Documentation bioanalytical study reports

During the 1990 Washington Conference on Analytical Methods Validation Bioavailability, Bioequivalence and Pharmacokinetic Studies [1], parameters that should be used for method validation were defined. The final report of this conference is considered the most comprehensive document on the validation of bioanalytical methods. Many multinational pharmaceutical companies and contract research organizations contributed to its final draft. This scientific meeting was sponsored by the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists (AAPS), the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The conference report has been used as a reference by bioanalytical laboratories and regulatory agencies worldwide. 

The bioanalytical laboratory should have a written set of standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure a complete system of quality control and assurance. The SOPs should cover all aspects of analysis from the time the sample is collected and reaches the laboratory until the results of the analysis are reported. All deviations from SOPs must be authorized by the study director and documented in the raw data. Significant changes in established SOPs must be properly authorized in writing by management. 

To avoid bias in the evaluation of the actual precision and accuracy of the bioanalytical method, the results of all QC samples assayed within accepted analytical runs should be reported and taken into consideration in the descriptive statistical analysis. Exclusion of values should be considered only in the case of a documented analytical problem (e.g. chromatographic interference) and the reason for the exclusion should be reported. This applies to both the pre-study validation of the method and the study phase itself. 

It is very likely that incomplete or missing records would prevent the verification of data integrity. Source records should be complete to facilitate an understanding of actual study conduct for critical phases of method development, method validation, and subject sample analysis. The records should confirm whether the testing was conducted in an appropriate manner, with well-designed and optimally controlled experiments. The documentation of actual laboratory events should demonstrate that the quantitative measures are suitable to achieve the objectives of the clinical or nonclinical protocol. The records should confirm that the reported results accurately reflect the actual concentration of the analyte in the biological matrix. It should be noted that the failure to adequately document critical details of study conduct has resulted in rejection of bioanalytical data for regulatory purposes. 

In cases where the study sponsor or pharmacokineticist5 assumes responsibility for selecting samples for repeat analysis, the bioanalytical laboratory should require and maintain written documentation of the request in the study file. The written documentation should identify the samples selected by the sponsor or pharmacokineticist, along with the basis for the selection. Ideally, the selection criteria used by the sponsor or pharmacokineticist should be provided to the bioanalytical laboratory in advance of sample analysis and maintained in the study file. Similarly, if the sponsor or pharmacokineticist assumes responsibility for determining the value reported for pharmacokinetic calculations, the SOP followed by the sponsor or pharmacokineticist in this regard should also be provided to the bioanalytical laboratory to facilitate a complete record for reconstructing the study conduct. 

If a lack of accuracy is not due to assay performance (i.e., analyte instability or interconversion) then the reason for the lack of accuracy should be investigated and its impact on the study assessed. The extent and nature of these experiments is dependent on the specific sample being addressed and should provide sufficient confidence that the concentration being reported is accurate. The results of incurred sample reanalysis studies may be documented in the final bioanalytical or clinical report for the study, and/or as an addendum to the method validation report . 

The FDA Guidance document (FDA 2001) provides a good model for analytical reports in general. Flowever, since the publication of that document additional details are commonly addressed (Viswanathan 2007). Table 10.8 was drawn from these publications and although the documents specifically address reporting requirements for bioanalyt-ical analysis in support of drug development studies, they provide an excellent overview of the requirements for a analytical report in general. 

---