SlideShare a Scribd company logo
6
Most read
8
Most read
11
Most read
1
Risk-Based Analytical Method Validation and
Maintenance Strategies
Stephan O. Krause, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist, Regulatory Science, Development
MedImmune
PDA/PCMO Task Force Leader for Analytical Methods and IMP Specifications
2
The Late-Stage Analytical Method Lifecycle: Risk-based
Validation and Maintenance Strategies
Agenda:
 Part 1
 AMV - Readiness Assessment Process
 Risk-Based AMV Study Designs and Acceptance Criteria
 Parts 2-3
 Analytical Method Replacement (AMR)
 Analytical Method Maintenance (AMM)
 Part 3
 The Analytical Method Transfer (AMT) Process
Krause/PDA, 2012
3
The Analytical Method Life Cycle
Krause/PDA, 2012
4
Example of Assessment Process of AMV Readiness
Krause/PDA, 2012
5
General AMV Risk Assessment Strategy
The purpose of risk assessment(s) for AMV studies is to provide
measurable results for:
1) The desired amount of formal validation studies to be executed.
2) The level of method performance needed as manifested in the AMV
protocol acceptance criteria.
Krause/PDA, 2012
6
Points to Consider in Overall Risk Assessment
for Analytical Methods
Points to Consider Examples Expected Potential Risk/Impact
Method type and
intended use (Identity,
Safety, Purity, Quality,
Potency, and Stability)
a. Safety test: Sterility test using
new rapid microbial method.
b. Quality test: Excipient
concentration at final production
stage.
a. Purity/Stability test:
Degradation products during
storage.
a. Potential risk to patients and firm is high if
sterility test provides false negative results.
b. Potential risk to patients is relatively low if the
quality test provides inaccurate results as
excipient is quantitatively added during
production.
c. Potential risk to patients is high if stability test
is incapable to measure all degradation products.
Surrogate and/or
complementary
method is routinely
used
Purity/Safety test: A HPSEC
method is used for quantitation of
protein aggregate levels. A second
electrophoresis method provides
similar results for aggregate levels.
If second method routinely supports the results
of the primary method, the risk to patients may
be lower if the primary method provides
inaccurate results.
Production Process
Stage
Purity Test: Fermentation
impurities are measured before
purification and after purification.
Early-stage inaccurate impurity results from less
reliable test method are lower risk to patients if
late-stage testing provides more accurate results.
Analytical Platform
Technology (APT)
Purity test: APT HPSEC method is
used to test in-process samples.
Current QC experience with this method
performance should lower the risk to patient
and/or firm if the effect of different sample types
is insignificant.
7
The Six General AMQ Classes and Prospective AMQ
Studies
AMQ Class Description
Typical Risk /
Uncertainty Level
(1=Low, 5=High)
Suggested Prospective
AMQ StudiesAMQ
Class No.
Analytical Method
Product /
Process Sample
A New New 4-5 Full Qualification
B New Old 3-4
Full Qualification Plus
Bridging Studies
C
Analytical Platform
Technology (not
qualified “as run”)
New 2-3 Partial Qualification
D
Analytical Platform
Technology
(qualified)
New 1-2
Partial Qualification or
Verification
E
Analytical Platform
Technology
(qualified)
Modified
(Formulation,
Conc.)
1-2 Verification
F Compendial New 1-2
Verification per USP
<1226>
8
The Five General AMV Classes and Prospective
AMV Studies
AMV Class Description
Typical Risk /
Uncertainty Level
(1=Low, 5=High)
Suggested Prospective
AMV Studies
AMV
Class
No.
Analytical Method
Product /
Process Sample
A New New 4-5 Full Validation
B New Old (Validated) 3-4(1) Full Validation Plus
AMR(2)
Studies
C
Analytical Platform
Technology (not
validated “as run”)
New 2-3 Partial Validation
D Old (Validated) New 1-2
Partial Validation or
Verification
E Compendial New 1-2
Verification per USP
<1226>
(1) If a new analytical method (forced method replacement) is needed due to supply reasons, the risk level can be generally considered higher
because no other option may exist. Unforced test method replacements can be considered to be a lower risk level as more time may be available
to optimize the method performance.
