Method validation phase

During the method validation phase, the calibration, using the CS solutions, is repeated each day over at least one week to establish both the within-day and the day-to-day components of the variability. To this end, at least 6 CS, evenly spread over the concentration range, must be repeatedly run (m = 8-10 is usual), to yield n 50 measurements per day. If there are no problems with linearity and heteroscedacity, and if the precision is high (say, CV < 2-5%, depending on the context), the number of repeats m per concentration may be reduced from the second day onwards (m = 2 - 3 is reasonable). The reasoning behind... 

The trend logio(CV) vs logjo(c) appears reasonably linear (compare this with Ref. 177 some points are from the method validation phase where various impurities were purposely increased in level). A linear regression line B) is used to represent Ae average trend (slope = -0.743). The target level for any given impurity is estimated by a simple model. Because the author-... 

B. Method Capability Assessment METHOD VALIDATION PHASE METHOD TRANSFER PHASE... 

In the second phase, analysts in participating laboratories prepare and analyze a minimum of two conttol samples and two samples fortified at the proposed tolerance concenttation. This phase allows analysts to become familiar with the method before the analysis of samples that will be part of the method validation. Results from the second phase should demonsuate that the control samples are without interference and that the analysts in the participating laboratories can achieve acceptable recovery of analyte from the samples. It is not uncommon for an analyst to have to repeat the second phase several times before adequate results are obtained. Failure at this phase of the trial can cause a method to fail the Uial. Often the problems are related to a poorly written SOP that does not adequately describe the procedure. 

XRPD as a stability-indicating assay method When the phase identity, or degree of crystallinity (or lack thereof), of a drug substance is important to its performance in a drug product, XRPD can serve as a vital stability-indicating assay method. There is no doubt that XRPD can be validated to the status of any other stability-indicating assay, and that one can use the usual criteria of method validation to establish the performance parameters of the method. This aspect would... 

Dewe, W., Govaerts, B., Boulanger, B., Rozet, E., Chiap, P., Hubert, P. Risk management for analytical methods Conciliating the objectives of the pre-study and in-study validation phases. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. System, 85, 2007, 262-268. 

During phase III the analytical laboratory performs systematic methods validation and continues with product characterization. A suitable formulation or a formulation candidate is in place and testing for stability continues. Production evaluates the consistency of the manufacturing process, which should be at a scale capable of delivering commercial quantities. Advanced studies are continued or initiated to evaluate chronic toxicology and reproductive side effects in animal models. Parallel to phase III studies, preparations are made for the submission of the BLA. 

DQ is performed by the supplier of the equipment or system at the supplier s factory as part of the factory acceptance test (FAT). IQ (based on site acceptance test—SAT), OQ, and PQ are performed on-site at the GMP facility. For a GMP manufacturing facility, the validation activities include the facility design, FTVAC system, environment control, laboratory and production equipment, water system, gases and utilities, cleaning, and analytical methods. Validation protocols (IQ, QQ, and PQ) are prepared for each item, listing all critical steps and acceptance criteria. Deviations are reviewed and resolved before the validation activity proceeds to the next phase. 

The objective of this present work was to investigate the feasibility of using GPC/DV for absolute molecular weight determination of hydroxypropylated lignins. In order to verify the validity of the universal calibration method, vapor phase osmometry (VPO) was used to provide reference number average molecular weight values. Comparisons with LALLS results have also been made and will be reported in another publication. 

The basic criterion for successful validation was that a method should come within 25% of the "true value" at the 95% confidence level. To meet this criterion, the protocol for experimental testing and method validation was established with a firm statistical basis. A statistical protocol provided methods of data analysis that allowed the accuracy criterion to be evaluated with statistical parameters estimated from the laboratory test data. It also gave a means to evaluate precision and bias, independently and in combination, to determine the accuracy of sampling and analytical methods. The substances studied in the second phase of the study are summarized in Table I. 

Analytical methods used to determine purity and potency of an experimental API that is very early in development will need a less rigorous method validation exercise than would be required for a quality control laboratory method at the manufacturing site. An early phase project may have only a limited number of lots to be tested and the testing may be performed in only one laboratory by a limited number of analysts. The ability of the laboratory to control the method and its use is relatively high, particularly if laboratory leadership is clear in its expectations for the performance of the work. 

TABLE 4 Assay Method Validation in Early Phase for Drug Substance and Drug Product... 

An example of the minimum requirement for potency assay of the drug substance and drug product is tabulated in Table 4. Note that the postponement of intermediate precision is aligned with previous discussion that the use of early phase analytical method resides mainly in one laboratory and is used only by a very limited number of analysts. Each individual company s phased method validation procedures and processes will vary, but the overall philosophy is the same. The extent of and expectations from early phase method validation are lower than the requirements in the later stages of development. The validation exercise becomes larger and more detailed and collects a larger body of data to ensure that the method is robust and appropriate for use at the commercial site. 

However, certain fundamental concepts of cGMPs must be applied regardless of the details of the phased appropriate method validation strategy used. Examples are (1) proper documentation, (2) change control, (3) deviations, (4) equipment and utilities qualification, and (5) proper training. 

System suitability. During the robustness testing of method validation, critical method parameters such as mobile phase composition and column temperature are varied to mimic the day-to-day variability. Therefore, the system suitability results from these robustness experiments should reflect the expected range for the system suitability results. As a result, system suitability results in these method validation experiments are very useful in determining the system suitability... 

The ultimate objective of the method validation process is to produce the best analytical results possible. To obtain such results, all of the variables of the method should be considered, including sampling procedure, sample preparation steps, type of chromatographic sorbent, mobile phase, and detection. The extent of the validation rigor depends on the purpose of the method. The primary focus of this section will be the validation of chromatographic methods. 

Author, year [Ref] Compounds IS Sample Extraction procedure Stationary phase Mobile phase IM/analyzer (detection mode) Method validation... 

Sample Extraction procedure Stationary phase Mobile phase mode) Method validation... 

---