This document discusses guidelines and best practices for handling out-of-specification (OOS) analytical results. It outlines procedures that regulatory agencies like the FDA recommend for investigating OOS results, including performing a preliminary assessment, full laboratory investigation, and documenting findings. The document emphasizes that OOS results should not be invalidated without a thorough investigation to identify the root cause and prevent future errors.
The document discusses handling out-of-specification (OOS) results in a quality control lab. It begins by summarizing a 1992 court case between Barr Laboratories and the FDA regarding OOS results. It then defines OOS results, unexpected results, and reportable values according to FDA guidelines. The document outlines when investigations of OOS results should be conducted and provides a flow chart depicting the investigation process. It also discusses retest sample size and the expectations of regulators regarding the handling and investigation of OOS results.
OOS and OOT investigation is always a challenging task. This slide may help for a better understanding of investigation procedure according to regulatory requrement.
This document discusses procedures for handling out-of-specification (OOS) and out-of-trend (OOT) test results. It describes a three phase investigation process: Phase I involves an initial investigation by the analyst and supervisor to identify obvious errors; Phase II occurs if no error is found and investigates further; Phase III investigates the impact on other batches and products. The document emphasizes that if no error is identified in Phases I-II, there is no basis to invalidate the initial OOS results. All test results must be reported and considered in batch release decisions. Stability OOS/OOT results require prompt escalation and may necessitate additional testing or product recall.
The document provides guidelines for specifications of new drug substances and products. It discusses setting specifications based on development data and stability studies. Universal tests for drug substances include identification, assay, impurities. For products, additional tests depend on dosage form and may include dissolution, uniformity, sterility. The guidelines provide concepts for justifying specifications and periodic testing. They apply principles for biotech products, addressing characterization, analytical validation, process controls, and linking specifications to manufacturing and clinical data.
In this slide contains Investigation, reason, case study of OOS.
Presented by: K Venkatsai Preasad. (Department of pharmaceutical analysis and quality assurance).
RIPER, anantapur.
This document discusses handling deviations from standard operating procedures in quality management systems. It defines a deviation as any departure from approved instructions or established standards. Deviations are classified as either planned or unplanned. Unplanned deviations require investigation to determine the root cause and implement corrective and preventive actions. The investigation process involves documenting the event, taking immediate action, analyzing the root cause, implementing corrective actions, and evaluating effectiveness. Guidelines such as ICH Q7 provide requirements for deviation handling, investigation, and corrective action to prevent future deviations.
The document outlines procedures for investigating out-of-specification or atypical laboratory test results. It describes conducting a Phase I investigation by the analyst and supervisor to identify obvious errors, and a Phase II investigation when no error is found. Phase II may involve hypothesis testing, retesting using the original sample if possible, or obtaining a new sample. If no assignable cause is identified after manufacturing and laboratory investigations, retesting a portion of the original sample may be considered with approval of a documented test plan.
The document discusses good manufacturing practices (GMP) for pharmaceutical products. It provides background on regulatory requirements for GMP internationally and outlines key aspects of GMP documentation and records management. Effective documentation is important for ensuring quality, traceability of activities, and compliance with GMP regulations.
QUALIFICATION OF MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENTSANKUSH JADHAV
油
it gives the information about qualification of various manufacturing equipment which is used into the pharmaceutical labs. (only for information purpose)
The document discusses the requirements and procedures for conducting an Annual Product Quality Review (APQR). Key points include:
- The APQR is intended to verify process consistency, assess trends, determine needed specification/procedure changes, and evaluate revalidation needs.
- Regulatory guidelines like ICH Q7, FDA, and EU require annual reviews that include batch data, deviations, complaints, stability results, and corrective actions.
- The quality unit coordinates the APQR using data and participation from other departments. The review is documented and approved by senior quality management.
ICH Q6A Specifications by Chandra MohanChandra Mohan
油
The document provides guidelines on specifications for new drug substances and products. It defines specifications and outlines universal tests that should be included for both drug substances and products, such as description, identification, assay, and impurities. It also describes specific tests that may be included depending on the dosage form, such as dissolution, disintegration, hardness/friability for solid oral dosage forms. The guidelines provide information on justifying acceptance criteria and setting specifications based on development data and stability studies.
This document discusses deviation handling and root cause analysis. It defines deviations as departures from standard procedures and outlines regulatory expectations to investigate deviations and prevent reoccurrence. The basic process flow for handling deviations includes identification, assessment, classification, investigation and corrective actions. Root cause analysis is presented as a method to systematically identify underlying causes of problems using techniques like brainstorming, 5 whys, and cause-and-effect diagrams. The goals of root cause analysis are failure identification, analysis, and resolution through an iterative process.