(2) AMR = Analytical Method Replacement. A study to confirm that a new analytical method can perform equally or better than the existing one.
From Krause, PDA/DHI 2007.
99
FACenter for Biologics Evaluation &
ResearchFDA
Safety
Methods
Validated
Qualified
Methods
Validated
Methods Re-Validation
(as needed)
Replacement
(Supplement)
Selection
Design
Development
Optimization
Life Cycle of Analytical MethodsLife Cycle of Analytical Methods
Phase 1 Phase 2Discovery/Pre-clinical Phase 3 BLA Post-Licensure
Performance
Characteristics
Robustness
10
CQA Development, CMC Changes, Specifications
11
12
Analytical Method Lifecycle – Intended Use
13
Risk-Based AMV Protocol Acceptance Criteria
Krause/PDA, 2012
14
Analytical Method Replacement (AMR) Categories
from ICH E9 (and USP <1033> for Equivalence)
 Equivalence
 Non-inferiority
 Superiority
Krause/PDA, 2012
15
Analytical Method Replacement
Suggested Performance Comparison Characteristics and Statistics
ICH Q2(R1)
Category
Identification
Test
(Qualitative)
Limit Test
(Qualitative)
Limit Test
(Quantitative)
Potency or
Content (Purity
or Range)
(Quantitative)
Accuracy Not Required Not Required TOST; Some
Data could be at
QL level
TOST
Intermediate
Precision
Not Required Not Required ANOVA, mixed
linear model, or
other variance
component
analysis
ANOVA, mixed
linear model, or
other variance
component
analysis
Specificity Probability
and/or Chi-
Squared for
Number of
Correct
Observations
Probability and/or
Chi-Squared for
Number of Correct
Observations
Not Required Not Required
Detection
Limit
Not Required Depends on how
DL was
established.
Probability
calculations may
be used
Not Required Not Required
Krause/PDA, 2012
16
Demonstrating Equivalence
Krause/PDA, 2012
17
Demonstrating Non-Inferiority
Krause/PDA, 2012
18
Demonstrating Superiority
Krause/PDA, 2012
19
Demonstrating Equivalence
Simplified Case Study
Because of anticipated supply problems for critical SDS-PAGE materials, it
was decided to develop and validate a capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE)
method that will replace the current (licensed) electrophoretic method.
The method performance characteristics for a quantitative limit test,
accuracy and intermediate precision, are compared.
For accuracy:
A delta of plus/minus 1.0% was chosen for the equivalence category
between both impurity levels. The 1.0% difference limit was set because a
future result difference of 1.0% is still acceptable within the existing release
and stability specifications (acceptable patient and mfger’s risks).
Both methods were run simultaneously (side-by-side) for each of a total of
n=30 reported results were compared by two-sided matched-paired t-test
statistics with pre-specified equivalence limits of plus/minus 1.0% (% =
reported percent and not relative percent).
Krause/PDA, 2012
20
Demonstrating Equivalence
Results
Equivalence Test Results Comparing Current Method to CZE:
Sample Size (n): 30
Hypothesized Difference in Mean: 0%
Minus Delta: -1.0%
Plus Delta: +1.0%
SDS-PAGE Mean (n=30): 3.8%
CZE Mean (n=30): 5.1%
90% confidence interval of CZE results (vs. SDS-PAGE): 4.88-5.32%
Krause/PDA, 2012
21
Equivalence of New Method Not Demonstrated
(New method’s result are different)
Krause/PDA, 2012
22
Analytical Method Maintenance (AMM)
VMP for Analytical Methods
AMC AMM
AMV
Process Map Steps
Method Modifications Method Review
Critical Method Elements
Standards and Controls Critical Reagents
Software/Computer Analytical Instrumentation
Statistical Data Reduction New/Additional Operator
Emergency Reviews
(OOS, many invalids)
Periodic Reviews
(Short and Long Term)
Quarterly or Annual Reviews Extensive Reviews
Prospective Retrospective
Krause, 2005.
