Taking the modular approach - Pharmaceutical Technology

Latest Issue
PharmTech

Latest Issue
PharmTech Europe

  • Search
  • Suppliers
  • Careers

Enter a company or product name

KeywordLocation
About Search
Taking the modular approach
When validating a new facility or revalidating an existing one, many pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical companies use a traditional and complex model that is costly and time intensive. A modern strategy that uses a modular approach could avoid these issues and help manufacturers achieve effective and economical compliance.


Pharmaceutical Technology Europe
Volume 22, Issue 6



Despite the fact that regulatory compliance is fundamental to the pharmaceutical industry, too many manufacturers lose millions of euro in revenue because of poorly or incorrectly validated facilities. With increasingly demanding global regulations and guidance, rising manufacturing costs and dwindling product portfolios, it is vital to achieve efficient and effective compliance of facilities, processes and equipment to retain market competitiveness.

Enhanced facility compliance (e.g., optimizing go-live dates, implementing standardized documentation, reducing errors and using risk-based strategies to minimize non-valueadded work) can be achieved by switching from the traditional method of validation to a modern modular approach that helps complete projects on time, assists the containment of cost, and supports the use of standardized methods that improve the accuracy of documentation.

The traditional approach

Currently, traditional facility validation programmes are complex, and the planning and execution phases are often initiated too late in the process (Figure 1). If the validation strategy is not agreed early enough (a common issue), it can contribute to projects running over budget and over time, which means facilities do not go live as scheduled and product manufacture is delayed.

Under the traditional method, major facility components (e.g., process descriptions, documentation standards, protocols, standard operating procedures [SOPs], critical utilities, process equipment, automated manufacturing systems, validation programming information and validation status information) are detailed and mapped out from the start of the validation phase in a large and intricate site validation master plan (VMP). This approach does not necessarily employ a validation team, which would help ensure the planned project delivers the necessary evidence to support facility and process approval. Additionally, because the VMP is used as a repository for all validation-impacting information, it is hard to compile, control and maintain, making it difficult to complete projects. Critically, the VMP is not a flexible document and needs constant revisions as the construction of the facility progresses, which can lead to delays in golive dates and product manufacture. There is usually little or no link to process development and process understanding; because important validation decisions are not necessarily based on the critical quality attributes of the product to be manufactured in the facility. This can result in non-valueadded validation effort and missing required work.

A modular approach


Figure 1: Traditional facility validation programmes.
The drawbacks of traditional facility validation methods result from a disparity between drug/process development, facility validation and ongoing facility compliance management. A carefully planned modular approach, however, can avoid these issues and increase the efficiency of achieving regulatory approval, thus improving the ability to complete projects on time, as well as assisting cost containment and supporting the use of standardized methods for enhanced documentation accuracy. A modular approach will also help minimize exposure to surplus information, while optimizing the level of control and ease of managing the compliance inspection process; for existing facilities, it minimizes the impact of change.

Compliance

Implementing a modular validation platform results in a validation process that is compliant with all current regulations, and provides a springboard for future-orientated regulatory initiatives. This includes standards and directives such as the FDA's Pharmaceutical cGMPS for the 21st Century — A RiskBased Approach and the ICH Q8, Q9 and Q10 guidelines, which demonstrate regulators' desire to use risk-management strategies to support all manufacturing and control activities.The ASTM E2500 guideline is already taking this a step further by steering validation towards a continuous verification process that is inherently risk-based, underpinning all decisions with detailed process and product knowledge.1


ADVERTISEMENT

post a comment
Your email address will NOT be published.
appears with your comment
read our privacy policy
Note: does not support HTML
All comments submitted are subject to review, and may be delayed before posting. We reserve the right not to post comments.
LCGC E-mail Newsletters

Subscribe: Click to learn more about the newsletter
| Weekly
| Monthly
|Monthly
| Weekly

Survey
When sourcing raw materials and non-GMP intermediates or other chemicals, where are the majority of your suppliers located?
In the United States
In Western Europe
In Central and Eastern Europe
In Japan
In India
In China
In the United States
19%
In Western Europe
21%
In Central and Eastern Europe
3%
In Japan
2%
In India
28%
In China
27%
View Results
Eric LangerOutsourcing OutlookEric Langer A Bio View of Outsourcing
Patricia Van ArnumIngredients InsiderPatricia Van Arnum Advances in Custom Synthesis
Faiz kermaniSpotlightFaiz Kermani Reinvigorating European R&D innovation
Faiz kermaniStatistical Solutions Lynn Torbeck%RSD: Friend or Foe?
Life After Big Pharma
PhRMA Details Its Proposal for Internet and Social-Media Standards
The Unregulated Regulator
Rx-360 Goals Get off the Ground
US and Europe At Risk from Substandard Medicines
FindPharma Custom Search
Source: Pharmaceutical Technology Europe,
Click here