Category Archives: Validation

Validation Project Plans

develop-project-plan-1200x480

Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is about Validation Project Plans, which is a specific type of project plan for projects in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device regulated industries. This post covers Validation Project Plans for pharmaceutical/biotechnology industries in particular.

Often I’ve see Validation Project Plans contain a lot of fluff but little meat, making them of less value to the project team. A good project plan clearly documents the following, at a minimum:

  1. What facilities, systems, and equipment are in scope of the plan
  2. What are the expected activities and deliverables
  3. Who is responsible for what
  4. What is the validation approach and rationale for that approach
  5. What happens after the validation scope covered in the plan is completed (i.e. ongoing requirements)

Note I do not include project cost or schedule in a project plan, because these are often changing rapidly and should be maintained in a less controlled, more flexible manner, e.g. with scheduling software for a schedule.

The plan itself should be controlled (i.e. approved and revision controlled) as soon as possible in the project but early enough so that scope will not change (too much).

Additional things to think about when drafting your plan:

  1.  Commissioning versus Qualification versus Validation. If your project has multiple phases (and any decent-sized project should), be sure to clearly state responsibilities and deliverables at each stage.
  2. Include references to regulations, industry guidance, and site procedures that govern your plan. Make it clear to everyone who reads the plan what framework you are working inside.
  3. The purpose and scope of the document should be clear and up front.
  4. Get buy-in from all functional groups by having them approve the document.
  5. Like all controlled documents, the plan should have version/revision history.
  6. Use tables to clearly present information.

I put together a quick template here:

Validation Project Plan Template MWV

What do you feel is necessary in a Validation Project Plan? Comment below.

Like this MWV (Mike Williamson Validation) blog post? Be sure to like, share, and subscribe!

 

 

Basic Components of a Test Form

Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is a short one on what are the basic components of a test form. In Validation, you’re going to record a lot of data, and you want this data to be well organized and easily understood. Here are the basic components I think every test form should have:

  1. Numbering! Each step should have a unique number so that it is easily identifiable and easy to reference elsewhere.
  2. A Title! What is this test all about? A short description should be provide.
  3. Purpose! What is the purpose of the test? Make it clear.
  4. Verification Steps! Clearly define what steps need to be performed.
  5. Expected Results! Clearly define what the expected results are. Does every step need an expected result? Every step can have one, so include it.
  6. Actual Results! This is where the actual data is collected. The actual results can be recorded exactly as the expected results are stated to avoid any confusion.
  7. Pass/Fail! Did the step pass or fail? This will quickly tell you. Also a good place to reference any comments.
  8. Initials/Date! In order for the data to be attributable, initial/date uniquely identifying the test executer must be included for each step.

What basic components do you include on your test forms? Comment below.

Like this MWV (Mike Williamson Validation) blog post? Be sure to like, share, and subscribe!

What NOT to Re-qualify

autoclave
Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is on what NOT to include in requalification/revalidation. I was recently on a site that had a five (5) year requalification requirement for sterilizers per a site SOP, which sounds reasonable (continuous monitoring would be better). But then I noted they included in their requalification requirements a re-execution of the entire initial controls system IOQ! The requalification included verification of:

  • Hardware/software installation
  • E-stop, guarding, and door interlocks
  • Restart and recovery
  • Recipe management
  • Temperature, pressure, and time control
  • Communication
  • Security

And it was expected that this would be done every five years! It just so happened that in 2014 they paid a contractor to do the work, who sadly did not help the site out by letting them know the wastefulness of such an endeavor. This is an egregious example of resource misuse and not understanding the expectations of a validation program/taking a risk-based approach. The point of requalification/revalidation is to look for drift in processes, not blindly repeat testing already performed.

What misunderstanding-of-validation-expectation horror stories do you have? Comment below.

Like this MWV (Mike Williamson Validation) blog post? Be sure to like, share, and subscribe!

Serialization Basics

vials
Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is high-level regarding serialization. Serialization is a process mandated by the world’s regulatory agencies to reduce counterfeit drug products in the market. Besides being costly to drug companies, counterfeit drug products are often less efficacious and less safe than the real drug they are purporting to be. Additionally, counterfeit drug products can be contaminated with other APIs and/or toxic excipients.
Continue reading Serialization Basics

Validation of Legacy Processes and Equipment

abandoned factory
Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is about dealing with legacy processes and equipment from a validation perspective.

I’ve worked in two plants that have legacy processes/equipment. By legacy, I mean processes/equipment that can be decades old. These processes have been producing products for the market for a long time. Initial validations will not meet the standards of today, if they exist at all. It is typical that documentation for legacy processes/equipment will not meet the today’s standards as well, and may also be nonexistent.

So how do you handle legacy processes/equipment from a validation point-of-view? First it is important to consider that because the product has been on the market for some time, there is a proven track-record. This must be leveraged. Also, legacy processes have been audited internally and externally many times. It is important to look at those audits to see what gaps and/or risks have been identified.

The next challenge is how to document changes to legacy processes/equipment. It can be difficult to track changes to equipment that, for example, does not have up-to-date P&IDs (Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams). Because creating missing documentation after installation can have a large resource cost, it will be up to the organization to determine their documentation needs and what risks they are willing to assume. This can lead to challenging conversations within the organization and unique validation programs.

What have you learned working with legacy processes/equipment? Comment below.

Like this MWV (Mike Williamson Validation) blog post? Be sure to like, share, and subscribe!

Warning Letter: Daito Kasei (Japan)

WarningLetterFDA

Hello good people of the world! Today’s post is about a recent (January 2018) warning letter issued by the FDA to a Japanese cosmetics and drug manufacturing company called Daito Kasei. The warning letter, which can be found here, underscores the need maintain focus on data integrity requirements in our modern age. This warning letter includes explicitly the following data integrity remediation steps: Continue reading Warning Letter: Daito Kasei (Japan)