GMP News, GMP guidelines, GMP Violations, GMP warnings A Public Health Global News Portal

Welcome to www.seekgmp.com FDA, WHO, EU, TGA, CDSCO guidelines...and GMP Violations news/warning letters..

150000+ Industry Leaders already read it everyday

  • This is default featured slide 1 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • GMP Trends, Quality Tools

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • GMP News drifts on Market and economy

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • This is default featured slide 4 title

    Go to Blogger edit html and find these sentences.Now replace these sentences with your own descriptions.This theme is Bloggerized by Lasantha Bandara - Premiumbloggertemplates.com.

  • What to Ask Your Doctor Before Taking Opioids

    Every patient should ask questions when getting a new prescription. This is especially important when your doctor, dentist or other health care professional prescribes you an opioid, such as hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine and morphine. What should you ask?

Showing posts with label Downloads. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Downloads. Show all posts

Monday, August 28, 2017

Statement of Non-Compliance report with GMP Violations @ Dr.reddy's Lab










Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories on Thursday (Aug 10th) said the German regulator had not renewed GMP (good manufacturing practice) compliance certificate of its formulations manufacturing unit-2 in Bachupally, Hyderabad, following an inspection.

Pending revocation of the non-compliance notification, the plant will not be able to make any further dispatch to the European Union, DRL said in a stock exchange filing.

The drugmaker’s German subsidiary betapharm Arzneimittel GmbH had received a communication from the Regulatory Authority of Germany (Regierung von Oberbayern) on Wednesday (Aug 9th) night. The GMP compliance certificate in respect of the formulations manufacturing unit-2 plant in Bachupally is not renewed consequent to the recent inspection of the plant, the subsidiary had informed.

For the non-compliance notification to be revoked, another inspection would be required, which has to be initiated by an invitation from betapharm, DRL said.

The filing did not share details of violations leading to the certificate not getting renewed. A spokesperson of the company said the regulator had made some observations, details of which would be available once the document, in German, is translated.

Report for the Miryalaguda facility, which the company said indicated closure of the audit.



Source: The Hindu, EMA



www.gmpviolations.com GMP News, GMP guidelines, GMP Violations, GMP warnings, GMP Trends. A Public Health Global News Portal. (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed/ experts experiences sharing.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images & content posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm. The Article posted under public health importance news. Please ensure the guideline as per Regulatory agencies.
Share:

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

Drug Supply Chain Security Act Implementation: Identification of Suspect Product and Notification Guidance for Industry


The FDA has published the Guidance for Industry "Drug Supply Chain Security Act Implementation: Identification of Suspect Product and Notification".
Share:

Wednesday, February 1, 2017

European Medicines Agencies and PIC/S agree on Audit Cooperation


 PIC/S & EMA


















PIC/S has published a "Letter of Agreement between the EEA Heads of Medicines Agencies and the Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme" on their website. The objective of the agreement is the exchange of information after audits among authorities and joint trainings for GxP inspectors.
Share:

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Handling of Reports of Suspected Quality Defects in Medicinal Products

Image result for guideline

GDP Compliance
 : EMA
Active substances and medicinal products shall be distributed in accordance with good distribution practices. Member States shall enter the certificates of good distribution practices which they issue in the Union database (EudraGMDP) in accordance with Art. 111(6) of the Directive 2001/83/EC as amended.

The Community formats for the GDP Certificate for Medical Products and for active substances are published in the Compilation of Community Procedures, which can be found at the following location:

The EudraGMDP Database contains GMP and GDP Compliance and Non-Compliance reports. So far a lot of GMP information has been published by the EU authorities but less about GDP compliance. Every EU Member State Inspectorate is asked to publish their GMP and GDP Inspection results. This will allow other authorities and industry to check the compliance status of certain companies.

A number of EU authorities have not published their GDP data information yet. However, progress can be seen also with regard to GDP compliance certificates and GDP non-compliance reports. From January 2016 until today six GDP non-compliance reports have been published. The Czech authority published three, the Danish authority two and a German inspectorate one GDP non-compliance report.

