseNot accepted21 Jul 2026

The secretariat does not accept this submission. The Institute records what is supplied and what is used, because a reader encountering a compound outside a regulated route is the reader most in need of an assessment of the evidence for it.

The sections remain. Every such section already states the regulatory status of the use described and states that the evidence for it is assessed separately from the evidence for the approved indication. The submission is published in full and identified as an industry submission.

Dr Amara Quaresma, MD, MRCP Independent analytical consultancy
DRAFT-PHOTOSTABILI/001 received 30 Apr 2026

Nothing requires a laboratory to demonstrate ongoing performance

The respondent states that suitability criteria assessed within a run demonstrate that the run worked and not that the laboratory performs consistently over time.

The respondent proposes participation in a proficiency scheme as a condition of conformance.

Declared interest. Holds a patent relating to a delivery technology referenced in the draft.
Secretariat responseAccepted in part05 Jul 2026

The secretariat accepts this submission in part. A trend requirement on system suitability data is added. Proficiency scheme participation is not made a condition of conformance, for the same reason competence requirements are not.

The standard now requires that system suitability results be trended across runs and that a determination report whether the trend was within the laboratory's stated limits, which places the demonstration inside the document the Institute can read.

Dr Katarzyna Yorkstone, MD, MRCP Independent analytical consultancy
DRAFT-PHOTOSTABILI/004 received 06 Jun 2026

A determination does not record the version of the standard it was made under

The respondent states that the standard will be revised and that results reported under different versions will circulate together, indistinguishable from one another.

The respondent proposes that the standard identifier and version be carried on the face of every determination.

Declared interest. Has received consultancy fees from a supplier named in the Institute's supplier assessment set within the preceding two years.
Secretariat responseAccepted11 Jul 2026

The secretariat accepts this submission. A conformance claim against an unspecified version is not a conformance claim.

Every determination reported under this standard now carries the standard identifier and version on its face, and a claim of conformance that does not identify the version is recorded by the Institute as not conformant.

Dr Lorcan Zaleski-Mbeki, MPharm, MRPharmS Academic nephrology unit
DRAFT-PHOTOSTABILI/003 received 12 Jun 2026

The scope does not say which materials the standard excludes

The scope states what the standard applies to. The respondent states that in practice the difficult question is whether a borderline material is in scope, and that the draft leaves it to be inferred.

The respondent proposes an explicit exclusion list.

Declared interest. Is a member of the Institute's external reviewer register but did not review the document under consultation.
Secretariat responseAccepted02 Jul 2026

The secretariat accepts this submission. A scope stated only positively is a scope that will be stretched.

The scope now states both what the standard applies to and what it does not, with the excluded classes named and, where another standard covers them, cross-referenced.

References cited on this page

References are numbered in order of first citation in this document. Each superscript in the text links to its entry below.

  1. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories. ISO/IEC Standard 2017;3rd edition. identifier not held by the Institute

Identifiers are reproduced only where the Institute holds them. Where a digital object identifier or PubMed identifier is not shown, the Institute has recorded the journal and year and has not constructed an identifier.

Nothing published by the Institute is medical advice, a diagnosis, a prescription, a treatment recommendation or a purchasing recommendation. Compounds supplied for research use are not approved for human or veterinary use in any jurisdiction, and a favourable analytical assessment of a supplier is not a statement that any product is safe or effective. The Institute publishes certainty ratings and never recommendations. No telephone number, messaging handle or ordering channel appears anywhere on this site.