Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Analytical method validation workshop
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Analytical method validation workshop

1,642
views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business

1 Comment
2 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,642
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
144
Comments
1
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Analytical Method and Validation Siham Abdoun Mohamed Msc., PhD
  • 2. ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE The analytical procedure refers to the way of performing the analysis. It should describe in detail the steps necessary to perform each analytical test. This may include but is not limited to: the preparation of the sample, the reference standard and the reagents, use of the apparatus, generation of the calibration curve, use of the formulae for the calculation, etc.
  • 3. Specifications:  A specification is defined as a list of tests, references to analytical procedures, and appropriate acceptance criteria which are numerical limits, ranges, or other criteria for the tests described. It establishes the set of criteria to which a new drug substance or new drug product should conform to be considered acceptable for its intended use. "Conformance to specifications" means that the drug substance and / or drug product, when tested according to the listed analytical procedures, will meet the listed acceptance criteria. Specifications are critical quality standards that are proposed and justified by the manufacturer and approved by regulatory authorities as conditions of approval.
  • 4. Type of Test 1. General test 1. Description 2. Identification 3. Assay 4. Impurities 2 .Specific test; according to dosage form e.g. Solid dosage form (tablets and hard gelatin capsules) In addition to general the following specific tests are required 1. Dissolution
  • 5. 2. Disintegration 3.Hardness and friability (tablet) 4Uniformity of dosage unit 5. Water content 6. Microbial limit test Oral liquids: One or more of the following specific tests will normally be applicable to oral liquids and to powders intended for reconstitution as oral liquids. a) Uniformity of dosage units: b) pH c) Microbial limit test
  • 6. d) Antimicrobial preservative content Testing for antimicrobial preservative content should normally be performed at release. Antimicrobial preservative effectiveness should be demonstrated during development, and throughout the shelf-life e) Antioxidant preservative content f) Extractables g) Dissolution: for oral suspensions and dry powder products for resuspension mainly for insoluble drug substance.
  • 7. h) Particle size distribution: Quantitative acceptance criteria and a procedure for determination of particle size distribution may be appropriate for oral suspensions i) Redispersibility: For oral suspensions which settle on storage (produce sediment), h) Reconstitution time: Acceptance criteria for reconstitution time should be provided for dry powder products which require reconstitution. j) Water content: For oral products requiring reconstitution, Parenteral Drug Products: The following tests may be applicable to parenteral drug products. a) Uniformity of dosage units: This term includes both the mass of the dosage form and the content of the active substance in the dosage form
  • 8. b) pH: Acceptance criteria for pH should be provided where applicable and the proposed range justified. c) Sterility: All parenteral products should have a test procedure and acceptance criterion for evaluation of sterility. d) Endotoxins/Pyrogens: A test procedure and acceptance criterion for endotoxins, using a procedure such as the limulus amoebocyte lysate test, should be included in the specification. Pyrogenicity testing may be proposed as an alternative to endotoxin testing where justified. e) Particulate matter: Parenteral products should have appropriate acceptance criteria for particulate matter. This will normally include acceptance criteria for visible particulates and / or clarity of solution, as well as for sub-visible particulates as appropriate.
  • 9. f) Water content: For non-aqueous parenterals, and for parenteral products for reconstitution, a test procedure and acceptance criterion for water content should be proposed when appropriate. g) Antimicrobial preservative content: For parenteral products needing an antimicrobial preservative, acceptance criteria for preservative content should be established. i) Redispersibility: For injectable suspensions which settle on storage (produce sediment), h) Reconstitution time: Acceptance criteria for reconstitution time should be provided for dry powder products which require reconstitution.
  • 10. l) Particle size distribution: Quantitative acceptance criteria and a procedure for determination of particle size distribution may be appropriate e.g. for injectable suspensions. i) Extractables: Control of extractables from container/closure systems is considered significantly more important for parenteral products than for oral liquids. h) Antioxidant preservative content: Release testing for antioxidant content should normally be performed.