This document discusses out-of-trend (OOT) results, which occur when a result does not follow the expected trend based on past data. It notes that identifying OOT results is becoming a regulatory issue and introduces some statistical approaches for doing so, like using a minimum of 25 batches to set a trend range of average 賊3 standard deviations. Some challenges of implementing OOT identification for commercial batches are determining the appropriate statistical approach, data requirements, and investigation process. The conclusion states that identifying OOT results is important for regulators and industry, and the method should not be too complex.
USFDA guidelines on process validation a life cycle approachRx Ayush Sharma
油
The document summarizes the US FDA's 2011 guidance on process validation, which outlines a lifecycle approach. It discusses the three stages of process validation according to the guidance: (1) Process Design which defines the commercial process based on development, (2) Process Qualification which evaluates the process's capability for commercial manufacturing, and (3) Continued Process Verification which gains ongoing assurance that the process remains in control during routine production. The lifecycle approach integrates validation strategies from previous guidelines and emphasizes continual process improvement, understanding sources of variation, and controlling variation to ensure consistent quality.
This document provides guidance on specifications for new drug substances and products. It aims to establish a single set of global specifications. Specifications include a list of tests, procedures, and acceptance criteria to ensure quality. Tests are used to characterize the drug substance and product properties such as identity, purity, strength, and stability. The guidance addresses setting specifications and acceptance criteria based on development data and justification. It provides recommendations for common tests like residual solvents, water content, polymorphism and enantiomers. The document aims to harmonize specifications accepted by major regulatory authorities.
The presentation was an overview of the GMP regulations specific to cleaning validation for medicine manufacturers. New guidelines for Health Based Exposure Limits were discussed along with common GMP deficiencies observed during TGA inspections.
This presentation is aimed at providing information on automation in the GLP practices in the pharmaceutical industry.
-Standard Operating Procedures.
-Documentation in GALP.
-Logs and Related Forms.
This document discusses deviations and out-of-specification/out-of-trend results in the pharmaceutical industry. It defines deviations as unwanted events that differ from approved processes or standards. Deviations are classified as major, critical, or minor depending on their impact. Out-of-specification results occur when test results fall outside predetermined specifications, requiring investigation. Out-of-trend results differ from historical results but are still within specifications, also necessitating investigation. The document provides examples of planned and unplanned deviations as well as approaches to minimize out-of-specification results through good practices.
The document discusses reference standards which are substances used to ensure the identity, strength, quality and purity of medicines. Reference standards are obtained from organizations like USP and used to support various measurements in chemical, biological, clinical and physical areas. The document outlines the process of preparation, characterization, storage and utilization of reference standards. It provides guidelines on properties like purity, stability and intended use of reference standards.
cGMP Guidelines According to Schedule MANKUSH JADHAV
油
This document provides an overview of cGMP guidelines according to Schedule M. It defines cGMP and outlines key areas that must be addressed including personnel, premises, equipment, standard operating procedures, raw materials, self inspections, master formula records, batch manufacturing records, warehousing, and validation. The guidelines ensure quality products are consistently produced and that quality is built into every step of the manufacturing process.
This document provides information from an online resource called Drug Regulations for pharmaceutical professionals. It discusses concepts related to cleaning validation for active pharmaceutical ingredient plants. The presentation covers topics like acceptance criteria, levels of cleaning, control of cleaning processes, bracketing and worst case scenarios, determination of residue amounts, and cleaning validation protocols. It provides examples and guidelines for calculating acceptance limits for cleaning validation.
This document provides background information and guidance on cleaning validation for pharmaceutical manufacturing. It discusses how the FDA began requiring validation of cleaning processes in the 1960s after issues with penicillin contamination. The document defines cleaning validation and outlines cGMP requirements. It provides guidance on general requirements including conducting multiple successful cleaning cycles, evaluating equipment cleaning strategies, and setting validation limits. It also discusses considerations for evaluating cleaning processes and detecting residues.
NEW ERA OF DRUG PRODUCT: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGESganpat420
油
Abstract
Introduction
Global pharmaceutical industry
Indian pharmaceutical industry
Indian Pharmaceutical Market
Opportunities
Challenges
Conclusion
References
The document discusses ICH Q7, a guideline for good manufacturing practices for active pharmaceutical ingredients. It aims to improve quality, enhance productivity and effectiveness of API manufacturing. ICH Q7 applies to APIs made through chemical synthesis, extraction, fermentation or combinations and establishes requirements for quality management, personnel, facilities, equipment, documentation, materials management, production controls, packaging and more. Adherence to ICH Q7 helps ensure APIs are safe, effective and of good quality and prepared according to cGMP standards expected by regulatory agencies like the FDA.
