1.0 Scope
This Guidance document has been prepared to provide guidance
to the pharmaceutical industry in dealing with validation issues for
sterile and non-sterile dosage forms, biologicals, and
radiopharmaceuticals. It should be noted that additional guidance
related to sterile products and not contained in this document should
also be considered. These requirements may be found in supplemental
process validation guidelines available on the Compliance and Enforcement website.
It is expected that importers and distributors of drug products
have documented evidence that their vendors meet validation
requirements.
2.0 Introduction
This document provides guidance on issues and topics related
to systems, equipment qualification, product and process validation for
sterile and non-sterile dosage forms. These topics reflect an area in
pharmaceutical, biological, and, radiopharmaceuticals manufacture that
is noted as being important by both the Inspectorate and the
pharmaceutical industry. These guidelines have been prepared to provide
guidance to inspectors, evaluators and the industry in dealing with
issues related to validation. Utilization of this information should
facilitate compliance with Division 2, Part C of the
Regulations to the
Food and Drugs Act.
It is not intended that the recommendations made in these
guidelines become requirements under all circumstances. Information
provided in the Interpretation section for limits to be applied in
defined circumstances, as well as the number of batches to be utilized
for validation studies are for guidance purposes only. Inspectors,
evaluators and the industry may consider other alternate means if
proposed and documented with appropriate scientific justification.
3.0 Purpose
These guidelines outline the general principles that the
Inspectorate considers to be acceptable elements of validation which may
be used by fabricators, packagers/labellers for drug products. The
Guidelines on Good Manufacturing Practices (
GMP), Division 2, Part C of the
Food and Drug Regulations require that:
- all critical production processes be validated
- validation studies are conducted in accordance with
pre-defined protocols. Written reports summarizing recorded results and
conclusions are prepared, evaluated, approved and maintained
- changes to production processes, operating parameters,
equipment or materials that may affect product quality and/or the
reproducibility of the process are also to be validated prior to
implementation.
These guidelines are not intended to specify how validation is to
be conducted, but are indicators of what is expected to be covered by
fabricators, packagers/labellers.
The elements of validation presented in these guidelines are not
intended to be all-encompassing. The particular requirements of
validation may vary according to factors such as the nature of drug
products e.g. sterile, non-sterile, biologicals, and the complexity of
the process. The concepts provided in these guidelines have general
applicability and provide an acceptable framework for establishing a
comprehensive approach to validation.
4.0 Definitions
Change Control:
A written procedure that describes the action to be taken if a
change is proposed (a) to facilities, materials, equipment, and/or
processes used in the fabrication, packaging, and testing of drugs, or
(b) that may affect the operation of the quality or support system.
Cleaning Validation:
The documented act of demonstrating that cleaning procedures for
the equipment used in fabricating/packaging will reduce to an
acceptable level all residues (products/cleaning agents) and to
demonstrate that routine cleaning and storage of equipment does not
allow microbial proliferation.
Concurrent Validation:
A process where current production batches are used to monitor
processing parameters. It gives assurance of the present batch being
studied, and offers limited assurance regarding consistency of quality
from batch to batch.
Critical Process Parameter:
A parameter which if not controlled will contribute to the variability of the end product.
Equipment Qualification:
Studies which establish with confidence that the process
equipment and ancillary systems are capable of consistently operating
within established limits and tolerances. The studies must include
equipment specifications, installation qualification (
IQ), and operational qualification (
OQ)
of all major equipment to be used in the manufacture of commercial
scale batches. Equipment qualification should simulate actual production
conditions, including "worst case"/ stressed conditions.
Installation Qualification:
The documented act of demonstrating that process equipment and
ancillary systems are appropriately selected and correctly installed.
Major Equipment:
A piece of equipment which performs significant processing steps
in the sequence of operations required for fabrication/packaging of
drug products. Some examples of major equipment include tablet
compression machines, mills, blenders, fluid bed dryers, heaters, drying
ovens, tablet coaters, encapsulators, fermentors, centrifuges, etc.