The current reports are not very detailed. However, some information can be found. For instance, for the company Ya Medicare in Winsen Germany the inspectors state: "The company has in general failed to comply with good distribution practice as they did not use the described quality system. The company has written procedures but was not able to show an adequate documentation for acting according to the procedures. Further the company does not have relevant documentation for storage and transport under correct temperature, a system for ensuring that they only obtain their supplies of medicine from companies with a valid WDA/MIA or a system for ensuring that they only supply medicines to companies with a valid WDA or a valid license to supply medicinal products to the public." The information provided in the report is very helpful in order to understand the nature of the non-compliance.



1. Introduction 
1.1 One of the main purposes of the GMP/GDP Inspectors Working Group is to establish and maintain a system for mutual recognition of national inspections in respect of the manufacture and, where relevant, wholesale distribution of medicinal products and for the administrative collaboration between Member States (MS) of the European Economic Area (EEA). The general requirements for national pharmaceutical inspectorates are to fulfil the requirements of national legislation and of the relevant European Directives for EEA countries. Specific obligations of inspections as contained in national law and if any European Directives must be included in the national Inspectorate’s quality systems.

 1.2 This document outlines the quality system requirements for GMP pharmaceutical inspectorates. It is intended that each GMP pharmaceutical inspectorate uses the document as the basis for developing and implementing its quality system and for preparing the quality manual. In addition to providing a basis for self-assessment and a reference document for use by external assessors, establishing and maintaining an effective quality system will generate confidence within and between GMP national pharmaceutical inspectorates in the assessment of compliance with good manufacturing practice and/or good wholesale distribution practice.

1.3 National GMP pharmaceutical inspectorates, the European Commission (EC), the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) and the pharmaceutical Inspection Cooperation Scheme – (PIC/S) should co-operate with one another in exchanging experiences in the maintenance and operation of quality systems and in the further development of this document. 

1.4 Only on voluntary basis, this document could be useful for (other) inspectorates assessing compliance with GXP or for the inspection of pharmacies.

 1.5 In preparing this text, the working group was advised by: EN ISO/IEC 17020:2005 General criteria for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspections; EN ISO/IEC 17023:2006 General requirements for bodies operating assessment and certification/ registration of quality system; ISO 9001-2000 Quality management systems-Requirements;

 ISO 9004-2000 Quality management systems: guidelines for performance improvements; 

ISO 19011 : 2002 Guidelines for quality and/or environmental managerial systems auditing; 

PI 002-1 : 2000 Recommendations on quality system requirements for pharmaceutical inspectorates; Compilation of Community Procedures on Inspections and Exchange of Information 

EMA/572454/2014 Rev 17 Page 7/253 May 2001 Revised Compilation of Community procedures on administrative collaboration and harmonisation of inspections; 1998 Proceedings of the PIC-PIC/S seminar on quality systems for pharmaceutical inspectorates.


Handling of Reports of Suspected Quality Defects in Medicinal Products
Procedure for Handling Rapid Alerts Arising from Quality Defects

Download:  Full guideline

Quality Systems Framework for GMP Inspectorates 
www.gmpviolations.com GMP News, GMP guidelines, GMP Violations, GMP warnings, GMP Trends. A Public Health Global News Portal (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Friday, December 30, 2016

Revision of PIC/S GMP Guide PE 009-13 GUIDE TO GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE

Related image

Geneva, 22 December 2016: the following Chapters of the PIC/S GMP Guide have been revised:
  • Chapter 1 on “Quality Management” (which has become “Pharmaceutical Quality Systems”); 
  • Chapter 2 on “Personnel”;
  • Chapter 6 on “Quality Control”; 
  • Chapter 7 on “Contract Manufacture and Analysis” (which has become “Outsources Activities”).
The revised Chapters 1, 2, 6 & 7 of the PIC/S GMP Guide are based on the equivalent Chapters of the EU GMP Guide with some minor differences in terms of language. Chapters 1, 2 & 7 have been aligned to ICH Q10 and the principles of “Pharmaceutical Quality System” have been integrated. A section on consultants has been added in Chapter 2. The scope of Chapter 7 has been expanded beyond the scope of “contract manufacture and analysis”. Both Chapters 1 and 7 have been renamed to reflect the changes. In Chapter 6, all sections have been reviewed and amended and a new section on “Technical transfer of testing methods” has been added.
The revision has been successfully completed by the PIC/S Sub-Committee on the Harmonisation of GM(D)P, led by Paul Gustafson (Canada/RORB). The revised GMP Guide (PE 009-13) will enter into force on 1st January 2017. All non-EEA Participating Authorities of PIC/S (and Applicants) have been invited to transpose the revised Chapters of the PIC/S GMP Guide into their own GMP Guides.
1.GUIDE TO GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS
     Download Link
2.GUIDE TO GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS
  PART II  Download Link
3.GUIDE TO GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE FOR MEDICINAL PRODUCTS       
   ANNEXES
1.    Annex 1 (Manufacture of sterile medicinal products)
2.    Annex 2 (Manufacture of biological medicinal substances and products for human use)
3.    Annex 3 (Manufacture of radiopharmaceuticals)
4.    Annex 4 (Manufacture of veterinary medicinal products other than immunologicals)
5.    Annex 5 (Manufacture of immunological veterinary medical products)
6.    Annex 6 (Manufacture of medicinal gases)
7.    Annex 7 (Manufacture of herbal medicinal products)
8.    Annex 8 (Sampling of starting and packaging materials)
9.    Annex 9 (Manufacture of liquids, creams and ointments)
10. Annex 10 (Manufacture of pressurised metered dose aerosol preparations for inhalation)
11. Annex 11 (Computerised systems)
12. Annex 12 (Use of ionising radiation in the manufacture of medicinal products)
13. Annex 13 (Manufacture of investigational medicinal products)
14. Annex 14 (Manufacture of medicinal products derived from human blood or plasma)
15. Annex 15 (Qualification and validation)
16. Annex 16 [Qualified person and batch release]*
17. Annex 17 (Parametric release)
18. Annex 18 [GMP Guide for active pharmaceutical ingredients]**
19. Annex 19 (Reference and retention samples)
20. Annex 20 (Quality risk management)***
·         Appendix I: Risk Management Methods and Tools Basic Risk Management Facilitation Methods
·         Appendix II: Potential Applications For Quality Risk Management


www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Sunday, December 25, 2016

EMA issues new Guideline on "Chemistry of Active Substances"

Image result for european medicines agency logo

A medicinal product authorization application requires comprehensive information on origin and quality of an active substance. What information is required was defined in two Guidelines so far: the Guideline "Chemistry of Active Substances" (3AQ5a) from 1987 and the "Guideline on the Chemistry of New Active Substances" from 2004. Because both Guidelines' content do not take into account the ICH Guidelines Q8-11 issued in the meantime and do thus not meet the current state of the art in sciences and in regulatory practice, the EMA Quality Working Party (QWP) developed an updated document  entitled "Guideline on the chemistry of active substances" (EMA/454576/2016), which was issued on 21 November.
The new Guideline describes the information on new or already existing active substances required in an authorization dossier. In the context of this Guideline "already existing" ingredients are those that are used in a product already authorized in the EU.
In detail the information and data regarding the substance have to be included in the following chapters of the CTD:

3.2.S.1: Nomenclature, information on the structural formula, pharmacological relevant physicochemical properties.

3.2.S.2: Information on the manufacturer(s), contractor(s), testing facilities etc.; description of the manufacturing processes (schematic representation with flow diagram as well as narrative); where appropriate detailed information on alternative manufacturing processes, for recovering of solvents and for routine reprocessing. Information with regard to re-working should not be included in the authorization dossier.

3.2.S.2.3: Information for controlling the material used during the manufacture and for its specification (incl. identity test). This paragraph is more comprehensive in the new Guideline compared with its predecessor and takes into account the requirements of the ICH Guideline Q11. This Guideline comprises requirements for the following materials: materials from biological sources, those used for the chemical synthesis of starting materials, materials from herbal origin, excipients like solvents (incl. water), reagents, catalysts etc.

3.2.S.2.4: Information on critical process steps (the Guideline comprises examples for these critical steps) as well as on quality and control of isolated intermediates within the synthesis steps. All information has to be provided with the appropriate justifications.