The document outlines the process for investigating out-of-specification (OOS), out-of-trend (OOT), or atypical test results. It involves a multi-phase investigation including:
Phase I involves an initial laboratory investigation to identify any errors. Phase II is a full-scale investigation including manufacturing process review, additional laboratory testing through retesting or resampling, and identification of any assignable causes. Phase III ensures corrective and preventative actions are taken as needed and other potentially impacted batches are evaluated. The goal is to thoroughly investigate to determine if the batch should be rejected or can be released and prevent future occurrences.
This document provides guidance on investigating out of specification or out of trend results from laboratory analyses. It describes a multi-step investigation process including: Phase Ia investigations to identify obvious errors; Phase Ib investigations conducted by an analyst and supervisor using a checklist to identify potential causes; Phase II investigations if no cause is found that may involve additional parties; and Phase III investigations and batch disposition if needed. Key terms related to investigations are also defined, such as out of specification, out of trend, assignable cause, and invalidated test.
The document outlines procedures for investigating out-of-specification or atypical laboratory test results. It describes conducting a Phase I investigation by the analyst and supervisor to identify obvious errors, and a Phase II investigation when no error is found. Phase II may involve hypothesis testing, retesting using the original sample if possible, or obtaining a new sample. If no assignable cause is identified after manufacturing and laboratory investigations, retesting a portion of the original sample may be considered with approval of a documented test plan.
The document discusses good manufacturing practices (GMP) for pharmaceutical products. It provides background on regulatory requirements for GMP internationally and outlines key aspects of GMP documentation and records management. Effective documentation is important for ensuring quality, traceability of activities, and compliance with GMP regulations.
QUALIFICATION OF MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENTSANKUSH JADHAV
油
it gives the information about qualification of various manufacturing equipment which is used into the pharmaceutical labs. (only for information purpose)
The document discusses the requirements and procedures for conducting an Annual Product Quality Review (APQR). Key points include:
- The APQR is intended to verify process consistency, assess trends, determine needed specification/procedure changes, and evaluate revalidation needs.
- Regulatory guidelines like ICH Q7, FDA, and EU require annual reviews that include batch data, deviations, complaints, stability results, and corrective actions.
- The quality unit coordinates the APQR using data and participation from other departments. The review is documented and approved by senior quality management.
ICH Q6A Specifications by Chandra MohanChandra Mohan
油
The document provides guidelines on specifications for new drug substances and products. It defines specifications and outlines universal tests that should be included for both drug substances and products, such as description, identification, assay, and impurities. It also describes specific tests that may be included depending on the dosage form, such as dissolution, disintegration, hardness/friability for solid oral dosage forms. The guidelines provide information on justifying acceptance criteria and setting specifications based on development data and stability studies.
This document discusses deviation handling and root cause analysis. It defines deviations as departures from standard procedures and outlines regulatory expectations to investigate deviations and prevent reoccurrence. The basic process flow for handling deviations includes identification, assessment, classification, investigation and corrective actions. Root cause analysis is presented as a method to systematically identify underlying causes of problems using techniques like brainstorming, 5 whys, and cause-and-effect diagrams. The goals of root cause analysis are failure identification, analysis, and resolution through an iterative process.
This document discusses out-of-trend (OOT) results, which occur when a result does not follow the expected trend based on past data. It notes that identifying OOT results is becoming a regulatory issue and introduces some statistical approaches for doing so, like using a minimum of 25 batches to set a trend range of average 賊3 standard deviations. Some challenges of implementing OOT identification for commercial batches are determining the appropriate statistical approach, data requirements, and investigation process. The conclusion states that identifying OOT results is important for regulators and industry, and the method should not be too complex.
USFDA guidelines on process validation a life cycle approachRx Ayush Sharma
油
The document summarizes the US FDA's 2011 guidance on process validation, which outlines a lifecycle approach. It discusses the three stages of process validation according to the guidance: (1) Process Design which defines the commercial process based on development, (2) Process Qualification which evaluates the process's capability for commercial manufacturing, and (3) Continued Process Verification which gains ongoing assurance that the process remains in control during routine production. The lifecycle approach integrates validation strategies from previous guidelines and emphasizes continual process improvement, understanding sources of variation, and controlling variation to ensure consistent quality.
This document provides guidance on specifications for new drug substances and products. It aims to establish a single set of global specifications. Specifications include a list of tests, procedures, and acceptance criteria to ensure quality. Tests are used to characterize the drug substance and product properties such as identity, purity, strength, and stability. The guidance addresses setting specifications and acceptance criteria based on development data and justification. It provides recommendations for common tests like residual solvents, water content, polymorphism and enantiomers. The document aims to harmonize specifications accepted by major regulatory authorities.