Master Production Document:
A document that includes specifications for raw material, for
packaging material and for packaged dosage form, master formula,
sampling procedures, and critical processing related standard operating
procedures (
SOPs), whether or not these
SOPs are specifically referenced in the master formula.
Measuring Devices:
A device used in monitoring or measuring process parameters.
Operational Qualification:
The documented action of demonstrating that process equipment
and ancillary systems work correctly and operate consistently in
accordance with established specifications.
Process Capability:
Studies conducted to identify the critical process parameters
that yield a resultant quality, and their acceptable specification
ranges, based on the established +/- 3 sigma deviations of the process,
under stressed conditions but when free of any assignable causes.
Process Qualification:
The phase of validation dealing with sampling and testing at
various stages of the manufacturing process to ensure that product
specifications are met.
Process Re-validation:
Required when there is a change in any of the critical process
parameters, formulation, primary packaging components, raw material
fabricators, major equipment or premises. Failure to meet product and
process specifications in sequential batches would also require process
re-validation.
Process Validation:
Establishing documented evidence with a high degree of
assurance, that a specific process will consistently produce a product
meeting its predetermined specifications and quality characteristics.
Process validation may take the form of prospective, concurrent or
retrospective validation and process qualification or re-validation.
Prospective Validation:
Conducted prior to the distribution of either a new product or a
product made under a modified production process, where the
modifications are significant and may affect the product's
characteristics. It is a pre-planned scientific approach and includes
the initial stages of formulation development, process development,
setting of process specifications, developing in-process tests, sampling
plans, designing of batch records, defining raw material
specifications, completion of pilot runs, transfer of technology from
scale-up batches to commercial size batches, listing major process
equipment and environmental controls.
Retrospective Validation:
Conducted for a product already being marketed, and is based on
extensive data accumulated over several lots and over time.
Retrospective Validation may be used for older products which were not
validated by the fabricator at the time that they were first marketed,
and which are now to be validated to conform to the requirements of
Division 2, Part C of the
Regulations to the
Food and Drugs Act.
Validation:
The documented act of demonstrating that any procedure, process,
and activity will consistently lead to the expected results. Includes
the qualification of systems and equipment.
Validation Master Plan:
An approved written plan of objectives and actions stating how and when a company will achieve compliance with the
GMP requirements regarding validation.
Validation Protocol:
A written plan of actions stating how process validation will be
conducted; it will specify who will conduct the various tasks and
define testing parameters; sampling plans, testing methods and
specifications; will specify product characteristics, and equipment to
be used. It must specify the minimum number of batches to be used for
validation studies; it must specify the acceptance criteria and who will
sign/approve/ disapprove the conclusions derived from such a scientific
study.
Validation Team:
A multi-disciplinary team of personnel primarily responsible for
conducting and/or supervising validation studies. Such studies may be
conducted by person(s) qualified by training and experience in a
relevant discipline.
Worst Case Condition:
The highest and /or lowest value of a given parameter actually evaluated in the validation exercise.
5.0 Phases of Validation
The activities relating to validation studies may be classified into three phases:
Phase 1:
Pre-validation phase or the qualification phase, which covers
all activities relating to product research and development,
formulation, pilot batch studies, scale-up studies, transfer of
technology to commercial scale batches, establishing stability
conditions, storage and handling of in-process and finished dosage
forms, equipment qualification, installation qualification, master
production documents, operational qualification, process capability.
Phase 2:
Process validation phase (process qualification phase) designed
to verify that all established limits of the critical process parameters
are valid and that satisfactory products can be produced even under the
"worst case" conditions.
Phase 3:
Validation maintenance phase requiring frequent review of all
process related documents, including validation audit reports to assure
that there have been no changes, deviations, failures, modifications to
the production process, and that all
SOPs have been followed, including change control procedures.