23
AMM - Continuous Review Example:
Combining Laboratory and Manufacturing Control Charts
88
92
96
100
104
108
112
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Sequential Batches Tested (last n=60)
Potency(inunits/mL)
SPC
Assay Control
Upper Specifications
Lower Specifications
SPC Mean
(101.0 units/mL)
Assay Control
Mean
(99.0 units/mL)
Krause/PDA/DHI, 2007.
24
AMM - Simplified Example:
Extensive Method Performance Evaluation
Krause/PDA/DHI, 2007.
AMV and Method Performance Verification Checklist Results Comments
Test Method Number/Title/Revision:
Process Step/Product Sampling Point(s):
Most Recent Validation/Verification Date:
Specifications Supported:
ICH Q2(R1) Test Method Category:
Suitable Overall Performance Demonstrated in AMV Report ?
Changes to Test System After AMV Studies ?
If yes, provide more information:
Number of Valid Test Runs Over Last 12 Months
Number of Invalid Test Runs Over Last 12 Months
Calculate Invalid Rate/Percentage:
Current System Control Limits (ex., 3 Standard Deviations):
Test System in Control ?
Method Performance Acceptable ?
If no, provide more information:
QC Signature:
QA Signature:

More Related Content

PPT
Cleaning validation
PPTX
Investigation of OOS and OOT results
PPTX
Handling of Out of Specification Results
PDF
Process validation fda
PPTX
Quality Risk management Application of FMEA
PPTX
Blend and Content Uniformity : Industry Recommendations for Way Forward
PPT
Ich Q7A Guidelines
PPTX
PROCESS VALIDATION
Cleaning validation
Investigation of OOS and OOT results
Handling of Out of Specification Results
Process validation fda
Quality Risk management Application of FMEA
Blend and Content Uniformity : Industry Recommendations for Way Forward
Ich Q7A Guidelines
PROCESS VALIDATION

What's hot (20)

PPTX
ICH Q7 Guideline
PPTX
Ich guidelines and protocols
PPTX
Developing specifications q3 q6
PPTX
Cleaning validation
PDF
Pharmaceutical Process validation
PPT
Validation master plan
PPTX
Impurities in drug substance (ich q3 a)
PPTX
Blend uniformity
PPT
What is a calibration master Plan?
PPTX
ICH Guideline – Q9
PPTX
Validation of cone blender, mixer granulator and tablet compression machine.
PPTX
PPTX
Analytical method developement
PPTX
Process validation
PPTX
ICH HARMONISED TRIPARTITE GUIDELINE - IMPURITIES IN NEW DRUG PRODUCTS Q3B(R2)
PPTX
Process Validation of API
PPTX
Deviation and root cause analysis in Pharma
DOCX
7.specification and test procedure
PPTX
Data Integrity
PPTX
Data Integrity.pptx
ICH Q7 Guideline
Ich guidelines and protocols
Developing specifications q3 q6
Cleaning validation
Pharmaceutical Process validation
Validation master plan
Impurities in drug substance (ich q3 a)
Blend uniformity
What is a calibration master Plan?
ICH Guideline – Q9
Validation of cone blender, mixer granulator and tablet compression machine.
Analytical method developement
Process validation
ICH HARMONISED TRIPARTITE GUIDELINE - IMPURITIES IN NEW DRUG PRODUCTS Q3B(R2)
Process Validation of API
Deviation and root cause analysis in Pharma
7.specification and test procedure
Data Integrity
Data Integrity.pptx
Ad

Viewers also liked (20)

PPTX
FDA (invited) Presentation - Specifications and Analytical Method Lifecycle f...
PPT
ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION BY P.RAVISANKAR
PPTX
Method Validation: What Are Its Key Parameters
PDF
Analytical method validation by manoj ingale(best ppts)
PPTX
Analytical Method Validation
PPT
Introduction to Analytical Method Development and Validation for Therapeutic ...
PPTX
Antibiotics
PPTX
Validation parameters
PDF
ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION -A PREDICAMENT OF SERVICE PROVIDER
PPTX
Analytical method validation
PPTX
Rose Quartz Healing Crystal Meaning
PPT
The late-stage analytical method lifecycle - Risk-based validation and extens...