The presentation was an overview of the GMP regulations specific to cleaning validation for medicine manufacturers. New guidelines for Health Based Exposure Limits were discussed along with common GMP deficiencies observed during TGA inspections.
This presentation is aimed at providing information on automation in the GLP practices in the pharmaceutical industry.
-Standard Operating Procedures.
-Documentation in GALP.
-Logs and Related Forms.
This document discusses deviations and out-of-specification/out-of-trend results in the pharmaceutical industry. It defines deviations as unwanted events that differ from approved processes or standards. Deviations are classified as major, critical, or minor depending on their impact. Out-of-specification results occur when test results fall outside predetermined specifications, requiring investigation. Out-of-trend results differ from historical results but are still within specifications, also necessitating investigation. The document provides examples of planned and unplanned deviations as well as approaches to minimize out-of-specification results through good practices.
The document discusses reference standards which are substances used to ensure the identity, strength, quality and purity of medicines. Reference standards are obtained from organizations like USP and used to support various measurements in chemical, biological, clinical and physical areas. The document outlines the process of preparation, characterization, storage and utilization of reference standards. It provides guidelines on properties like purity, stability and intended use of reference standards.
cGMP Guidelines According to Schedule MANKUSH JADHAV
油
This document provides an overview of cGMP guidelines according to Schedule M. It defines cGMP and outlines key areas that must be addressed including personnel, premises, equipment, standard operating procedures, raw materials, self inspections, master formula records, batch manufacturing records, warehousing, and validation. The guidelines ensure quality products are consistently produced and that quality is built into every step of the manufacturing process.
This document provides information from an online resource called Drug Regulations for pharmaceutical professionals. It discusses concepts related to cleaning validation for active pharmaceutical ingredient plants. The presentation covers topics like acceptance criteria, levels of cleaning, control of cleaning processes, bracketing and worst case scenarios, determination of residue amounts, and cleaning validation protocols. It provides examples and guidelines for calculating acceptance limits for cleaning validation.
This document provides background information and guidance on cleaning validation for pharmaceutical manufacturing. It discusses how the FDA began requiring validation of cleaning processes in the 1960s after issues with penicillin contamination. The document defines cleaning validation and outlines cGMP requirements. It provides guidance on general requirements including conducting multiple successful cleaning cycles, evaluating equipment cleaning strategies, and setting validation limits. It also discusses considerations for evaluating cleaning processes and detecting residues.
NEW ERA OF DRUG PRODUCT: OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGESganpat420
油
Abstract
Introduction
Global pharmaceutical industry
Indian pharmaceutical industry
Indian Pharmaceutical Market
Opportunities
Challenges
Conclusion
References
The document discusses ICH Q7, a guideline for good manufacturing practices for active pharmaceutical ingredients. It aims to improve quality, enhance productivity and effectiveness of API manufacturing. ICH Q7 applies to APIs made through chemical synthesis, extraction, fermentation or combinations and establishes requirements for quality management, personnel, facilities, equipment, documentation, materials management, production controls, packaging and more. Adherence to ICH Q7 helps ensure APIs are safe, effective and of good quality and prepared according to cGMP standards expected by regulatory agencies like the FDA.
The document outlines the process for investigating out-of-specification (OOS), out-of-trend (OOT), or atypical test results. It involves a multi-phase investigation including:
Phase I involves an initial laboratory investigation to identify any errors. Phase II is a full-scale investigation including manufacturing process review, additional laboratory testing through retesting or resampling, and identification of any assignable causes. Phase III ensures corrective and preventative actions are taken as needed and other potentially impacted batches are evaluated. The goal is to thoroughly investigate to determine if the batch should be rejected or can be released and prevent future occurrences.
This document provides guidance on investigating out of specification or out of trend results from laboratory analyses. It describes a multi-step investigation process including: Phase Ia investigations to identify obvious errors; Phase Ib investigations conducted by an analyst and supervisor using a checklist to identify potential causes; Phase II investigations if no cause is found that may involve additional parties; and Phase III investigations and batch disposition if needed. Key terms related to investigations are also defined, such as out of specification, out of trend, assignable cause, and invalidated test.
This document discusses out of specification (OOS) results and the processes for investigating them. It covers:
1) What OOS is and when investigations are conducted.
2) The initial laboratory investigation and the responsibilities of the analyst and supervisor.
3) Full-scale investigations which include reviewing manufacturing, production, sampling, and initial lab results.
4) Supplementary laboratory testing like re-testing and re-sampling to identify the source of errors.
5) Analyzing the investigated results to determine the possible causes of OOS results.
