How to prepare a Development Safety Update Report

How do you prepare a DSUR that supports an FDA IND annual submission?

Use ICH E2F to define the development program, reporting interval, data-lock point and reference safety information, then integrate the new evidence with prior safety knowledge. Map the resulting DSUR and regional material to §312.33’s U.S. content and timing. A global report can support the annual obligation, but its title or completeness against E2F alone does not demonstrate the full FDA handoff.

Before you begin

ICH E2F DSUR preparation with a specific FDA IND annual-report reconciliation; not a substitute for expedited reporting or a universal postmarketing report.

What you will prepare: An evidence-traceable DSUR and regional coverage map with reconciled dates and safety conclusions.

Set the scope and clock before requesting data

Identify the active substance, sponsor/co-development responsibilities, products, indications, populations and studies included. E2F recommends an integrated report across the development program where feasible. Document unavailable partner or sponsor-investigator information rather than implying the report includes data the sponsor cannot access.

Establish the development international birth date, interval, data-lock point, prior DSUR and relevant IND anniversaries. The E2F timing approach and the U.S. IND clock require reconciliation; they must not create uncovered periods. The current 312.33 text checked for this guide remains an annual-report regulation. E2F describes a DSUR as capable of taking the place of the existing annual report, but a generic global DSUR is not automatically a complete FDA package. Map U.S. content and timing and resolve any needed agency agreement before using a different clock.

Build an evidence register around the reporting period

Collect study status and exposure estimates, interval serious adverse reaction listings, cumulative serious-event tabulations, relevant completed and ongoing trial findings, noninterventional and other clinical information, nonclinical findings, literature, marketing experience, regulatory actions, lack-of-efficacy concerns when relevant and late-breaking information. Assign an owner and cutoff to every source.

Identify the investigator brochure in effect at the start of the interval as the reference safety information in the E2F framework, or the appropriate alternative when an IB is not required. Preserve the version/date and explain changes during the interval. Do not silently use the newest brochure to reclassify the entire period. Separate expectedness, seriousness and causality conventions and reconcile them with the safety assessment.

Write the assessment, not only the listings

Follow the E2F section structure, using concise information where available and explaining absent or inapplicable content. Tables should state whether counts are interval or cumulative, how subjects or events were counted, the population and any exposure-estimation assumptions.

The overall safety assessment should integrate new clinical, nonclinical and other relevant information with prior knowledge. For each important issue, explain the evidence, limitations, whether the understanding of risk changed and the action taken or proposed. Reconcile the important-risk summary, benefit-risk discussion, executive summary and conclusion. A conclusion of no change needs a documented review; it must not be the default when data collection is incomplete.

Keep expedited reporting and urgent protective actions on their own timelines. Discovering an important signal while writing the DSUR is a reason to involve the safety team promptly, not wait for annual submission.

Use a regional coverage map for the FDA handoff

Map the 312.33 information to the DSUR body or regional appendix: individual studies and required demographic/disposition information; safety summaries; nonclinical work; drug-action findings; significant manufacturing/microbiological changes; the next-year investigational plan; brochure revisions; relevant protocol changes; and foreign marketing developments. Keep the optional outstanding-business log distinct from mandatory content.

For each item, record exact location, period, source and whether supplemental U.S. material is needed. The file's presence under 1.13.15 is not proof that the regional content or timing is adequate. If development continues after marketing approval, establish the applicable development and postmarketing periodic reporting obligations separately rather than assuming one report replaces both.

Worked review: the global DSUR omits the coming-year plan

Fictional editorial exercise: a complete global safety report contains cumulative study tables but no U.S. next-year investigational plan and no account of significant manufacturing changes. The team marks the IND annual report complete because the file is named DSUR.

Use the coverage map to add the missing regional information and confirm the applicable interval and due date. If partner data are unavailable, explain that limitation and its consequences for the assessment. Changing the data-lock point requires checking the transition period; never make an uncovered month disappear by relabeling the report.

Connect the safety assessment to an explicit U.S. coverage check

For each important safety issue, write a short evidence chain: previous understanding; new interval findings; relevant population and exposure; limitations; effect on the risk assessment; and action taken or proposed. This authoring method helps prevent a list of new events from becoming an unsupported conclusion that the safety profile is unchanged.

Assessment exercise: a new finding concerns a population that was scarcely represented in earlier trials. State what is known about that population, the limits of the comparison and how the finding affects planned monitoring or further evaluation. Do not dilute the finding by citing a large cumulative exposure total from a different population. Conversely, an imbalance alone does not establish causality; retain the safety team’s interpretation and uncertainty.

Use a separate coverage table for the FDA handoff. Record actual section and appendix locations in the submitted version, not only the intended table-of-contents labels.

E2F uses the sponsor’s first clinical-trial authorization anywhere in the world as the development international birth date. It provides a commencement-linked approach where the first country has no formal authorization process. It recommends submission within 60 calendar days after the data-lock point. These definitions do not justify silently replacing an IND anniversary with a convenient global date; document the U.S. timing reconciliation and any necessary agency agreement.

Late-breaking important safety findings received after the data-lock point belong in E2F’s late-breaking-information treatment and integrated assessment as appropriate. Preserve the stated cutoff for the main tables, explain the new information and assess urgent action separately. Quietly moving the cutoff for selected tables can make the assessment impossible to reconcile.

Finish by reading the executive summary, overall assessment, important-risk summary and conclusion together. They should describe the same evidence, uncertainties and actions. Use the IND annual-report guide to check U.S. coverage and the annual-report route guide to keep development and marketing obligations distinct.

Frequently asked questions

Sources and revisions

Requirements, source recommendations and editorial preparation advice have different roles. Review the scope and revision of the source you use.

Related guides