PDF
Analytical method validation
PDF
A Beginner's Guide to Crystals
PPT
Analytical Control Strategy for Biologics SK17Jan13
PPTX
Data Analysis Of An Analytical Method Transfer To
PPTX
Analytical method transfer (module 01)
PPT
Pharmacology of pain
PPTX
Analytical mehod validation explained sadasiva
PDF
Analytical method validation raaj gprac [compatibility mode]
FDA (invited) Presentation - Specifications and Analytical Method Lifecycle f...
ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION BY P.RAVISANKAR
Method Validation: What Are Its Key Parameters
Analytical method validation by manoj ingale(best ppts)
Analytical Method Validation
Introduction to Analytical Method Development and Validation for Therapeutic ...
Antibiotics
Validation parameters
ANALYTICAL METHOD VALIDATION -A PREDICAMENT OF SERVICE PROVIDER
Analytical method validation
Rose Quartz Healing Crystal Meaning
The late-stage analytical method lifecycle - Risk-based validation and extens...
Analytical method validation
A Beginner's Guide to Crystals
Analytical Control Strategy for Biologics SK17Jan13
Data Analysis Of An Analytical Method Transfer To
Analytical method transfer (module 01)
Pharmacology of pain
Analytical mehod validation explained sadasiva
Analytical method validation raaj gprac [compatibility mode]
Ad

Similar to Risk-based Analytical Method Validation and Maintenance Strategies SK-Sep13 (20)

PPT
CASSS CMC Strategy Forum Slides for 27Jan14 - SK21Jan14
PDF
Analytical QBD -CPHI 25-27 July R00
PPTX
Analytical procedures life cycle management
PPTX
Life cycle of analytical method
PPT
Analytical method- Content, Development, validation, Transfer & Life Cycle Ma...
PPT
Phase Appropriate Method Validation Aryo Boston-Nitto 2
PPTX
Analytical process validation
PDF
introduction-to-analytical-quality-by-design-aqbd-principles.pdf
PPTX
Method Validation - ICH /USP Validation, Linearity and Repeatability
PPT
Analytical quality by design
PPTX
Quality by design in analytical method developmentpptx
PPT
The Analytical Method Transfer Process SK-Sep 2013
PPTX
CASSS CMC 09Dec14 Stephan Krause
PPTX
Bioanalytical method validation
PDF
Analytical method validation icp.pdf
PDF
USP(1225,1226) ICH Q2(R1) by agilent
PPT
Assay-Method validation-PPT _slide
PPTX
Analytical method validation
PPTX
Analytical method validation
PPT
Method validation for drug substances and drug product _remodified_2014
CASSS CMC Strategy Forum Slides for 27Jan14 - SK21Jan14
Analytical QBD -CPHI 25-27 July R00
Analytical procedures life cycle management
Life cycle of analytical method
Analytical method- Content, Development, validation, Transfer & Life Cycle Ma...