This document discusses procedures for investigating out-of-specification or atypical laboratory test results. It defines key terms like out-of-specification, out-of-trend, and atypical results. It also outlines a two-phase investigation process conducted by analysts and supervisors to identify potential errors or assignable causes for the results. If no error or cause is found, a more thorough investigation involving production and quality personnel is required. Checklists are provided to guide the analysts' and supervisors' review of methodology, equipment, standards, and other potential factors.
This document summarizes a presentation on handling out-of-specification (OOS) results from a scientific and regulatory perspective. It discusses the history of an OOS case involving Barr Laboratories, the phenomena and scenarios surrounding OOS results, and how to conduct OOS investigations. It provides guidance on classifying results as above the line, below the line, or within the line. It also discusses best practices for OOS investigations including conducting them in a timely, unbiased, and well-documented manner. The presentation emphasizes that OOS investigations should aim to determine the root cause and not to "test into compliance".
An out of specification (OOS) occurs when analytical results fall outside established specification ranges. There are guidelines from organizations like MHRA, CDER, and PIC/S for handling OOS events. OOS can occur during stability studies, finished products, or raw materials due to laboratory errors, process issues, or sample homogeneity problems. Investigations follow a phased approach starting with the quality control laboratory and then involving manufacturing operations if needed. The fate of an OOS batch may include reprocessing, reworking, or destruction depending on the investigation conclusions.
Effective handling of OOS investigations involves adhering to OOS investigation guidelines to ensure thorough analysis and resolution. Following robust protocols and regulatory standards in OOS investigation processes is crucial for maintaining product quality and compliance.
Read more here https://www.ipa-india.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Presentation-on-Handling-OOS-Investigations-Regulatory-Expectations-Dipesh-Shah-Comsumer-Safety-Officer-USFDA.pdf
FDA OOS investigation India (Out of Specifications).pdfmidohamada2
油
Dipesh Shah, a consumer safety officer, discusses regulatory expectations for handling out-of-specification (OOS) investigations in India. The guidance outlines a two-phase process for OOS investigations to determine if a result was due to a laboratory error or a production issue. Phase I involves a laboratory investigation and Phase II involves a full production review if no error is found. The guidance stresses that investigations must be scientifically sound, supported by evidence, and result in effective corrective actions to prevent future OOS results. Common problems cited include failing to identify the root cause or evaluate the impact on other batches.
It is difficult to maintain the sterility and It is more difficult to investigate when the status is Non sterile. So this ppt narrate the way for you to investigate the Non sterility.
This document summarizes key concepts related to quality systems including change control, out of specifications, and out of trends. It defines change control as a procedure to review, verify, regulate, manage, approve and control changes made to existing systems or processes. It describes the process for managing change control including establishing written procedures and evaluating all changes that could impact quality, safety or efficacy. It also discusses out of specifications results as test results that fall outside established acceptance criteria and the procedures for investigating such results, including retesting and root cause analysis. Finally, it defines out of trend results as those that do not follow the expected trend over time and methods for identifying out of trend results.
The document discusses quality systems concepts related to change control, out of specifications, and out of trends. It provides definitions and procedures for managing changes to systems and processes, investigating results that fall outside specifications, and identifying trends that deviate from expected patterns. The key aspects covered are the need to justify, document, review and approve all changes, as well as procedures for investigating out of specification or trend results through retesting, resampling, and identifying potential root causes in the laboratory or manufacturing process.
The document discusses laboratory controls required by cGMP regulations. It provides an overview of Subpart I, which establishes requirements for laboratory controls, testing and release of products, stability testing, special testing, reserve samples, and laboratory animals. The document emphasizes that laboratory data is essential to prove manufacturing processes and products are suitable and ensure consistent product quality. It warns that unreliable test methods can pose risks to both consumers and manufacturers.
Pharmacovigilance role through investigating Out of Specification (OOS) for F...Mohamed Raouf
油
Pharmacovigilance role in Investigating OOS for Finished Product on the Stability Program through Health Hazard Assessment & Post monitoring and effectiveness check.
The document discusses out-of-specification (OOS) test results and the process for investigating them. OOS results occur when analytical results fall outside established specification ranges. There are guidelines from organizations like MHRA, CDER, and PIC/S for handling OOS products. Investigations of OOS results involve a Phase I laboratory investigation and may proceed to Phase II and III manufacturing investigations. The goal is to determine the root cause and decide if corrective actions can resolve the issue or if the batch must be rejected.
The document discusses Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), which are quality standards that regulate the conduct of laboratory studies related to health and safety. It provides background on GLP, including that GLP was created by the FDA in the 1970s in response to cases of fraudulent laboratory practices. The key objectives of GLP are to ensure laboratory study data is accurate, traceable, and can be relied upon for regulatory decision making. GLP establishes requirements for facilities, equipment, personnel, methods, records, and management to ensure the integrity of all safety data generated during nonclinical health and environmental safety studies.
