Method validation specificity

The number of papers addressing method validation specifically has also been growing. Ciurczak addressed the overall problem for all types of spectroscopic methods in the industry [28]. He points out that ICH and FDA guidelines favor separation methods and do not address qualitative and quantitative methods based on spectroscopy. Conzen [29] addressed NIR... 

Analytical methods and specifications must be established and validated so as to define and control the quality and purity of the raw materials, intermediates and the finished product. For many standard chemical raw materials, the development of specifications will not be necessary as they are already published in US and European pharmacopoeia (for example, standards for water, organic solvents and various excipients). The ultimate objective of these activities is to be able to manufacture the drugs required for clinical trials in accordance with good manufacturing practice (GMP). 

Control All control points starting with the basic raw materials right through to the finished product must be identified. Descriptions of the specifications, test methods, reference standards, and methods validation data should be included. 

The simplified theory allows the time-dependent wave function to be calculated rapidly for any specified laser field. However, controlling the dynamics of the charge carriers requires the answer to an inverse question [18-22]. That is, given a specific target or objective, what is the laser field that best drives the system to that objective Several methods have been developed to address this question. This section sketches one method, valid in the weak response (perturbative) regime in which most experiments on semiconductors are performed. 

Combinations of non-selective and/or single-selective relaxation-rates, or both, with n.0.e. values may conveniently be performed with reliable results, especially when other methods seem impractical. However, these experiments are time-consuming, as they entail the determination of a rather large number of experimental values. Moreover, the n.O.e. parameters carry their own systematic and random errors, which are magnified in the calculation of interproton distances. The deuterium-substitution method requires specific deuteration at a strategic position, which, in many cases, may be inconvenient or impractical. Also, this technique is valid only when the relaxation rates obtained after deuterium substitution are at least 5% enhanced, relative to the relaxation rates of the unsubstituted compound, and it requires that, for a meaningful experiment, the following condition " be satisfied. 

A pharmacopoeial reference substance is intended for the determination of the main component of a substance or for the active ingredient of a pharmaceutical formulation which is usually present at a high proportion of the total. The reference substance is to be used as a primary standard in a specific method validated as prescribed in the ICH Guideline Validation of Analytical Procedure Methodology" (Technical Guide for the Elaboration of Monographs 1996 ICH Guideline 1997). the reproducibility of which is known. This is taken into account when the limits of acceptance (tolerance) for the substance or product are fixed (Daas and Miller 1997,1998). 

The use of reference samples for method calibration and development/validation occurred hand-in-hand with the development of all modern instrumental methods of analysis. In fact, the two developments are intimately linked with one another. As already noted, G-i and W-i (Fairbaim et al. 1951 Stevens i960) illustrate first instance of reference samples specifically developed for calibration purposes. Following that, the use of BCR-i as a reference sample throughout the lunar program (Science 1970) is a prime illustration of the quality assurance and method validation applications in large-scale inter-laboratory measurement programs. 

Validation of methods for specific uses, and developing new or improved techniques and methods. 

The MHLW described the validation protocol criteria in the 2006 official guidelines to standardize the Japanese official method for specific allergenic ingredient detection. The outlines of the validation protocol criteria for the food allergenic ingredient quantitative and qualitative detection methods are shown in Tables 4.7 and 4.8, respectively. 

For each group, one representative sample matrix has to be used for method validation. If the intended use is restricted to one of the crop groups, the method must be validated only for this group. On the other hand, the method has to be validated for all groups if the use is intended for a variety of crops that belong to two or more different groups. In addition, specific crops which are difficult to analyze due to matrix interference require individual method validation (e.g., hops, brassica varieties, bulb vegetables, herbs, tea). 

In this article, an analytical method is defined as series of procedures from receipt of a sample to final determination of the residue. Validation is the process of verifying that a method is fit for purpose. Typically, validation follows completion of the development of a method. Validated analytical data are essential for monitoring of pesticide residues and control of legal residue limits. Analysts must provide information to demonstrate that a method intended for these purposes is capable of providing adequate specificity, accuracy and precision, at relevant analyte concentrations and in all matrices analyzed. 

