Life's work. A patient. A crop. A river. A device that has to live inside a body. Each of them answers at the molecular level — and that is where we go, so life can be supported, protected and sustained. Every answer we return can be traced back to the moment we saw it.
Data that travels
OECD GLP accreditation triggers Mutual Acceptance of Data — one study in Chennai, filed with the FDA, EMA, and MHLW without re-testing or bridging studies.
Pharma & biopharma — discovery through IND-enabling safety.
Hover for capabilities →Devices, combination products, protective barriers.
Hover for capabilities →Crop protection, food & feed, biopesticides, vector control.
Hover for capabilities →REACH programmes and radiolabelled tracer work.
Hover for capabilities →Verified from the corporate record, current to 2024.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
About BRF
BRF began in 2010 with a single question that hasn't changed since: can work done in Chennai be accepted, without qualification, anywhere a filing lands?
Sponsors running preclinical programmes out of India in 2010 faced a recurring tax: data generated locally often had to be repeated abroad before a regulator would accept it. The science wasn't in question. The chain of custody around it was.
BRF was built to close that gap — not by claiming quality, but by submitting to the regimes that make quality checkable by someone who has never visited the facility. One study, run once, accepted across every OECD member country.
Capability, compounded
Where the data travels
Reach isn't a count of countries — it's a list of authorities that have accepted work generated in Sengadu without asking for it to be repeated. Every ring is a true distance from the bench.
Azimuthal equidistant · centred on Sengadu · every ring a true distance
One study, run once, accepted across every OECD member state — that is what Mutual Acceptance of Data means in practice, and it is the reason the accreditation stack on this site is listed by name rather than summarised.
Ethics & welfare
The commitments below are auditable. Each is inspected by a body outside BRF, on a schedule we don't set.
An AAALAC-accredited vivarium operating under CPCSEA oversight, with an institutional ethics committee reviewing every protocol before a study begins. Accreditation is by peer assessment, not self-declaration, and it is renewed on inspection.
Replacement, reduction and refinement are applied at study design rather than reported afterwards. Fewer animals, better data, and a design that a reviewer can defend on the record.
ALCOA+ principles across raw data capture, with a Quality Assurance unit that sits outside the study chain and reports independently of the Study Director.
Sponsor programmes are compartmentalised across teams and systems. NDAs are available before scoping begins, and study material is retained under archive control.
Leadership
Every GLP study carries a named Study Director who is personally answerable for it. The same principle runs to the top of the organisation.
Founded BRF in 2010 and has led its accreditation programme since — from the first GLP inspection in 2016 to the current twelve-regime stack.
PlaceholderAccountable for study conduct across all four capability pillars, and for the Study Director cohort that runs them.
PlaceholderLeads the independent QA unit — the function that audits studies in progress and hosts regulatory and sponsor inspections.
PlaceholderMaintains the accreditation register and prepares the facility for each renewal inspection across twelve regimes.
Names in brackets are placeholders pending client confirmation.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Pharma & biopharma — discovery through IND-enabling safety.
Hover for capabilities →Devices, combination products, protective barriers.
Hover for capabilities →Crop protection, food & feed, biopesticides, vector control.
Hover for capabilities →REACH programmes and radiolabelled tracer work.
Hover for capabilities →The chain of trust
Twelve accreditations, four pillars. Select a journey to read the regimes your study runs under — and the jurisdictions the resulting report is accepted in.
A crop-protection programme run once in Chennai and filed in Washington, Amsterdam and New Delhi off the same study set — because the chain it was run under is recognised in all three.
A two-species toxicology programme taken from candidate selection to an accepted IND, on one protocol set, with no regulatory query on the nonclinical data.
Twelve endpoints run against a single sample set, closing a device submission in nine months with no deficiency letter on the biological safety file.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
The core safety package supporting a first-in-human filing.
Tap to see what runs here →
PK/PD, ADME, and translational modelling to de-risk candidates early.
Tap to see what runs here →
Characterisation and safety testing for large-molecule programmes.