3.2.S.2.5: Information on Process Validation
3.2.S.2.6: Information on the development of the manufacturing process. Here all changes have to be described that were performed during the various phases (pre-clinical, clinical, scale-up, pilot and possibly production phase) of the process for new active substances. For already existing active substances available in production scale no information on process development is needed.

3.2.S.3: Information on Characterisation. Comprehensive information on the elucidation of the structure of the active substance, its physico-chemical properties and its impurities profile have to be provided. Further, the mutagenic potential of degradation products has to be considered. The analytical methods have to be described and their suitability has to be justified.

3.2.S.4: Information on the control of active substances. The analytical procedures and their validation have to be described. Data for the analytical method development should be provided if critical aspects of the analysis regarding the active substance's specification need to be clarified. Analytical data are necessary for batches for pre-clinical and clinical studies as well as for pilot batches which are not less than 10% of the maximum production scale. The substance's specification and its control strategy have to be justified on the basis of data from the pre-clinical and clinical phase and, if available, from the production phase.

3.2.S.5: Information on reference materials. If no Chemical Reference Substances (CRS) of the European Pharmacopoeia - counting as completely qualified reference standards - are used, comprehensive information on the analytical and physico-chemical characterization are required even for established primary standards.

3.2.S.6: Information on Container Closure System. Here a brief description is sufficient. However, if a Container-/Closure System is critical for the substance's quality, its suitability has to be proven and justified. A reference to stability data can be used as supporting information.

3.2.S.7: Information on Stability. A detailed description of the stability studies carried out and the protocol used as well as a summary of the results are expected. Information on stress studies and conclusions on storage conditions and re-test dates or expiry dates are also to be made. This does not apply to substances monographed in the European Pharmacopoeia. If no re-test period or expiry date of batches on the production scale is available at the time of submission of the application, a stability commitment has to be attached with a post-approval stability protocol. The analytical methods have to be described.
The Guideline's provisions also apply to an Active Substance Master File (ASMF) or to a Certificate of Suitability (CEP). They apply to active substances that have undergone development in a "traditional" way or according to the "enhanced" approach. The provisions of the ICH Guidelines Q8-11 have to be taken into account.

The Guideline is not applicable to active substances of herbal, biological and biotechnological origin as well as to radiolabelled products and radiopharmaceuticals.

The Guideline "Guideline on the chemistry of active substances" (EMA/454576/2016) becomes effective six months after issuing, which means in May 2017.

www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Q11 Implementation Working Group Development and Manufacture of Drug Substances (Chemical Entities and Biotechnological/Biological Entities)

Image result for ich logo

ICH Q11: Draft Q&A Document Reaches Step 2b

The ICH Q11 Questions and Answers (Q&As) on the Development and Manufacture of Drug Substances (Chemical Entities and Biotechnological/Biological Entities) regarding the selection and justification of starting materials, reached Step 2b of the ICH process and enters the consultation period.
 
The Q&As are intended to provide additional clarification on the considerations for the selection of starting materials and on the information that should be provided in marketing authorisation applications and/or Master Files. The focus of the Q&A document is on chemical entity drug substances.
ICH points out that “Applicant” is used throughout the Q&A document and should be interpreted broadly to refer to:
  • the marketing authorization holder
  • the filing applicant
  • the drug product manufacturer, and/or
  • the drug substance manufacturer.
Designation of starting materials should be based on process knowledge for the intended commercial process. It is emphasized that all of the general principles in ICH Q11 Section 5 should always be considered holistically, together with the clarifications in this Q&A document, rather than applying a single general principle or Q&A clarification in isolation.
Comments on the draft document can be submitted until January 31, 2017. A final version (Step 4) of the Q&A document can be expected in November 2017.

Source:
ICH: Newsroom
www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

EMA revises Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products

EU flag

EMA revises Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products

The EMA (European Medicines Agency) has published the revised version of its “Guideline on process validation for finished products – information and data to be provided in regulatory submissions“ on 21 November 2016.
 
The amendment is considered to be minor and only comprises an update to the definition for “on-line measurement" included in the glossary. A consultation phase was considered to be unnecessary as the document is not intended as a full revision of the guideline.
Source:
www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Friday, December 2, 2016

CDSCO Informs Abbott, Glaxo and Pfizer of Outcome of Review of FDC Data


Image result for cdsco

The Central Drugs Standard Control Organization (CDSCO) has contacted 283 drugmakers including Abbott, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer about its review of their fixed-dose combination (FDC) products. The review looked at the safety and efficacy of FDCs sold without approval at the national level.
CDSCO and a FDC-focused expert committee conducted the review to assess whether applications filed by companies supported the continued sale of certain products, despite them never having been approved by the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI). In each case, the reviewers have issued either a no objection certificate for the continued manufacturing and marketing of the FDC, a show cause notice or a letter requesting the running of a Phase IV trial.
The notice released publicly by CDSCO lists the companies that have been the subject of review and how many letters they have received, but lacks details of the FDCs assessed and the conclusions reached by the regulator. The notice illustrates the scale of the task undertaken by CDSCO. With the review covering 283 companies, some of which are subject to many assessments, CDSCO sent out close to 1,000 letters detailing its findings.
Publication of the letters moves CDSCO a step closer to its long-standing goal of rationalizing the FDC market in India. In the past, companies introduced FDCs without first securing approval from DCGI. This led to FDCs with questionable safety and therapeutic rationale being available in India. CDSCO wrote to manufacturers in January 2013 seeking data to support the continued use of their FDCs. The letters sent out this week are the result of reviews of data received following that request.
Downloads: CDSCO Alert, Other

www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

FDA releases Guidance on Contract Manufacturer Quality Agreements


Image result for fda guidance

On 22 November, 2016, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finalized its long awaited Guidance on Contract Manufacturer Quality Agreements.
 
The guidance describes FDA’s current thinking on defining, establishing, and documenting manufacturing activities of the parties involved in contract drug manufacturing subject to CGMP requirements. Owners and contract facilities can draw on quality management principles to carry out the complicated process of contract drug manufacturing by defining, establishing, and documenting their activities for ensuring compliance with CGMP and to ensure the quality, safety, and effectiveness of drugs.
Since the draft release in May 2013 FDA needed to clarify some special areas.
In particular, our revisions clarified the scope and applicability of the guidance and key terms used in the guidance.
Regarding scope and applicability, we have clarified that the guidance is limited to commercial manufacturing activities. Although the principles articulated may be useful in approaching quality agreements for other kinds of activities, such as clinical research, development, or distribution, these are outside the scope of this particular document.
Especially the terms “owner” and “contract facility” have to been defined clearly. Some commenters recommended to use “contract giver” and “contrat acceptor” instead. According to the FDA, these terms do not align with the agency’s goal of showing how the parties to a contract manufacturing arrangement can work together to define agreements.
Per FDA's recommendations, the quality agreements should contain at least the following sections:
  • The purpose and scope of the contract agreement
  • The terms of the agreement, including its effective dates
  • Terms for dispute resolution
  • Responsibility of each respective party, including an overview of the subparts of the CGMP regulations
  • Change control and revision practices
It is of particular interest to FDA how each party will define the responsibilities of the Quality/Compliance Units, the facility and its equipment, the materials used in the manufacture of a product, laboratory controls, documentation of production, and change controls”, the FDA emphasized.
The 16-page guidance is being issued consistent with FDA’s good guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115) and represents the current thinking of FDA on Contract Manufacturing Arrangements for Drugs: Quality Agreements.
Source:
www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

FDA: Revision 1 of Quality Metrics Guidance


Image result for fda guidance

On 23 November 2016, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a Revision 1 of the draft guidance to Quality Metrics which was initially published in July 2015. The revision with the new title “Submission of Quality Metrics Data” came on short notice and is open for comments and suggestions until 24 January 2017.
 
What has changed?
The revised draft guidance describes FDA’s plans for an initial, voluntary phase of a quality metrics reporting program. FDA expects that this will allow the Agency to learn more about a limited set of quality metrics and associated analytics, and will help any future FDA decision-making about its quality metrics program. This second draft also provides an opportunity to gain additional perspectives from industry participants on the future use of quality metrics data. The beginning of this program is scheduled for early 2018.
After evaluating the results of the voluntary phase of the quality metrics program in 2018, FDA intends to develop a mandatory quality metrics reporting program.
In the revised draft guidance, FDA has reduced the number of metrics from four primary metrics and three optional metrics to three primary metric areas:
  • lot acceptance rate
  • invalidated out-of-specification rate
  • product quality complaint rate.
FDA continues to recognize the importance of measuring an establishment’s pharmaceutical quality system robustness and quality culture (e.g., senior management engagement, Corrective Action and Preventive Action effectiveness and continual improvement, and process capability/ performance).
Furthermore, the guidance was revised to
  • clarify the technical definitions and provide illustrative examples for specific scenarios (see Appendix B, examples)
  • contemplate submission of either product reports segmented by site or site reports segmented by product which should be publicly recognized in a quality metrics reporters list
  • allow the publishing of a quality metrics reporters list
  • address the special complexities for grouping non-application drugs products
  • define product families for finished drug products and APIs to group similar products with similar manufacturing operations
  • put into perspective special considerations regarding product quality complaints for OTC products
A Technical Specifications Document entitled ‘‘Quality Metrics Technical Conformance Guide, Version 1.0’’ was published on June 27, 2016.This guide provides technical recommendations for the submission of quality metrics data. FDA intends to publish Version 2.0 of the Technical Conformance Guide soon.
FDA anticipates that an electronic submission platform will be available to test in 2017. From January 2018 on the electronic portal should be open for voluntary submissions of data.

Source:
FDA: Quality Metrics Guidance, Revision 1

www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Sunday, November 6, 2016

Comprehensive Overview of global Initiatives on Medicine Regulation published


Image result for ema
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) has published an overview of existing international regulatory initiatives for human medicines, like for example International Council for Harmonisation (ICH), Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S), International Pharmaceutical Regulators Forum (IPRF) and International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities (ICMRA) members.

The report entitled  (click to download)  "Connecting the dots - Towards global knowledge of the international medicine regulatory landscape: mapping of international initiatives" also lists the respective international projects and details on the number and scope of global initiatives.
The aim of the mapping exercise is to raise awareness of ongoing international regulatory activities, help establish a basis for a more strategic coordination to avoid duplication of efforts, and identify possible gaps.

In the conclusion, EMA mentions that there is "a myriad of initiatives but no strategic coordination". So these mappings and analyses should "strongly support the need for a global strategy to support cooperation between international medicines regulators, to help avoid an overlap of activities and make resources available for areas where gaps still exist."


www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.) Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:

Wednesday, October 26, 2016

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning letter to Teva Pharmaceutical Works Private Limited


Image result for The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)











The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspected your drug manufacturing facility, Teva Pharmaceutical Works Pvt. Ltd. at 2100 Godollo, Tancsics Mihaly ut 82, Godollo, Hungary, from January 21 to 29, 2016. 
This warning letter summarizes significant violations of current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations for finished pharmaceuticals. See 21 CFR, parts 210 and 211. 
Because your methods, facilities, or controls for manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding do not conform to CGMP, your drug products are adulterated within the meaning of section 501(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), 21 U.S.C. 351(a)(2)(B). 
We reviewed your firm’s February 22, 2016, response in detail and acknowledge receipt of your subsequent correspondence.
Our investigators observed specific violations including, but not limited to, the following consolidated violations for more details Click Here

1.    Your firm failed to thoroughly investigate any unexplained discrepancy or failure of a batch or any of its components to meet any of its specifications, whether or not the batch has already been distributed. (21 CFR 211.192)

You did not adequately investigate media fill and sterility test failures. These failures indicate that there is a lack of adequate sterility assurance in your manufacturing facility.

a.    Media Fills

b.    Sterility Test Positive Investigations
·         . 
2.    Your firm failed to establish and follow appropriate written procedures that are designed to prevent microbiological contamination of drug products purporting to be sterile, and that include validation of all aseptic and sterilization processes. (21 CFR 211.113(b))

a.    Poor Aseptic Behavior

b.    Mechanical Failure During Media Fill

3.    Your firm failed to establish an adequate system for monitoring environmental conditions in aseptic processing areas. (21 CFR 211.42(c)(10)(iv))


4.    Your firm failed to establish laboratory controls that include scientifically sound and appropriate specifications, standards, sampling plans, and test procedures designed to assure that components, drug product containers, closures, in-process materials, labeling, and drug products conform to appropriate standards of identity, strength, quality, and purity. (21 CFR 211.160(b))

5.    Your firm failed to ensure that laboratory records included complete data derived from all tests necessary to assure compliance with established specifications and standards. (21 CFR 211.194(a))


6.    Your firm failed to exercise appropriate controls over computer or related systems to assure that only authorized personnel institute changes in master production and control records, or other records. (21 CFR 211.68(b))


7.    Your firm failed to follow adequate written procedures for the preparation of master production and control records designed to assure uniformity from batch to batch. (21 CFR 211.186(a)) 


CGMP Consultant Recommended
Based upon the nature of the violations we identified at your firm, we strongly recommend that your consultant, who should be qualified as set forth in 21 CFR 211.34, assist your firm in meeting CGMP requirements. Your consultant should provide a thorough assessment of your entire operation to identify contamination hazards, assist in remediation of sterility assurance in your facility, improve your quality system, and certify readiness. Your use of a consultant does not relieve your firm’s obligation to comply with CGMP. Your firm’s executive management remains responsible for fully resolving all deficiencies and ensuring ongoing CGMP compliance.

Additional Guidance on Aseptic Processing
See FDA’s guidance document Sterile Drug Products Produced by Aseptic Processing—Current Good Manufacturing Practice to help you meet the CGMP requirements when manufacturing sterile drugs using aseptic processing, online at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/.../Guidances/ucm070342.pdf.

Data Integrity Remediation
Your quality system does not adequately ensure the accuracy and integrity of data to support the safety, effectiveness, and quality of the drugs you manufacture. We acknowledge that you are using a consultant to audit your operation and assist in meeting FDA requirements.





www.gmpviolations.com (This story has not been edited by GMP Violations staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

 Disclaimer: The Logos/Images posted here are belongs to respective to Authority / owners of firm.
Share:
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Popular Posts

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Subscribe Free GMP Guidelines

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Followers

Printfriendly

Subscribe via email for free

Services

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Menu :
Powered by Blogger.

Visitors

    Translater

    Category

    2016 (37) 2017 (85) 2018 (10) 211 CFR (2) 211.63 (1) 21cfr (1) 483 (5) AAFA (1) Abbott (2) AboutUs (1) ALCOA (1) Alerts (2) ANDA (1) Anshu (2) Antibiotics (1) apic (1) APR17 (8) APS (2) Articles (4) AstraZeneca (1) Aug17 (2) Aurobindo (2) Author (2) Authors (8) Biocon (1) cadila (1) capa (3) CDSCO (5) Change control (1) Christian Green (1) cipla (2) Cleaning validation (1) Data Integrity (9) dec16 (15) Definations (1) Deviations (1) Donald Trump’s (2) Downloads (17) Dr.Reddy's (4) eca (1) EIR (1) Eli Lilly (1) ema (12) EU (9) FDA (73) FDA Guide (20) FEB17 (15) Genaral (1) General Health (2) GMP (1) GMP News (36) gsk (2) GuidelineEU (10) GuidelinesG (5) GuidelineW (2) GV/0117/001 (1) GVAuthors (3) Health (4) HOSPIRA (1) ICH (3) ICHGuide (3) import alert (1) India (1) ISPE (1) James Bullock (1) JAN17 (23) Jul17 (8) July17 (1) Jun17 (4) Lupin (2) Mahender (40) MAR17 (13) Mar18 (7) May17 (10) May18 (1) MHRA (3) MHRA guide (1) Mumbai (1) Mylan (4) Natco (1) News (55) Non Complinaces (1) Nov16 (5) Novartis (1) oct (1) Oct16 (10) OCT17 (1) PDA (1) Personnel (1) pfizer (1) pics (8) Picsguide (2) QbD (1) Quality Docs (1) RCA (1) Recall (1) safety (1) Sanjeev Kumar Singh (4) Sanofi (1) Sep16 (6) Siegfried Schmitt (2) SUN (1) TGA (3) TOP 10 PHARMA (1) USP (2) Validation (3) Warning Letters (44) WHO (6) zika (1)

    Sponsors

    Theme Support