At this stage the validation team also assures that there
have been no changes/ deviations that should have resulted in
requalification and revalidation.
6.0 Interpretation
General Concepts:
Quality, safety and effectiveness must be built into the
product. This requires careful attention to a number of factors such as
the selection of quality materials/components, product and process
design, control of processes, in-process control, and end-product
testing.
Due to the complexity of the drug products, routine end-product
testing alone is not sufficient due to several reasons. Furthermore,
quality cannot be tested into the finished drug product but rather be
built in the manufacturing processes and these processes should be
controlled in order that the finished product meets all quality
specifications. A careful design and validation of systems and process
controls can establish a high degree of confidence that all lots or
batches produced will meet their intended specifications.
Validation protocol:
A written plan stating how validation will be conducted,
including test parameters, product characteristics, production and
packaging equipment, and decision points on what constitutes acceptable
test results. This document should give details of critical steps of the
manufacturing process that should be measured, the allowable range of
variability and the manner in which the system will be tested.
The validation protocol provides a synopsis of what is hoped
to be accomplished. The protocol should list the selected process and
control parameters, state the number of batches to be included in the
study, and specify how the data, once assembled, will be treated for
relevance. The date of approval by the validation team should also be
noted.
In the case where a protocol is altered or modified after its
approval, appropriate reasoning for such a change must be documented.
The validation protocol should be numbered, signed and dated, and should contain as a minimum the following information:
- objectives, scope of coverage of the validation study
- validation team membership, their qualifications and responsibilities
- type of validation: prospective, concurrent, retrospective, re-validation
- number and selection of batches to be on the validation study
- a list of all equipment to be used; their normal and worst case operating parameters
- outcome of IQ, OQ for critical equipment
- requirements for calibration of all measuring devices
- critical process parameters and their respective tolerances
- description of the processing steps: copy of the master documents for the product
- sampling points, stages of sampling, methods of sampling, sampling plans
- statistical tools to be used in the analysis of data
- training requirements for the processing operators
- validated test methods to be used in in-process testing and for the finished product
- specifications for raw and packaging materials and test methods
- forms and charts to be used for documenting results
- format for presentation of results, documenting conclusions and for approval of study results.
Validation Master Plan:
A validation master plan is a document that summarises the
company's overall philosophy, intentions and approaches to be used for
establishing performance adequacy. The validation master plan should be
agreed upon by management.
Validation in general requires meticulous preparation and
careful planning of the various steps in the process. In addition, all
work should be carried out in a structured way according to formally
authorised standard operating procedures. All observations must be
documented and where possible must be recorded as actual numerical
results.
The validation master plan should provide an overview of the
entire validation operation, its organizational structure, its content
and planning. The main elements of it being the list/inventory of the
items to be validated and the planning schedule. All validation
activities relating to critical technical operations, relevant to
product and process controls within a firm should be included in the
validation master plan. It should comprise all prospective, concurrent
and retrospective validations as well as re-validation.
The validation master plan should be a summary document and
should therefore be brief, concise and clear. It should not repeat
information documented elsewhere but should refer to existing documents
such as policy documents,
SOP's and validation protocols and reports.
The format and content should include:
- introduction: validation policy, scope, location and schedule
- organizational structure: personnel responsibilities
- plant/ process /product description: rational for inclusions or exclusions and extent of validation
- specific process considerations that are critical and those requiring extra attention
- list of products/ processes/ systems to be validated, summarised in a matrix format, validation approach
- re-validation activities, actual status and future planning
- key acceptance criteria
- documentation format
- reference to the required SOP's
- time plans of each validation project and sub-project.
Installation and Operational Qualification:
The detail and scope of a qualification exercise is in many
respects related to the complexity of the equipment involved and the
critical nature of that equipment with respect to the quality of the
final product. Installation and operational qualification exercises
assure through appropriate performance tests and related documentation
that equipment, ancillary systems and sub-systems have been commissioned
correctly. The end results are that all future operations will be
reliable and within prescribed operating limits.