Phase Appropriate Method Validation Aryo Boston-Nitto 2
Analytical process validation
introduction-to-analytical-quality-by-design-aqbd-principles.pdf
Method Validation - ICH /USP Validation, Linearity and Repeatability
Analytical quality by design
Quality by design in analytical method developmentpptx
The Analytical Method Transfer Process SK-Sep 2013
CASSS CMC 09Dec14 Stephan Krause
Bioanalytical method validation
Analytical method validation icp.pdf
USP(1225,1226) ICH Q2(R1) by agilent
Assay-Method validation-PPT _slide
Analytical method validation
Analytical method validation
Method validation for drug substances and drug product _remodified_2014

Risk-based Analytical Method Validation and Maintenance Strategies SK-Sep13

  • 1. 1 Risk-Based Analytical Method Validation and Maintenance Strategies Stephan O. Krause, Ph.D. Principal Scientist, Regulatory Science, Development MedImmune PDA/PCMO Task Force Leader for Analytical Methods and IMP Specifications
  • 2. 2 The Late-Stage Analytical Method Lifecycle: Risk-based Validation and Maintenance Strategies Agenda:  Part 1  AMV - Readiness Assessment Process  Risk-Based AMV Study Designs and Acceptance Criteria  Parts 2-3  Analytical Method Replacement (AMR)  Analytical Method Maintenance (AMM)  Part 3  The Analytical Method Transfer (AMT) Process Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 3. 3 The Analytical Method Life Cycle Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 4. 4 Example of Assessment Process of AMV Readiness Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 5. 5 General AMV Risk Assessment Strategy The purpose of risk assessment(s) for AMV studies is to provide measurable results for: 1) The desired amount of formal validation studies to be executed. 2) The level of method performance needed as manifested in the AMV protocol acceptance criteria. Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 6. 6 Points to Consider in Overall Risk Assessment for Analytical Methods Points to Consider Examples Expected Potential Risk/Impact Method type and intended use (Identity, Safety, Purity, Quality, Potency, and Stability) a. Safety test: Sterility test using new rapid microbial method. b. Quality test: Excipient concentration at final production stage. a. Purity/Stability test: Degradation products during storage. a. Potential risk to patients and firm is high if sterility test provides false negative results. b. Potential risk to patients is relatively low if the quality test provides inaccurate results as excipient is quantitatively added during production. c. Potential risk to patients is high if stability test is incapable to measure all degradation products. Surrogate and/or complementary method is routinely used Purity/Safety test: A HPSEC method is used for quantitation of protein aggregate levels. A second electrophoresis method provides similar results for aggregate levels. If second method routinely supports the results of the primary method, the risk to patients may be lower if the primary method provides inaccurate results. Production Process Stage Purity Test: Fermentation impurities are measured before purification and after purification. Early-stage inaccurate impurity results from less reliable test method are lower risk to patients if late-stage testing provides more accurate results. Analytical Platform Technology (APT) Purity test: APT HPSEC method is used to test in-process samples. Current QC experience with this method performance should lower the risk to patient and/or firm if the effect of different sample types is insignificant.
  • 7. 7 The Six General AMQ Classes and Prospective AMQ Studies AMQ Class Description Typical Risk / Uncertainty Level (1=Low, 5=High) Suggested Prospective AMQ StudiesAMQ Class No. Analytical Method Product / Process Sample A New New 4-5 Full Qualification B New Old 3-4 Full Qualification Plus Bridging Studies C Analytical Platform Technology (not qualified “as run”) New 2-3 Partial Qualification D Analytical Platform Technology (qualified) New 1-2 Partial Qualification or Verification E Analytical Platform Technology (qualified) Modified (Formulation, Conc.) 1-2 Verification F Compendial New 1-2 Verification per USP <1226>
  • 8. 8 The Five General AMV Classes and Prospective AMV Studies AMV Class Description Typical Risk / Uncertainty Level (1=Low, 5=High) Suggested Prospective AMV Studies AMV Class No. Analytical Method Product / Process Sample A New New 4-5 Full Validation B New Old (Validated) 3-4(1) Full Validation Plus AMR(2) Studies C Analytical Platform Technology (not validated “as run”) New 2-3 Partial Validation D Old (Validated) New 1-2 Partial Validation or Verification E Compendial New 1-2 Verification per USP <1226> (1) If a new analytical method (forced method replacement) is needed due to supply reasons, the risk level can be generally considered higher because no other option may exist. Unforced test method replacements can be considered to be a lower risk level as more time may be available to optimize the method performance. (2) AMR = Analytical Method Replacement. A study to confirm that a new analytical method can perform equally or better than the existing one. From Krause, PDA/DHI 2007.