The document discusses Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), which are quality standards that regulate the conduct of laboratory studies related to health and safety. It provides background on GLP, including that GLP was created by the FDA in the 1970s in response to cases of fraudulent laboratory practices. The key objectives of GLP are to ensure study data is accurate, traceable, and promotes international acceptance of tests. GLP establishes requirements for facilities, equipment, personnel, methods, records, and quality assurance programs. Laboratories must adhere to GLP in order to produce reliable results for regulatory submissions.
The document discusses Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), which are quality standards that regulate the conduct of laboratory studies related to health and safety. It provides background on GLP, explaining that GLP was created by the FDA in the 1970s after investigations found fraudulent activities and poor practices in toxicology labs. The objectives of GLP are to ensure data submitted are an accurate reflection of study results and that data is traceable. GLP provides a framework for planning, conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting laboratory studies while maintaining quality assurance.
The document provides an overview of common issues seen by regulators in evaluating bioequivalence studies from the perspective of a regulatory evaluator. It discusses key aspects of study design, clinical conduct, analytical methods, pharmacokinetic analysis, and statistical analysis that are evaluated. Examples of specific studies that were not accepted due to issues such as analytical problems, clinical inconsistencies, and use of an inappropriate reference product are also provided. The evaluator emphasizes that justification for exclusion of data and consideration of outliers is important in statistical analysis.
2. HISTORY not so long ago 1992 1993 1992 European Union is formed Yugoslavia disintegrates Microsoft ships Windows 3.1 Suicide bombing at Israel Embassy in Buenos Aires EuroDisney opens near Paris Yitzhak Rabin wins the elections Bill Clinton wins the elections United States of America, Plaintiff V. Barr Laboratories Inc., Defendants, Civil Suite 92-1744 August 17 till October 12, 1992 Judge Wolin decision on February 5, 1993 1993 (Jan-Feb) V叩clav Havel elected President of the Czech Republic World Trade Center bombing History Very actual today HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
7. MHRA GUIDELINE ON OOS RESULTS COMING IN 2010? HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
8. MHRA GUIDELINE ON OOS RESULTS COMING IN 2010? HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
9. Q6A: Specifications : Test Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for New Drug Substances and New Drug Products: Chemical Substances DEFINITION OF SPECIFICATIONS HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
10. DEFINITION OF ?RESULTS? OOS Results - Test results laying outside of the specifications Questionable results (e.g. close to spec / limit) Out of trend ( OOT - stability, but not only) Out of limits ( OOL - alert / alarm) Unexpected Results results that are aberrant, abnormal, anomalous, atypical, irregular or deviant Batch failure , used by FDA, disliked by Judge Wolin (Barr case) Additional unexpected peaks in chromatogram (e.g. Dissolution test) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
11. A History of the OOS Problem, Steven Kuwahara (BioPharm International, Volume 20, Issue 11) The most significant abuse of statistical methods has been to test lots repeatedly until a sample falls within the specification range, and then to accept a lot based on one passing result. This method is known as " testing into compliance . In "testing into compliance," an unethical manufacturer hopes that even a bad lot will produce a passing test result, as a result of extreme statistical variation. Consequently, failing test results are ignored and retests are ordered until extreme variation produces a passing test result. The passing result is accepted and the lot is released based on that result. seven to eight retests were ordered in an attempt to obtain a passing result ... There is no reason to believe that the results obtained from the retests are really different from the original test result . HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
12. Investigations of OOS results should be performed in cases of : Batch release testing and testing of starting materials. IPC testing: if data is used for batch calculations/decisions and if in a dossier and on Certificates of Analysis. NOTE : OOS NOT applicable for in-process testing used for process adjustment (eg - pH, viscosity, etc.), and for process validation studies (variable parameters, analytics - robustness). Stability studies on marketed batches of finished products and or active pharmaceutical ingredients, ongoing / follow up stability ( NOT applicable for stress/forced degradation tests ). If the previous released GMP batch used as reference sample in an OOS investigation produced OOS or questionable results investigation should be extended to include it. Batches for clinical trials under cGMPs. HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
13. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Inc 8/25/2010 During release testing, batches 90056 and 90057 of Promethazine Hydrochloride (HCI) Tablets, 25 mg, exhibited OOS water content results of 5.7% and 5.9%, respectively (the specification is ). The OOS results were invalidated after a retest yielded acceptable results, despite your failure to identify an assignable laboratory cause. Furthermore, you failed to extend the investigation to associated batches . The investigation did not include batch 90058 that was analyzed in conjunction with batches 90056 and 90057 and for which passing results were obtained. Yet your Quality Control Unit (QCU) released lots 90056A, 90057A, and 90058A between May 2009 and June 2009. FDA Warning letters, Aug-Sept-Oct 2010 HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
14. Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co., Ltd. 9/29/10 1. Failure of your quality control unit/laboratory to thoroughly investigate and document out-of-specification (OOS) results obtained. For example, b) Your firm's OOS investigation relating to impurity levels for (b)(4), lot (b)(4) , concluded that the root cause was a laboratory error, but the investigation did not identify what specific laboratory error occurred. The investigational checklist initially indicated that no problem was found with the analysis. The investigational checklist you currently use is insufficient to detect and evaluate instrument problems and standard/sample preparation errors. You authorized retesting of (b)(4), lot (b)(4), without identifying a possible root cause . Instead, a new sample preparation was used to retest the product, which was found within specification. You used the passing retest results to invalidate the original OOS results, with no laboratory error attributed in obtaining the original result . This retesting approach lacks scientific justification. HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
15. Contract Pharmacal Corporation 10/14/10 Your response is inadequate because it fails to include details on how your firm handles investigations, such as which errors or incidents would result in a thorough out-of-specification (OOS) investigation d) Ibuprofen had OOS assay result of 110.3% on (b)(4) April 12, 2010, for the initial testing of (b)(4) (Ibuprofen), under lot 102005. The analyst performed repeat testing, in duplicate, on the same date, from the same sample. After that, both assay test results were found within specification. Your response states, "It was determined that each of the OOS results was due to a procedural error on the part of the analyst." However, your response does not include any information regarding which part of the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) the analyst failed to follow and whether you extended the investigation for the assay testing to associated batches. You should report all test results that have not been invalidated, and these results should be considered in batch release decisions . Finally, we note your commitment to retrain analysts on a routine basis, but your response fails to include timeframes for completing training to address OOS results. HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
16. Evaluation of OOS results should include looking for possible statistics : Similar / multiple OOS results for certain analytical methods? Similar / multiple OOS results for certain instruments? - Similar / multiple OOS results for certain products? - Similar / multiple OOS results for certain analysts? Investigation : - The investigation has to follow a pre-established investigation plan - The investigation has to be well documented / summarized - The investigation is the basis for a release decision - The investigation is the basis for CAPA HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
17. NEVER start or continue a test if SST or calibration criteria are not met NEVER continue tests that you expect to be invalidated at a later time for an assignable cause NEVER complete analysis for the sole purpose of seeing what results can be obtained when obvious or very likely errors have occurred NEVER knowingly produce an OOS result QC / analytical / contract labs must be aware and informed of any process deviation that may have a negative effect on the potency or purity of the product and may cause OOS results! HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
18. All solutions and reagents must be retained until all data has been second person verified as being within the defined acceptance criteria. Compendial tests that are statistic in nature and/or measure variability (Dissolution, Uniformity of Dosage Units, Sterility) - have several levels for additional analyses with specific acceptance criteria (e.g. dissolution levels S1, S2 & S3; uniformity of dosage units testing of 20 additional units). However the sample test criteria is usually the first level of testing and if a sample has to be tested to the next level - this should be investigated/documented prior to proceeding to next level - as it is not an expected result. HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
19. The amount of the initial sample should be sufficient for: - the initial testing - Possible investigation - Confirmation of the OOS results - Retained sample A lack of sample material is not necessarily a suitable reason for re-sampling for the purposes of OOS investigation Contract laboratory ( usually ) is not involved in sampling HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
20. Example : NEXTAR OOS investigation flowchart (part of SOP) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
21. Sources of error - Correct test methodology followed (e.g. method version number) - Correct sample(s) tested - Sample integrity maintained, correct container and chain of custody - Assessment of the possibility that the sample contamination/degradation has occurred during the testing / re-testing procedure (e.g. sample left open to air) - All equipment used in the testing is within calibration date - Review equipment logbooks - Appropriate standards used in the analysis - Standards and/or controls performed as expected - System suitability conditions met (those before analysis and during analysis) - Correct and clean glassware used - Correct pipette / volumetric flasks volumes used - Media/Reagents prepared according to procedure - Items were within expiry date - A visual examination (solid and solution) - Correct specification applied - Data acceptance criteria met - The analyst is trained on the method - Interview analyst to assess knowledge of the correct procedure / performance - Examination of the raw data, including chromatograms and spectra - Any previous issues with this test / method / product - Other potentially interfering testing / activities occurring at the time of the test - Environmental conditions (temperature/humidity/draughts) during testing - Review of other data for other batches performed within the same analysis set - Consideration of other results (not only OOS) obtained for the tested batch - Review of method validation HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
