20181101 RQA Data Integrity & Risk by Ian Ramsay

www.RamsayPharma.com
www.MHRADeficiencies.com
Ian.Ramsay@Ramsaypharma.co.uk
1
21 October 2018
1
Data Integrity & Risk
A Proportional Approach To Data Integrity
©RamsayPharma 2018

22
21 October 2018
©RamsayPharma 2018
Introduction & Bio
 Independent Quality Consultant with over 14 years experience across a
range of dose forms, technologies and manufacturing sites.
 7 years with Big-Pharma offering a range of support, coaching and
oversight to multiple manufacturing sites world-wide
 4 years with MHRA (UK Regulator) performing regulatory inspections &
compliance management to wide range of manufacturers world-wide
(sterile/non-sterile/licensed/unlicensed/IMPs/Biologic)
 Consulting for industry. Support, Remediation & Audits
 Actively curate MHRA Deficiencies- an upcoming website trending MHRA
deficiencies for industry

33
21 October 2018
Disclaimer
 All opinions represented here are my own and only my own
 No offence is intended in anything I’m about to say!
 This is a complex topic- you cannot get all the answers in 30 mins!
 Strongly recommend you seek a diverse range of opinions
 Will assume a level of Data Integrity Understanding
 I am not a lawyer and I am not giving any form of legal advice (this will
become relevant later!)
©RamsayPharma 2018 3

44
21 October 2018
Purpose & Scope
 Purpose:
 “Is the tail wagging the dog”?
 Has Data Integrity lost all senses of
proportionality?
 What is the actual risk?
 What can be done to address this issue?
 Scope:
 Data Integrity concerns & issues in a GxP setting
©RamsayPharma 2018

55
21 October 2018
Data Integrity Background
©RamsayPharma 2018
Complex Topic Simple Principals
Broad Scope Continuing Problem

66
21 October 2018
Data Integrity
Background
 Regulators have developed excellent
guidance on the topic
 Increasing focus on the quality culture
 Increasing focus on the driving factors
behind fraud/falsification
 Heavy emphasis on pressure applied to
individuals and people in the business
 However…..determining whether an issue is
deliberate falsification or a simple error is
very difficult
 Principal Determining factor is INTENT
 Difficult to determine Intent

77
21 October 2018
Data Integrity Background
 Principally, Data Integrity focus is designed to prevent deliberate
falsification/fraud
©RamsayPharma 2018
Bad Practice
• Not intention to deceive
• No intention to harm
• No intention to benefit
Falsification
• Deliberate deception
• No intention to harm (most of the time!)
• Pursuing a perceived or actual benefit
• Hiding a perceived or actual weakness
• Often driven by:
• Opportunity
• Motivation
• Reward
Top Priority!
80% of the
issue
20% of the
issue
VS
INTENT

88
21 October 2018
Data Integrity
Background
 Inability of regulators to
effectively evaluate intent makes
it hard to evaluate a data
integrity issue
 Difficulty in determining intent
leads to an assumption that any
DI issue is deliberate and/or
falsification
 Companies often left to prove
their innocence- very challenging
 Resources being diverted to
manage low risk events because
they are not fully understood
 Other critical areas often suffer
as a result

99
21 October 2018
What Do We
Need?
 A mechanism or framework for more
effectively evaluating data integrity
issues
 A mechanism or framework for
prioritising data integrity issues
according to risk
 A process for determining Intent much
more effectively
 Get regulator buy-in
 Prioritise what's important
 Don’t forget the rest of the business
 Reintroduce proportionality to Data
Integrity
Help Determine Intent

1010
21 October 2018
©RamsayPharma 2018

1111
21 October 2018
What Do We Need?
 Good News!......we don’t have to reinvent
the wheel here
 Criminal justice has been thinking about
this topic for hundreds (if not thousands) of
years
 There is an established approach to
classifying intent and degrees of deliberate
action
 Often referred to as “Mens Rea” in common
law jurisdictions
 Establishes a widely accepted framework
for determining the level of intent in any
misdeed 11

1212
21 October 2018
Mens Rea as a Model For Determining
Intent
©RamsayPharma 2018
Increasing
Level of
Intent

1313
21 October 2018
Intent
 Direct Intention:
 The individual/group/company wants something to happen and deliberately sets
out to make sure that thing happens
 For example: a deliberate falsification of batch records to avoid criticism related
to an out of range value
 For example: a deliberate manipulation of an HPLC result to hide the fact it was
originally out of specification
 Indirect or “Oblique” Intention:
 The individual/group/company does not specifically intend for the consequence of
their action, however are virtually certain that is may happen or is a possibility
 For example: deliberately manipulating all HPLC chromatogram integration to
ensure their chance of passing is increased (although not knowing of OOS)
 For example: deliberately replicating a paper record to remove errors or mistakes
and make the record seem “cleaner”
©RamsayPharma 2018