  • 9. 99 FACenter for Biologics Evaluation & ResearchFDA Safety Methods Validated Qualified Methods Validated Methods Re-Validation (as needed) Replacement (Supplement) Selection Design Development Optimization Life Cycle of Analytical MethodsLife Cycle of Analytical Methods Phase 1 Phase 2Discovery/Pre-clinical Phase 3 BLA Post-Licensure Performance Characteristics Robustness
  • 10. 10
  • 11. CQA Development, CMC Changes, Specifications 11
  • 12. 12 Analytical Method Lifecycle – Intended Use
  • 13. 13 Risk-Based AMV Protocol Acceptance Criteria Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 14. 14 Analytical Method Replacement (AMR) Categories from ICH E9 (and USP <1033> for Equivalence)  Equivalence  Non-inferiority  Superiority Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 15. 15 Analytical Method Replacement Suggested Performance Comparison Characteristics and Statistics ICH Q2(R1) Category Identification Test (Qualitative) Limit Test (Qualitative) Limit Test (Quantitative) Potency or Content (Purity or Range) (Quantitative) Accuracy Not Required Not Required TOST; Some Data could be at QL level TOST Intermediate Precision Not Required Not Required ANOVA, mixed linear model, or other variance component analysis ANOVA, mixed linear model, or other variance component analysis Specificity Probability and/or Chi- Squared for Number of Correct Observations Probability and/or Chi-Squared for Number of Correct Observations Not Required Not Required Detection Limit Not Required Depends on how DL was established. Probability calculations may be used Not Required Not Required Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 19. 19 Demonstrating Equivalence Simplified Case Study Because of anticipated supply problems for critical SDS-PAGE materials, it was decided to develop and validate a capillary zone electrophoresis (CZE) method that will replace the current (licensed) electrophoretic method. The method performance characteristics for a quantitative limit test, accuracy and intermediate precision, are compared. For accuracy: A delta of plus/minus 1.0% was chosen for the equivalence category between both impurity levels. The 1.0% difference limit was set because a future result difference of 1.0% is still acceptable within the existing release and stability specifications (acceptable patient and mfger’s risks). Both methods were run simultaneously (side-by-side) for each of a total of n=30 reported results were compared by two-sided matched-paired t-test statistics with pre-specified equivalence limits of plus/minus 1.0% (% = reported percent and not relative percent). Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 20. 20 Demonstrating Equivalence Results Equivalence Test Results Comparing Current Method to CZE: Sample Size (n): 30 Hypothesized Difference in Mean: 0% Minus Delta: -1.0% Plus Delta: +1.0% SDS-PAGE Mean (n=30): 3.8% CZE Mean (n=30): 5.1% 90% confidence interval of CZE results (vs. SDS-PAGE): 4.88-5.32% Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 21. 21 Equivalence of New Method Not Demonstrated (New method’s result are different) Krause/PDA, 2012
  • 22. 22 Analytical Method Maintenance (AMM) VMP for Analytical Methods AMC AMM AMV Process Map Steps Method Modifications Method Review Critical Method Elements Standards and Controls Critical Reagents Software/Computer Analytical Instrumentation Statistical Data Reduction New/Additional Operator Emergency Reviews (OOS, many invalids) Periodic Reviews (Short and Long Term) Quarterly or Annual Reviews Extensive Reviews Prospective Retrospective Krause, 2005.
  • 23. 23 AMM - Continuous Review Example: Combining Laboratory and Manufacturing Control Charts 88 92 96 100 104 108 112 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Sequential Batches Tested (last n=60) Potency(inunits/mL) SPC Assay Control Upper Specifications Lower Specifications SPC Mean (101.0 units/mL) Assay Control Mean (99.0 units/mL) Krause/PDA/DHI, 2007.
  • 24. 24 AMM - Simplified Example: Extensive Method Performance Evaluation Krause/PDA/DHI, 2007. AMV and Method Performance Verification Checklist Results Comments Test Method Number/Title/Revision: Process Step/Product Sampling Point(s): Most Recent Validation/Verification Date: Specifications Supported: ICH Q2(R1) Test Method Category: Suitable Overall Performance Demonstrated in AMV Report ? Changes to Test System After AMV Studies ? If yes, provide more information: Number of Valid Test Runs Over Last 12 Months Number of Invalid Test Runs Over Last 12 Months Calculate Invalid Rate/Percentage: Current System Control Limits (ex., 3 Standard Deviations): Test System in Control ? Method Performance Acceptable ? If no, provide more information: QC Signature: QA Signature: