Method transfer types

Redox enzymes have been assembled in a monolayer on the solid surface by a potential-assisted self-assembling method as well as a thiol-gold selfassembling method. These enzymes are electronically communicated with the solid substrate through a molecular interface of conducting polymer and a covalently bound mediator. Electron transfer type of enzyme sensors have been fabricated by the self-assembling methods. 

Electron Transfer Type of Dehydrogenase Sensors To fabricate an enzyme sensor for fructose, we found that a molecular interface of polypyrrole was not sufficient to realize high sensitivity and stability. We thus incorporated mediators (ferricyanide and ferrocene) in the enzyme-interface for the effective and the most sensitive detection of fructose in two different ways (l) two step method first, a monolayer FDH was electrochemically adsorbed on the electrode surface by electrostatic interaction, then entrapment of mediator and electro-polymerization of pyrrole in thin membrane was simultaneously performed in a separate solution containing mediator and pyrrole, (2) one-step method co-immobilization of mediator and enzyme and polymerization of pyrrole was simultaneously done in a solution containing enzyme enzyme, mediator and pyrrole as illustrated in Fig.22. 

Method Technique Receiving Site familiarity (API/dosage form) Complexity of Technique Risk Assessment Supporting Rationale Transfer Type... 

This is a similar approach to that articulated by USP, where transfer waivers can be utilised if the receiving site is considered to be qualified to use the method(s), without comparison or generation of inter-laboratory comparative data. The different types of testing associated with the different types of method transfer, together with acceptance criteria are summarised in Table 5 (Raska et al., 2010). 

Table 5. Typical Analytical Testing and Acceptance Criteria for Different Types of Method Transfer (adapted from Raska et al., 2012)...

Different types of CE instruments have different thermostating systems, have different detectors, use capillary of different lengths, have detection windows at different distances from the injection point, and have different injectors. Thus, additional tests may be required after a method transfer. 

Since the aim of the protocol is to ensure the mitigation of problems, the essential elements of the protocol consists of sections that include (a) an Introduction, (b) treatment and disposition of data, (c) types of methods being transferred, (d) materials, reference standards, and reagents being used, (e) recommended type of equipment, (f) sample handling, (g) predetermined acceptance criteria, and (h) an Acknowledgment section. An example of a typical table of contents (TOC) of an analytical methods transfer protocol is discussed in Table 16-2. 

One deals with the ab initio description of electronic excited states. These include the attachment or removal of electrons, the account of direct or inverse photo-emission spectra, and the electron-hole excitations of the d -> d or charge transfer type. Advanced methods are presently under development to account for them the GW method, the SIC method, the LDA-I-U method, etc. However, they imply an increased computation cost, which is not routinely accessible for complex systems, such as most oxide surfaces. These methods are also expected to open the field of strongly correlated materials, among which transition metal oxides, which have important technological applications high-Tc superconductivity, giant magneto-resistance, etc. 

Another ironic feature of the increasing emphasis on robustness to ensure ease of method transfer is that the quality of HPLC stationary phases is improving. The quality arises from better batch-to-batch reproducibility and more homogeneous surfaces on which only one type of retention mechanism may operate. The irony lies in the fact that in the past it might have been the flaw (e.g. residual silanols on a reversed-phase material) that was responsible for the last bit of selectivity that was needed to achieve a very difficult separation. Now with improved stationary phases, there may be a need for more complex mobile phases thereby compromising robustness once more. 

However, the (undisclosed) proprietary immobilization process appears to modify the enantiomer separation characteristics as compared to the coated versions [145, 146]. Ghanem et al. compared the chiral recognition profile of a coated CHIRALPAK AD CSPs with that of the immobilized version, employing hexane/ 2-propanol containing TEA (0.1%) as mobile phase [145]. They reported superior enantiomer separation for the coated CSP, with some analytes failing to resolve on the immobilized version. These differences in the enantiomer separation capacity of coated and immobilized polysaccharide-type CSPs may complicate attempts at direct method transfer. 

Before the performance of method transfer activities involving protocols and acceptance criteria, it was customary for a receiving laboratory to repeat some or all of the validation experiments. This laboratory was thereby deemed to be qualified as described above. The choice of validation parameter(s) depends highly on the type of method being transferred. For example, content uniformity assays to determine consistency of product potency depend heavily on the method and system precision. As a second example, a determination of trace impurities in an API could not be reproduced between two sites if their instruments did not yield similar limits of detection and limits of quantitation. A detailed discussion on the rational choice of validation parameters that would need to be repeated by the receiving laboratory is beyond the scope of this chapter. The reader is referred to the method validation chapter by Crowther et al. for additional information on this subject. 

Eurachem guide [285], which discusses when, why, and how methods should be validated. However, for the pharmaceutical industry, the main reference source is the ICH Guidelines [286], which provides recommendations on the various characteristics to be tested for the most common types of analytical procedures developed in a pharmaceutical laboratory. The main characteristics of any analytical method to be tested are specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, solution stability, limits of detection and quantification, and robustness. Specific aspects should be considered for a CE method including method transfer between instrument manufacturers, reagent purity and source, electrolyte stability, capillary treatment and variations in new capillaries, and buffer depletion. Fabre and Altria [284] discuss CE method validation in more detail and include a number of examples of validated CE methods for pharmaceutical analysis. Included in Table 4.3 are a number of validated pharmaceutical assay methods. 

The FDA Guidance document (FDA 2001) describes a circumstance somewhat related to abbreviated validations but one that is applicable to modifications of existing fully validated methods. The validation procedures required for such circumstances are called partial validations. In general, the required components of a partial validation wiU depend on what type of modification was made and the vahdation parameters that may have been affected the requirements can range from as little as one determination of intra-assay accuracy and precision to a nearly full vahdation. Examples of the modifications to existing methods that require some form of partial vahdation (FDA 2001) include method transfers from one laboratory to another (but it has been argued that this circumstance is... 

Many enzymes use redox centers to store and transfer electrons during catalysis. These redox centers can be composed of metals such as iron or cobalt, or organic cofactors such as quinones, amino acid radicals, or flavins. In order to fully appreciate the catalytic mechanisms of these enzymes, it is often necessary to determine the free energy required to reduce or oxidize their protein redox centers. This is called the redox potential. The measurement of enzyme redox potentials can be performed by either direct or indirect electrochemical methods. The type of electrochemistry suitable for a particular protein system is simply dictated by the accessibility of its redox center to the electrode surface. Because most reactions catalyzed by enzymes occur within hydrophobic pockets of the protein, the redox sites are often far from the surface of the protein. Unless an electron transfer path exists from the protein surface to the redox center, it is not feasible to use direct electrochemistry to measure the redox potential. Since only a few enzymes (most notably certain heme-containing enzymes) have such electron transferring paths and... 

Market simulations are run many times for a range of initial aquifer levels, with input obtained via Monte Carlo sampling from a joint, multivariate distribution created from inflow and withdrawal data. Simulated supply and demand conditions are translated into market prices for each transfer type, and the expected cost and reliability of various combinations, or portfolios, of transfer types can be computed. The transfer types are specified for each scenario, and a sequential search method is then used to identify minimum cost portfolios that meet designated supply-reliability constraints (Figure 3). Differences in the cost of the respective portfolios indicate the value of including each transaction type in the market, as well as how the cost of market-based approaches compares to the development of the least expensive new water source (Carrizo Aquifer). 

I. THE DRUG DEVELOPMENT PROCESS I. TYPES OF METHOD TRANSFER... 

---