The basic principles are:
- equipment be correctly installed in accordance with an installation plan
- requirements for calibration, maintenance and cleaning be covered in approved SOP's
- tests be conducted to assure that equipment is operating correctly, under normal and "worst case" conditions
- operator training requirements pertaining to new equipment be conducted and documented.
At various stages in a validation exercise there is need for
protocols, documentation, procedures, equipment, specifications and
acceptance criteria for test results. All these need to be reviewed,
checked and authorised. It would be expected that representatives from
the appropriate professional disciplines,
e.g.
engineering, research and development, manufacturing, quality control
and quality assurance be actively involved in these undertakings with
the final authorisation given by a validation team or the quality
assurance representative.
Installation Qualification (IQ):
IQ is the method of establishing with
confidence that all major processing, packaging equipment and ancillary
systems are in conformance with installation specifications, equipment
manuals, schematics and engineering drawings. This stage of validation
includes examination of equipment design, determination of calibration,
maintenance and adjustment requirements.
For complicated or large pieces of equipment, a pharmaceutical
manufacturer may elect to undertake a pre-delivery check of the
equipment at the supplier's assembly facility. This pre-delivery check
cannot substitute for the installation qualification. However, it is
acknowledged that the checks conducted and documented at this stage may
duplicate a number of the checks conducted at the
IQ stage, thus leading to a reduction in the scope of the
IQ checks.
All equipment, gauges and services should be adequately identified
and should be given a serial number or other reference number. This
number should appear in the reports for the equipment validation studies
conducted.
Installation qualification requires a formal and systematic check
of all installed equipment against the equipment supplier's
specifications and additional criteria identified by the user as part of
the purchase specifications. These checks, tests and challenges should
be repeated a significant number of times to assure reliable and
meaningful results.
At the
IQ stage the company should document
preventive maintenance requirements for installed equipment. The
preventive maintenance schedule should be incorporated into the routine
maintenance schedule.
Note:
There will be cases where installation of the equipment had not been
qualified at the time of installation, and the engineering drawings and
manuals for the equipment are no longer available at the manufacturing
site. However, the equipment in place operates for a lengthy period of
time without any problem or modifications of its design since it was
first installed. In such situations, the Inspectorate considers that it
may be appropriate for those specific cases to verify a limited number
of the most critical parameters demonstrating that the equipment had
been adequately installed. Thereafter, the company could pass directly
to the operational qualification (
OQ) stage if there
is sufficient documented evidence that these units have always been well
maintained and calibrated according to an adequate pre-established
schedule.
Operational Qualification (OQ):
The conduct of an operational qualification should follow an
authorised protocol. The critical operating parameters for the equipment
and systems should be identified at the
OQ stage. The plans for the
OQ
should identify the studies to be undertaken on the critical variables,
the sequence of those studies and the measuring equipment to be used
and the acceptance criteria to be met.
Studies on the critical variables should include a condition or a
set of conditions encompassing upper and lower processing and operating
limits referred to as "worst-case" conditions. The completion of a
successful
OQ should allow the finalisation of
operating procedures and operator instructions documentation for the
equipment. This information should be used as the basis for training of
operators in the requirements for satisfactory operation of the
equipment.
The completion of satisfactory
IQ and
OQ
exercises should permit a formal "release" of the equipment for the
next stage in the process validation exercise as long as calibration,
cleaning, preventive maintenance and operator training requirements have
been finalised and documented.
Re-Qualification:
Modifications to, or relocation of equipment should follow
satisfactory review and authorization of the documented change proposal
through the change control procedure. This formal review should include
consideration of re-qualification of the equipment. Minor changes or
changes having no direct impact on final or in-process product quality
should be handled through the documentation system of the preventative
maintenance program.