Verification implies that the laboratory investigates trueness and precision in particular. Elements which should be included in a full validation of an analytical method are specificity, calibration curve, precision between laboratories and/or precision within laboratories, trueness, measuring range, LOD, LOQ, robustness and sensitivity. The numbers of analyses required by the NMKL standard and the criteria for the adoption of quantitative methods are summarized in Table 10. 

In summary, the procedure of the Nordic Committee describes a comprehensive validation protocol, but it is not specially designed for pesticide residue analysis and has no preferences with regard to single- or inter-laboratory validation. Therefore, if it is applied to pesticide residue methods, some specific validation requirements should be added. The procedure clearly lists all necessary steps of validation and adjusts its recommendations to the degree of previous external validation. 

Once the determinative or confirmatory method has been developed to take full advantage of the chemical properties of the analyte molecule, a study is necessary to prove that the method is valid. Criteria for method validation are outlined in guidelines from the US FDA, US EPA, and EU. A summary of the differences in regulatory requirements for method validation is provided in Table 3. The parameters addressed by all of the regulatory guidelines include accuracy, precision, sensitivity, specificity, and practicability. 

For non-compendial procedures, the performance parameters that should be determined in validation studies include specificity/selectivity, linearity, accuracy, precision (repeatability and intermediate precision), detection limit (DL), quantitation limit (QL), range, ruggedness, and robustness [6]. Other method validation information, such as the stability of analytical sample preparations, degradation/ stress studies, legible reproductions of representative instrumental output, identification and characterization of possible impurities, should be included [7], The parameters that are required to be validated depend on the type of analyses, so therefore different test methods require different validation schemes. 

Method validation is defined in the international standard, ISO/IEC 17025 as, the confirmation by examination and provision of objective evidence that the particular requirements for a specific intended use are fulfilled. This means that a validated method, if used correctly, will produce results that will be suitable for the person making decisions based on them. This requires a detailed understanding of why the results are required and the quality of the result needed, i.e. its uncertainty. This is what determines the values that have to be achieved for the performance parameters. Method validation is a planned set of experiments to determine these values. The method performance parameters that are typically studied during method validation are selectivity, precision, bias, linearity working range, limit of detection, limit of quantitation, calibration and ruggedness. The validation process is illustrated in Figure 4.2. 

Method validation is carried out to provide objective evidence that a method is suitable for a given application. A formal assessment of the validation information against the measurement requirements specification and other important method performance parameters is therefore required. Although validation is described as a sequential process, in reality it can involve more than one iteration to optimize some performance parameters, e.g. if a performance parameter is outside the required limits, method improvement followed by revalidation is needed. 

Knowledge based only Method, method validation report related knowledge and target specifications None None Updated training record... 

Method validation is the process of proving that an analytical method is acceptable for its intended purpose. Many organizations provide a framework for performing such validations (ASTM, 2004). In general, methods for product specifications and regulatory submission must include studies on specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, range, detection limit, and quantitation limit. 

Further discussion of method validation can be found in Chapter 7. However, it should be noted from Table 11 that it is frequently desirable to perform validation experiments beyond ICH requirements. While ICH addresses specificity, accuracy, precision, detection limit, quantitation limit, linearity, and range, we have found it useful to additionally examine stability of solutions, reporting threshold, robustness (as detailed above), filtration, relative response factors (RRF), system suitability tests, and where applicable method comparison tests. 

Analytical data generated in a testing laboratory are generally used for development, release, stability, or pharmacokinetic studies. Regardless of what the data are required for, the analytical method must be able to provide reliable data. Method validation (Chapter 7) is the demonstration that an analytical procedure is suitable for its intended use. During the validation, data are collected to show that the method meets requirements for accuracy, precision, specificity, detection limit, quantitation limit, linearity, range, and robustness. These characteristics are those recommended by the ICH and will be discussed first. 

For a liquid or semi-solid pharmaceutical dosage form, it is crucial to include a preservative in the formulation. Commonly used preservatives in these systems include sodium benzoate, EDTA, sorbic acid, and parabens. A generic HPLC method is also recommended for the preservatives used in liquid formulations for routine monitoring to ensure the stability of the preservative itself and it must be validated specific to its use with the dosage form. (See chapters on Sample Preparation and Method Development.)... 

---