  • 11. Analytical procedure may be a pharmacopeia or non pharmacopeia Methods validation is the process of demonstrating that analytical procedures are suitable for their intended use. Validation is performed in order to show that the result(s) generated by a particular analytical procedure are reliable and accurate.
  • 12.  Types of Analytical Procedures to be Validated • identification tests • Assay of drug substances and pharmaceutical products • Content of impurities and limit tests for impurities • Dissolution testing and determination of particle size • Uniformity of content of pharmaceutical products
  • 13. • Definition of the types of tests considered in the validation 1. Identification tests: are intended to ensure the identity of an analyte in a sample. This is normally achieved by comparison of a property of the sample (e.g., spectrum, chromatographic behavior, chemical reactivity, etc.) to that of a reference standard;
  • 14. 2. Testing for impurities can be either a quantitative test or a limit test for the impurity in a sample. Either test is intended to accurately reflect the purity characteristics of the sample. 3. Assay procedures are intended to measure the analyte present in a given sample it represents a quantitative measurement of the drug substance in the drug product. The same validation characteristics may also apply to assays associated with other analytical procedures (e.g., dissolution).
  • 15. • Method validation presentation: 1.Protocol: includes procedures and acceptance criteria 2.Report: documented results 3.Justification needed when non-pharmacopoeial methods are used (if pharmacopoeial methods are available). Justification to include data, e.g. comparisons with the pharmacopoeial or other methods 4.Detailed standard test methods include:  chromatographic conditions, reagents and others
  • 16. • Validation parameters • The objective of the analytical procedure should be clearly understood since this will govern the validation characteristics which need to be evaluated.
  • 17. Characteristics that should be considered during validation of analytical methods include: specificity linearity range accuracy precision détection limit quantitation limit robustness
  • 18. 1/ SPECIFICITY • Specificity is the ability to assess clearly the analyte in the presence of components which may be expected to be present. Typically these might include impurities, degradants, matrix, etc. as follow, 1. Identification: to ensure the identity of an analyte, Suitable identification tests should be able to discriminate between compounds of closely related structures which are likely to be present.
  • 19. 2.Assay and Impurity Test(s) • For chromatographic procedures, representative chromatograms should be used to demonstrate specificity and individual components should be appropriately labelled. Similar considerations should be given to other separation techniques. • In cases where a non-specific assay is used, other supporting analytical procedures should be used to demonstrate overall specificity.
  • 20. • 2.1 Impurities are available • For the assay , this should involve demonstration of the discrimination of the analyte in the presence of impurities and/or excipients; practically, this can be done by spiking pure substances (drug substance or drug product) with appropriate levels of impurities and/or excipients • For the impurity test, the discrimination may be established by spiking drug substance or drug product with appropriate levels of impurities
  • 21. 2.2 Impurities are not available If impurity or degradation product standards are unavailable, specificity may be demonstrated by comparing the test results of samples containing impurities or degradation products to a second well-characterized procedure e.g.: pharmacopoeial method or other validated analytical procedure (independent procedure). This should include samples stored under relevant stress conditions: light, heat, humidity, acid/base hydrolysis and oxidation. - for the assay, the two results should be compared; - for the impurity tests, the impurity profiles should be compared.
  • 22. 2/ ACCURACY Accuracy: is the degree of agreement of test results with the true value, or the closeness of the results obtained by the procedure to the true value. Accuracy should be established across the specified range of the analytical procedure
  • 23. 2.1. Assay 2.1.1 Drug Substance Several methods of determining accuracy are available: a) application of an analytical procedure to an analyte of known purity (e.g. reference material); b) comparison of the results of the proposed analytical procedure with those of a second well-characterized procedure, the accuracy of which is stated and/or defined c) accuracy may be determined once precision, linearity and specificity have been established
  • 24. 2.1.2 Drug Product Several methods for determining accuracy are available: a) application of the analytical procedure to synthetic mixtures of the drug product components to which known quantities of the drug substance to be analysed have been added; b) accuracy may be inferred once precision, linearity and specificity have been established
  • 25. c) in cases where it is impossible to obtain samples of all drug product components , it may be acceptable either to add known quantities of the analyte to the drug product or to compare the results obtained from a second, well characterized procedure, the accuracy of which is stated and/or defined
  • 26. 2.2. Impurities (Quantitation) Accuracy should be assessed on samples (drug substance/drug product) spiked with known amounts of impurities. In cases where it is impossible to obtain samples of certain impurities and/or degradation products, it is considered acceptable to compare results obtained by an independent procedure. It should be clear how the individual or total impurities are to be determined e.g., weight/weight or area percent, in all cases with respect to the major analyte.