Process Validation:
It would normally be expected that process validation be completed
prior to the distribution of a finished product that is intended for
sale (prospective validation). Where this is not possible, it may be
necessary to validate processes during routine production (concurrent
validation). Processes which have been in use for some time without any
significant changes may also be validated according to an approved
protocol (retrospective validation).
a) Prospective Validation:
In prospective validation, the validation protocol is
executed before the process is put into commercial use. During the
product development phase the production process should be broken down
into individual steps. Each step should be evaluated on the basis of
experience or theoretical considerations to determine the critical
parameters that may affect the quality of the finished product. A series
of experiments should be designed to determine the criticality of these
factors. Each experiment should be planned and documented fully in an
authorised protocol.
All equipment, production environment and the analytical testing
methods to be used should have been fully validated. Master batch
documents can be prepared only after the critical parameters of the
process have been identified and machine settings, component
specifications and environmental conditions have been determined.
Using this defined process a series of batches should be produced.
In theory, the number of process runs carried out and observations made
should be sufficient to allow the normal extent of variation and trends
to be established to provide sufficient data for evaluation. It is
generally considered acceptable that three consecutive batches/runs
within the finally agreed parameters, giving product of the desired
quality would constitute a proper validation of the process. In
practice, it may take some considerable time to accumulate these data.
Some considerations should be exercised when selecting the process
validation strategy. Amongst these should be the use of different lots
of active raw materials and major excipients, batches produced on
different shifts, the use of different equipment and facilities
dedicated for commercial production, operating range of the critical
processes, and a thorough analysis of the process data in case of
requalification and revalidation.
During the processing of the validation batches, extensive
sampling and testing should be performed on the product at various
stages, and should be documented comprehensively. Detailed testing
should also be done on the final product in its package.
Upon completion of the review, recommendations should be made
on the extent of monitoring and the in-process controls necessary for
routine production. These should be incorporated into the batch
manufacturing and packaging record or into appropriate standard
operating procedures. Limits, frequencies and actions to be taken in the
event of the limits being exceeded should be specified.
Matrix or "Family" approaches to prospective process validation:
It may be possible and acceptable in particular circumstances
for a manufacturer that uses the same process for several related
products to develop a scientifically sound validation plan for that
process rather than different plans for each product manufactured by
that process.
The matrix approach generally means a plan to conduct process
validation on different strengths of the same product. However,
discrete manufacturing steps such as compression, and coating that
involve different tools, equipment, and process conditions for the
different dosage strengths can not be generally validated using the
matrix approach. It should be recognized that the matrix approach has
limitations when there are concerns with respect to physical
characteristics such as flow properties, particle size distribution,
homogeneity.
The "family" approach means a plan to conduct process
validation on different products manufactured with the same processes
using the same equipment.
The validation process using these approaches must include
batches of different strengths or products which should be selected to
represent the worst case conditions or scenarios to demonstrate that the
process is consistent for all strengths or products involved.
b) Concurrent Validation:
Unconditional use of this approach is not encouraged by the
Inspectorate and is not acceptable as being the "norm". In using this
approach there is always the risk of having to modify process parameters
or specifications over a period of time. This situation often leads to
questions regarding disposition of the batches that had already been
released for sale, subsequently known to have undesired quality
characteristics.
Concurrent validation may be the practical approach under certain circumstances. Examples of these may be:
- when a previously validated process is being transferred to a third party contract manufacturer or to another manufacturing site
- where the product is a different strength of a
previously validated product with the same ratio of active / inactive
ingredients
- when the number of lots evaluated under the
retrospective validation were not sufficient to obtain a high degree of
assurance demonstrating that the process is fully under control
- when the number of batches produced are limited (e.g. orphan drugs).
It is important in these cases however, that the systems and
equipment to be used have been fully validated previously. The
justification for conducting concurrent validation must be documented
and the protocol must be approved by the validation team. A report
should be prepared and approved prior to the sale of each batch and a
final report should be prepared and approved after the completion of all
concurrent batches. It is generally considered acceptable that a
minimum of three consecutive batches within the finally agreed
parameters, giving the product the desired quality would constitute a
proper validation of the process.
c) Retrospective Validation:
In many establishments, processes that are stable and in
routine use have not undergone a formally documented validation process.
Historical data may be utilized to provide necessary documentary
evidence that the processes are validated.
The steps involved in this type of validation still require
the preparation of a protocol, the reporting of the results of the data
review, leading to a conclusion and recommendation.
Retrospective validation is only acceptable for well
established detailed processes that include operational limits for each
critical step of the process and will be inappropriate where there have
been recent changes in the formulation of the product, operating
procedures, equipment and facility.
The source of data for retrospective validation should
include amongst others, batch documents, process control charts, annual
product quality review reports, maintenance log books, process
capability studies, finished product test results, including trend
analyses, and stability results.
For the purpose of retrospective validation studies, it is
considered acceptable that data from a minimum of ten consecutive
batches produced be utilized. When less than ten batches are available,
it is considered that the data are not sufficient to demonstrate
retrospectively that the process is fully under control. In such cases
the study should be supplemented with data generated with concurrent or
prospective validation.
Some of the essential elements for retrospective validation are:
- Batches manufactured for a defined period (minimum of 10 last consecutive batches)
- Number of lots released per year
- Batch size/strength/manufacturer/year/period
- Master manufacturing/packaging documents
- Current specifications for active materials/finished products
- List of process deviations, corrective actions and changes to manufacturing documents
- Data for stability testing for several batches
- Trend analyses including those for quality related complaints
Process Re-Validation:
Re-validation provides the evidence that changes in a process
and /or the process environment that are introduced do not adversely
affect process characteristics and product quality. Documentation
requirements will be the same as for the initial validation of the
process.
Periodic review and trend analysis should be carried out at
scheduled intervals. Re-validation becomes necessary in certain
situations. The following are examples of some of the planned or
unplanned changes that may require re-validation:
- Changes in raw materials (physical properties such as
density, viscosity, particle size distribution, and moisture, etc., that
may affect the process or product).
- Changes in the source of active raw material manufacturer
- Changes in packaging material (primary container/closure system).
- Changes in the process (e.g., mixing time, drying temperatures and batch size)
- Changes in the equipment (e.g. addition of automatic
detection system). Changes of equipment which involve the replacement of
equipment on a "like for like" basis would not normally require a
re-validation except that this new equipment must be qualified.
- Changes in the plant/facility.
- Variations revealed by trend analysis (e.g. process drifts)
A decision not to perform re-validation studies must be fully justified and documented.
Change Control:
Written procedures should be in place to describe the actions
to be taken if a change is proposed to a product component, process
equipment, process environment, processing site, method of production or
testing or any other change that may affect product quality or support
system operations.
All changes must be formally requested, documented and
accepted by the validation team. The likely impact / risk of the change
on the product must be assessed and the need for the extent of
re-validation should be determined.
Commitment of the company to control all changes to premises,
supporting utilities, systems, materials, equipment and processes used
in the fabrication/packaging of pharmaceutical dosage forms is essential
to ensure a continued validation status of the systems concerned.
The change control system should ensure that all notified or
requested changes are satisfactorily investigated, documented and
authorised. Products made by processes subjected to changes should not
be released for sale without full awareness and consideration of the
change by the validation team. The team should decide if a re-validation
must be conducted prior to implementing the proposed change.
7.0 References
- Guidelines on General Principles of Process Validation, CDER, US-FDA 1987
- Pharmaceutical Process Validation; 2nd edition, Editors: I. R. Berry and R.A. Nash, 1993
- Recommendations on Validation Master Plan, Installation
and Operational Qualification, Non-Sterile Process Validation, Cleaning
Validation, PIC/S September, 2007.