22. Example : NEXTAR OOS preliminary assessment checklist HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
23. Example : NEXTAR OOS laboratory investigation form HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
24. Example : NEXTAR OOS laboratory investigation form HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
25. Initial laboratory assessment of the unexpected result Full laboratory Investigation Sampling Production Report / Decision 0 - 2 0 - 7 2 - 10 2 - 21 - 30 days Suggested timeline for the investigation (business days) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
27. FDA OOS Guidance : For contract laboratories, the laboratory should convey its data, findings, and supporting documentation to the manufacturing firms quality control unit (QCU), who should then initiate the full-scale OOS investigation. Subcontractors additional considerations Quality agreement should relate to OOS investigations Should clearly define the expectations, timelines, agreed procedures, access to data, documentation, performing assessment, batch disposition by contract giver! (if only testing performed by contract lab). OUT OF SPECIFICATION RESULTS HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
28. DOCUMENT YOUR OBSERVATIONS IN REAL TIME! TIP : visual observation is an important part of testing and/or investigation of unexpected results. Therefore analysts (especially at contract lab!) may document the occurrences by taking photos helping to document / verify observation of unexpected result e.g. appearance of the sample, lack of disintegration or dissolution, etc. OUT OF SPECIFICATION RESULTS HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
29. Costs of OOS investigation Preliminary assessment Analyst + Supervisor Documentation ! Full laboratory investigation Best case: 1 day, 8 hours Batch delay Documentation ! ! Deviation investigation QA investigation Other departments (Maintenance, Production, Packaging, etc.) Documentation ! ! ! Further batch delay Reject (false negative?) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
30. Failure to investigate deviations 27% Incomplete investigations 25% Inadequate documentation and reporting 14% Inadequate corrective actions 11% Inadequate management review/oversight 9% Unjustified conclusions 9% Failure to assure timely investigation/closure 5% Failure investigation trends HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
31. Prevention of OOS results - EQUIPMENT Prevention of OOS results - PEOPLE Training of Analysts, Supervisors, Lab Managers We are all human Periodic review of OOS/OOT/OOL results Regular review of investigations and of assignable causes of laboratory error with analysts Hands-on participation of analysts in investigations HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
32. Operator Error as stated reason for OOS results SHOULD BE SPECIFIC Operator Action Inattention to Detail Verbal or Written Communication Problem Operator Monitoring Multiple Processes Operator Training: Not Trained on Procedure Not Trained on Current Version of Procedure Insufficient Practice or Experience Inadequate Content in Training Automation of routine laboratory tasks Reduce errors in dilution (serial dilutions) Reduce errors in weighing (especially multiple components) Improve reproducibility Improve safety Reduce stress level for analyst Reduce waiting time of sample (UV, O 2 , H 2 O, T o C degradation) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
33. NUMBER OF RETESTS HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS One analyst Two analysts, of at least the same level of experience ? Original test Investigation / Retesting One analyst, of higher level of experience ? 1 replicate Two tests in duplicates ? 2 replicates Two tests in triplicates ? 3 replicates Two tests in 4 replicates each ?
34. References and useful links 1. FDA: Guidance for Industry Investigating Out-of-Specification (OOS) Test Results for Pharmaceutical Production, Guidance for Industry, October 2006 ( http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm070287.pdf ) 2. PIC/S AIDE MEMOIRE ON INSPECTION OF QUALITY CONTROL LABORATORIES ( http://www.picscheme.org/publication.php?id=14 ) 3. MHRA presentations on OOS, July 2010 ( http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/comms-con/documents/websiteresources/con088214.pdf ) ( http://www.mhra.gov.uk/home/groups/comms-con/documents/websiteresources/con088215.pdf ) 4. United States of Americs, Plaintiff V. Barr Laboratories Inc., Defendants, Civil Suite 92-1744 ( http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/Manufacturing/UCM216425.pdf ) ( http://www.navigategmp.com/pdf/BarrLabs.pdf ) 5. Mettler-Toledo on-demand webinar by Dr. Joanne Ratcliff, Marketing Project Manager ( http://uk.mt.com/gb/en/home/events/webinar/ondemand/q_OoS_QAQC.html ) 6. Steven Kuwahara A History of the OOS Problem, BioPharm International, Vol.20, Issue 11 ( http://biopharminternational.findpharma.com/biopharm/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=470169 ) HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS
35. QUOTES FROM INSPECTORS "If you want to keep us entertained, come up with inconclusive results Companies are very inventive in finding explanations to invalidate results HANDLING OF OOS RESULTS