  • 27. 3/ PRECISION The precision of an analytical procedure expresses the closeness of agreement (degree of scatter) between a series of measurements obtained from multiple sampling of the same homogeneous sample under the prescribed conditions. Precision may be considered at three levels: repeatability, intermediate precision and reproducibility. The precision of an analytical procedure is usually expressed as the variance, standard deviation or coefficient of variation of a series of measurements.
  • 28. 3.1. Repeatability Repeatability expresses the precision under the same operating conditions over a short interval of time. Repeatability is also termed intra-assay precision Repeatability should be assessed using: a) a minimum of 9 determinations covering the specified range for the procedure (e.g., 3 concentrations/3 replicates) b) a minimum of 6 determinations at 100% of the test concentration
  • 29. 3.2. Intermediate precision Intermediate precision expresses within-laboratories variations: it study the effects of random events on the precision of the analytical procedure. Typical variations to be studied include days, analysts, equipment, etc. It is not considered necessary to study these effects individually.
  • 30. d. 3.3. Reproducibility Reproducibility expresses the precision between laboratories (collaborative studies, usually applied to standardization of methodology) for inclusion of procedures in pharmacopoeias.. Validation of tests for assay and for quantitative determination of impurities includes an investigation of precision.
  • 31. 3.4. Recommended Data The standard deviation, relative standard deviation (coefficient of variation) and confidence interval should be reported for each type of precision investigate
  • 32. Accurate but imprecise Inaccurate but precise Accurate and Precise
  • 33. 4/DETECTION LIMIT The detection limit of an individual analytical procedure is the lowest amount of analyte in a sample which can be detected but not necessarily quantitated as an exact value. Several approaches for determining the detection limit are possible, depending on whether the procedure is a non-instrumental or instrumental.
  • 34. 4.1. Based on Visual Evaluation Visual evaluation may be used for non-instrumental methods but may also be used with instrumental methods. The detection limit is determined by the analysis of samples with known concentrations of analyte and by establishing the minimum level at which the analyte can be reliably detected.
  • 35. 4.2. Based on Signal-to-Noise This approach can only be applied to analytical procedures which exhibit baseline noise. Determination of the signal-to-noise ratio is performed by comparing measured signals from samples with known low concentrations of analyte with those of blank samples and establishing the minimum concentration at which the analyte can be reliably detected. A signal-to-noise ratio between 3 or 2:1 is generally considered acceptable for estimating the detection limit.
  • 36. 5/ QUANTITATION LIMIT The quantitation limit of an individual analytical procedure is the lowest amount of analyte in a sample which can be quantitatively determined with suitable precision and accuracy. The quantitation limit is a parameter of quantitative assays for low levels of compounds in sample matrices, and is used particularly for the determination of impurities and/or degradation products.
  • 37. 5.1. Based on Visual Evaluation Visual evaluation may be used for non-instrumental methods but may also be used with instrumental methods. The quantitation limit is generally determined by the analysis of samples with known concentrations of analyte and by establishing the minimum level at which the analyte can be quantified with acceptable accuracy and precision.
  • 38. 5.2. Based on Signal-to-Noise Approach This approach can only be applied to analytical procedures that exhibit baseline noise. Determination of the signal-to-noise ratio is performed by comparing measured signals from samples with known low concentrations of analyte with those of blank samples and by establishing the minimum concentration at which the analyte can be reliably quantified. A typical signal-to-noise ratio is 10:1.
  • 39. 5.3. Based on the Standard Deviation of the Response and the Slope The quantitation limit (QL) may be expressed as: 5.4 Recommended Data The quantitation limit and the method used for determining the quantitation limit should be presented. The limit should be subsequently validated by the analysis of a suitable number of samples known to be near or prepared at the quantitation limit.