1414
21 October 2018
Intent
©RamsayPharma 2018
Direct
Intention
Oblique
Intention
Deliberate, wilful
and targeted
falsification
Deliberate
falsification,
usually untargeted
Deliberate bad practice-
indication of poor training &
culture
Unconscious/non-deliberate
bad practice- indicate of
poor training or systems

1515
21 October 2018
Mens Rea as a Model
For Determining Intent
 Any issue must be fully investigated
 The investigation must include discussions with those
involved- even if they are implicated
 Hard and often difficult discussions will need to be
undertaken
 Establish a range of questions which can help to
differentiate actions between the different levels of
“Mens Rea”
 Look beyond the words- look at possible motives
 Benefits obtained
 Perceived of actual weaknesses hidden
 Pressures on the individuals
 Remember the Pressure/Opportunity/Rationalisation
model
©RamsayPharma 2018

1616
21 October 2018
EU GMP Risk Levels
 We must remember patient risk as well!
 Potential risk to the Patient/Product/Process
is key
 Regulators follow very clearly defined rules
regarding classification of deficiencies
 EMA Community procedures define the rules
for regulators and outlines the classification
definitions for deficiencies
 Available online at EMA under “ Compilation
of Community Procedures on Inspections and
Exchange of Information”
 EMA/572454/2014 Rev 17
©RamsayPharma 2018

1818
21 October 2018
A Potential Model for Data Integrity Risk
Evaluation
 Combine the principals of the EU community procedures with the concepts
and principals of “Mens Rea” & Intent
 Re-establish proportionality in evaluating Data Integrity issues
 Provide a clearly defined framework for considering intent when determining
risk
 Reduce the number of critical deficiencies and findings which have no patient
risk
 Re-establish a risk based approach to this complex topic
 Drive consistency through the industry and our regulators
©RamsayPharma 2018

1919
21 October 2018
A Potential Model for Data Integrity Risk
Evaluation
©RamsayPharma 2018
Intent & Criticality Deficiency Risk Matrix
Deficiency Risk
Other Major Critical
LevelofIntent
Purposely Critical Critical Critical
Knowingly Major Major Critical
Recklessly Minor Major Critical
Negligently Minor Major Critical

2020
21 October 2018
Summary &
Conclusions
 Data integrity is a complex topic
 Data Integrity is not going away
 Ultimately, falsification is a Human Issue-
dependent heavily on INTENT
 Intent can be driven by many things, however
pressure is key (remember pressure,
opportunity and rationalisation)
 It is very important to establish the level of
intent when determining the risk of any data
integrity event
 Purposeful & Knowing falsification should be
the key focus:
 Purposeful actions are the most
important- indicating deliberate
falsification with an intended outcome
 Knowing actions indicate deliberate
falsification but with no specific outcome
intended
©RamsayPharma 2018

2121
21 October 2018
Summary &
Conclusions
 Establishing a PROPORTIAL approach to data
integrity findings is key
 Regulators need Industry to take the lead
 Influence your regulators
 Establish detailed procedures for how to
handle and investigate issues before they
happen
 Ensure you have detailed, pre-defined
questions and topics to explore
 Summarize your overall controls on Data
Integrity (Governance)
 Document everything and make your case
regarding the risk
 Don’t neglect other parts of your operations
 Don’t ignore other risks

2222
21 October 2018
Thanks You!
Q&A
 Thanks!
 I welcome any questions…..remember...we as an industry need to discuss this
topic!
©RamsayPharma 2018

2323
21 October 2018
RamsayPharma Details
 Ian Ramsay available at:
 Ian.Ramsay@RamsayPharma.co.uk
 Work extensively in Data Integrity
 Work on Consulting, remediation, Audits and more….
 www.RamsayPharma.com
 Working on a new, highly searchable database of MHRA deficiencies worldwide
 Currently have over 7000 MHRA findings in specific detail
 Watch this space……
 www.MHRADeficiencies.com
©RamsayPharma 2018

20181101 RQA Data Integrity & Risk by Ian Ramsay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 20181101 RQA Data Integrity & Risk by Ian Ramsay

Similar to 20181101 RQA Data Integrity & Risk by Ian Ramsay (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (10)

20181101 RQA Data Integrity & Risk by Ian Ramsay