Insider’s Insights / The IMPD

Cover of the Insider’s Insight: The Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier
Pages
21
Reading time
About 40 min
Updated
November 2026
Format
PDF, free
Regulatory New guide

The Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier

The IMPD looks deceptively straightforward until someone has to write it. This guide shows how to build it as the sponsor’s scientific argument that the product is sufficiently characterised, manufactured and controlled for use in a clinical trial, in the EU and in the UK.

Regulatory affairsCMC teamsMedical writersSponsors and CROs
  • A 10-step development workflow you can apply straight away
  • The deficiencies regulators raise most often, and how to avoid them
  • Includes four key questions answered by our team

Download your free copy

We will email you the guide straight away.

By signing up, you will also receive new and updated Insider’s Insights by email. You can unsubscribe at any time.

What you will learn

Six things you will be able to do after reading this guide.

  • Pitch the IMPD at the right level

    How much information is enough for the stage of development and the risk of the proposed clinical exposure.

  • Build the evidence chain

    From drug substance and manufacture through to non-clinical exposure, human exposure and risk.

  • Avoid the most common quality deficiencies

    Characterisation, impurities, specifications and stability: what regulators raise most often.

  • Handle biologicals and manufacturing changes

    Why biological products need a different mindset, and how to keep a product history that supports comparability.

  • Justify the human starting dose

    How pharmacology, toxicology and exposure come together, from NOAEL to MABEL.

  • Work across the EU and UK frameworks

    The UK’s amended regulations from 28 April 2026, simplified IMPDs and cross-referencing.

How well do you know the IMPD?

Three quick questions taken from the guide. Test what you already know.

0of 3 correct so far

Question 1 of 3

When did the UK’s amended Clinical Trials Regulations take full effect?

28 April 2026. The UK now has a framework separate from the EU. The guide explains what that means for your dossier.

You scored 0 out of 3

The guide covers each of these in depth, from the quality section to the risk-benefit assessment.

Download the free guide

Look inside

A few of the 21 pages, so you know exactly what you are getting.

Sample page: Key insights
Key insightsTwo checklists to get you started
Sample page: The evidence chain
The evidence chainWhat the IMPD is actually trying to demonstrate
Sample page: Common regulatory problems
Common regulatory problemsThe issues regulators raise most often
Sample page: A practical workflow
A practical workflowTen stages from strategy to cross-document review
Sample page: Key questions answered
Key questions answeredFirst-in-human, medical writers, EU and UK

Frequently asked questions

How much information is enough for a first-in-human IMPD?

The answer is not to dump every bit of information you have into your IMPD. Your focus should be on providing the information necessary to establish that the product is adequately characterised and controlled for the proposed exposure, supported by an appropriate non-clinical package and a scientifically justified starting dose.

Should an IMPD be written by a medical writer?

Most stakeholders tend to be aware and confident of their abilities. However, a medical writer can be extremely useful, particularly when the dossier involves multiple contributors and needs to become a coherent regulatory document. But a medical writer cannot manufacture missing scientific knowledge. The best arrangement is usually multidisciplinary. Subject matter experts generate and interpret the evidence; regulatory specialists determine the applicable requirements; and an experienced writer integrates the information into a consistent narrative. The writer’s job is not simply to make the document readable. It is to make the evidence understandable. That is a different skill.

How different should the EU and UK IMPDs be?

Since the advent of Brexit an ever more relevant question has been how different are the EU and UK IMPDs. Suffice to say that scientifically, they should ideally be remarkably similar. Regulatorily, they need not be identical. For a multinational development programme, maintaining a controlled core dossier can avoid unnecessary duplication while allowing jurisdiction-specific requirements to be incorporated.

When should we engage with the regulators?

Earlier than many sponsors do. Regulatory advice is particularly valuable when the product, development pathway or manufacturing process creates an unusual problem for which existing guidance does not provide a straightforward answer. The MHRA explicitly states that sponsors can seek scientific advice at any stage of medicine development. The objective should not be to ask the regulator to tell you how to write the development strategy. It is to test the proposed strategy against the regulator’s expectations before an avoidable problem becomes embedded in the programme.

Read next

Investigator’s Brochure

The IMPD’s companion document: what a well-constructed, fully compliant brochure needs to contain.

Need support with your IMPD?

Regulatory Writing

IMPDs, Investigator’s Brochures, protocols and submission documents written to agency standards.

Also relevant

Agency Communications and Submissions

Clinical trial applications to the MHRA and EU, from strategy to responses to questions.

© 2025 Niche.org.uk     All rights reserved

HomePrivacy policy Corporate Social Responsibility