  • 40. 8/ LINEARITY • The linearity of an analytical procedure is its ability (within a given range) to obtain test results which are directly proportional to the concentration (amount) of analyte in the sample. • It may be demonstrated directly on the drug substance (by dilution of a standard stock solution) and/or separate weighing's of synthetic mixtures of the drug product components, using the proposed procedure. • For the establishment of linearity, a minimum of 5 concentrations is recommend
  • 41. • Linearity should be evaluated by visual inspection of a plot of signals as a function of analyte concentration or content. If there is a linear relationship, test results should be evaluated by appropriate statistical methods, for example, by calculation of a regression line by the method of least squares. • In some cases, to obtain linearity between assays and sample concentrations, the test data may need to be subjected to a mathematical transformation prior to the regression analysis. • Data from the regression line itself may be helpful to provide mathematical estimates of the degree of linearity.
  • 42. Calculated analyte in mg/mL Linearity of an analyte in a material Table of values (x,y) x 0.040 # 0.035 Reference material mg/ml y Calculated mg/ml 1 0.0100 0.0101 2 0.0150 0.0145 3 0.0200 0.0210 4 0.0250 0.0260 5 0.030 0.0300 0.0294 6 0.0400 0.0410 0.025 0.020 0.015 0.010 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 Reference material mg/ml 0.035 0.04
  • 43. 8./ RANGE • The range of an analytical procedure is the interval between the upper and lower concentration (amounts) of analyte in the sample (including these concentrations) for which it has been demonstrated that the analytical procedure has a suitable level of precision, accuracy and linearity. • The specified range is normally derived from linearity studies and depends on the intended application of the procedure. It is established by confirming that the analytical procedure provides an acceptable degree of linearity, accuracy and precision when applied to samples
  • 44. • The following minimum specified ranges should be considered: 1. For the assay of a drug substance or a finished (drug) product: normally from 80 to 120 percent of the test concentration; 2. For content uniformity, covering a minimum of 70 to 130 percent of the test concentration, unless a wider more appropriate range, based on the nature of the dosage form (e.g., metered dose inhalers), is justified; 3. For dissolution testing: +/-20 % over the specified range;
  • 45. 4. For the determination of an impurity: from the reporting level of an impurity1 to 120% of the specification; for validation of impurity test procedures carried out during development, it may be necessary to consider the range around a suggested (probable) limit. 5. If assay and purity are performed together as one test and only a 100% standard is used, linearity should cover the range from the reporting level of the impurities1 to 120% of the assay specification.
  • 46. 9/ ROBUSTNESS The robustness of an analytical procedure is a measure of its capacity to remain unaffected by small, but considered variations in method parameters and provides an indication of its reliability during normal usage. Depends on the type of procedure under study. It should show the reliability of an analysis with respect to deliberate variations in method parameters.
  • 47. • Examples of typical variations are: 1. stability of analytical solutions; 2. extraction time. • In the case of liquid chromatography, examples of typical variations are: 1. influence of variations of pH in a mobile phase; 2. influence of variations in mobile phase composition; 3. temperature; 4. flow rate.
  • 48. • In the case of gas-chromatography, examples of typical variations are: 1. different columns (different lots and/or suppliers); 2. temperature; 3. flow rate.
  • 49. Table 1. Recommended Validation Characteristics of the Various Types of Tests. - signifies that this characteristic is not normally evaluated + signifies that this characteristic is normally evaluated
  • 50. 9. SYSTEM SUITABILITY TESTING System suitability testing is an integral part of many analytical procedures. The tests are based on the concept that the equipment, electronics, analytical operations and samples to be analyzed constitute an integral system that can be evaluated as such.
  • 51. CATEGORIES OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE AND VALIDATION REQUIRMENT The following categories of analysis are considered 1. Transfer of a method 2. Screening 3. Development of a new analytical procedure
  • 52. 1. Transfer of a Method • In this category validation data for this particular analysis is already available, so verification of suitability under conditions of use (=method transfer check)is required 1.1. Pharmacopoeial (compendial) method. 1.1.1 Active substance The analytical procedures described in a monograph of a pharmacopoiea are considered to be validated. In this case only system suitability tests are required.