Tap to see what runs here →
Full battery genotox testing to ICH guidelines.
Tap to see what runs here →Risk assessment and analytical detection for emerging impurity classes.
Tap to see what runs here →Container-closure and device-contact E&L profiling.
Tap to see what runs here →Showing 1–4 of 6 capabilities
A two-species toxicology programme taken from candidate selection to an accepted IND, on one protocol set, with no regulatory query on the nonclinical data.
Immunogenicity and repeat-dose work run against a single reference set, supporting one comparability exercise rather than three parallel programmes.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Domains · Advanced Therapeutics · 02
What this answers
DMPK is where a candidate stops being a structure and becomes a dosing decision. Absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion are measured, then modelled into an exposure–response relationship a clinical team can act on — before toxicology commits the programme to a schedule it cannot easily change.
What we run
If your protocol is on this list, it runs here under the accreditation shown below. If it isn't, it can usually be built from these components. Add studies to a scope and carry the set into the quote.
Study design
Where it runs
The chain, narrowed
Seven of the twelve govern this work. Touch a regime to read it — including the five that do not apply, which is as much a statement as the ones that do.
Which is why a DMPK package generated here is filed with the FDA, EMA and MHLW without a bridging study.
A two-species toxicology programme taken from candidate selection to an accepted IND, on one protocol set, with no regulatory query on the nonclinical data.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Domains · Agroscience & Environmental
What we protected
Global Agroscience & Environmental Risk
A crop protection product cannot reach a field until three separate regulators agree its residues are safe. Miss one registration window and the product waits a full season — a season in which growers have no access to it. What was protected here was not a filing. It was a year of a crop, and the people who depend on it.
Residue trials are geographically bound. Three regions normally means three programmes, three protocols, three analytical methods and three timelines that rarely align — against a registration window under two years.
One protocol, eleven sites, one analytical method, one report — accepted by all three authorities with no bridging studies and no repeat work.
The programme
One GLP protocol written to satisfy the strictest of the three regional guidance documents, rather than three written to satisfy one each.
Produced · one protocol accepted in all three regionsA single validated method applied across every site, removing cross-method reconciliation at the reporting stage.
Produced · one dataset, no reconciliation stepInterim data released at defined checkpoints so the regulatory team could prepare submissions in parallel with the in-life phase.
Produced · submissions drafted before the study closedA single OECD GLP report package accepted under Mutual Acceptance of Data.
Produced · zero bridging studies requestedThe route it took
Three of the four pillars, one dossier, three authorities. The stage that was not touched is shown hollow — the shape of a programme is as much what it skipped.
The report didn't need translating for each authority. It was accepted as written.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Quality System
Mutual Acceptance of Data
OECD GLP accreditation triggers Mutual Acceptance of Data across all OECD member states. No re-testing, no bridging studies, no second submission package.
The register
Colour indicates the regulatory domain each certificate governs. Select any to read its scope.
The full register
Maintained continuously. Certificates and full inspection reports are released to sponsors under NDA.
How the system holds
Quality is not a department here. It is four points where a study can be stopped.
Every protocol is reviewed and signed by the QA unit before a single animal is dosed or a sample drawn.
Phase inspections are unannounced. The QA unit observes the study as it runs, not after it closes.
Raw data is verified against the report line by line. Every figure in a BRF report traces to a record.
Records are held under controlled archive conditions for the full retention period, retrievable on demand.
Inspection record
Regulatory inspections are routine here, and sponsor audits are welcomed at any stage of a study. The log below is maintained continuously.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Get in touch
Sponsors commission studies and arrange audits. Scientists join the teams that run them. Either way, the person who replies is a scientist, not a sales desk.
Scoped by scientists, not a sales desk. Reply within [X] business days. NDA on request.
Partnership or press? Same form — choose it in the dropdown.
Work for us
320+ scientific staff across four pillars under one accredited roof. Studies run here are filed with the FDA, EMA and MHLW — the work ships into regulatory record, not into a drawer.
Join the talent pool. Applications are read by the department they name, and held for twelve months.