  • 53. • Identification: no formal validation required; • Testing for Impurities: no formal validation required; • Assay: no formal validation required.
  • 54. 1.1.2 Medicinal product The pharmacopoeial monograph for a specific dosage form is a good basis for the analysis; however as in many cases there is no indication about the exact composition of the product (qualitative and quantitative composition of the excipients), it must at least be made sure that these do not interfere in the analysis of the active substance,
  • 55. The Validation characteristic required in each type of analysis: • Identification: no formal validation required; • Testing for Impurities: 1.specificity: no interference from excipients; 2.the limit of quantification .
  • 56. • Assay: 1.specificity, 2.accuracy: mainly recovery, minimum 1 determination., 3.precision (repeatability): around the target test concentration (minimum 2 independent determinations) 4.linearity at three measuring points in the range around the target value.
  • 57. 1.2 Method of a manufacturer. 1.2.1: the analytical procedures have been fully validated by the company • The requirement under pharmacopeia active substance applies for both the active substance and the medicinal product: no validation is required for Identification, Testing for Impurities and Assay: 1.2.2: old application file with no or insufficient validation data This case should be notified to the authorities. For the validation characteristics to be considered
  • 58. 1.3 Non compendial published method. The validation characteristics to be considered will always depend on the amount of validation data provided. If the method has been fully validated and data published in the literature, the same of pharmacopeial (active substance and medicinal product) is applied. If not, the following has to be considered: Identification: no formal validation required
  • 59. 1. specificity; • Testing for Impurities: 1. limit of quantitation; 2. precision/accuracy over the range. • Assay: 1. specificity: no interference from excipients 2. accuracy: around the target concentration 3. repeatability: around the target concentration (minimum 2 independent determinations) 4. linearity at three measuring points in the range
  • 60. 1.4 Method of a first manufacturer to be used for a product of a 2nd manufacturer. 1.4.1 Active substance: • Identification: no formal validation required • Testing for Impurities: specificity (impurity profile) (if the impurity profile is different, further validation data might be necessary)
  • 61. • Assay: • no formal validation required in case of a titration; • Stability indicating: see testing for impurities. 1.4.2 Medicinal product: A prerequisite is, that we have here comparable formulations (matrix): • Identification: no formal validation required • Testing for Impurities: 1.Specificity (interference of excipients); 2. limit of quantitation; 3.precision/accuracy over the range .
  • 62. • Assay: 1. specificity: no interference from excipients 2. accuracy: around the target concentration 3. repeatability: around the target concentration (minimum 2 independent determinations) 4. linearity at three measuring points in the range around the target value.
  • 63. 1.5 Method for an active substance to be used for a medicinal product. The main factor to be considered here is the influence of the matrix on the analysis including interference from the excipients. • Identification: no formal validation required • Testing for Impurities: 1. specificity; 2. limit of quantitation; 3. precision/accuracy over the range .
  • 64. • Assay: 1. specificity: no interference from impurities and excipients 2. accuracy: around the target concentration 3. repeatability: around the target concentration (minimum 2 independent determinations) 4. linearity at three measuring points in the range around the target value.
  • 65. 2. Development of a new analytical procedure This is mainly the case where a product is tested in routine testing conditions and/or where an in-house analytical procedure is used. The analytical procedures should be fully validated
  • 66. • REVALIDATION • Revalidation is required when 1. changes in the process for synthesis of the drug substance 2. changes in the composition of the finished product 3. changes in the analytical procedure 4. transfer of methods from one laboratory to another 5. changes in major pieces of equipment, instruments
  • 67. • Revalidation should be performed to ensure that the analytical procedure maintains its characteristics (e.g., specificity) and to demonstrate that the analytical procedure continues to ensure the identity, strength, quality, purity, and potency of the drug substance and drug product, and the bioavailability of the drug product. The degree of revalidation depends on the nature of the change.