Ich guidelines for validation final

PHARMACEUTICS

1. ICH GUIDELINES FOR METHOD VALIDATION

2. BY SUMEL ASHIQUE M.PHARM ( PHARMACEUTICS ) ISF COLLEGE OF PHARMACY .MOGA (PB)

3. CONTENTS METHOD VALIDATION PURPOSE OF METHOD VALIDATION ICH AND USP GUIDELINES

4. METHOD VALIDATION : Method validation is the process of demonstrating that analytical procedures are suitable for their intended use and that they support the identity, strength, quality, purity and potency of the substances in products. Method validation is primarily concerned with: I dentification of the sources of potential errors Q uantification of the potential errors in the method An method validation describes in mathematical and quantifiable t e r m s t h e p e r f o r m a n c e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of an a s s a y 4

5. Examples of Methods That Require Validation Documentation Chromatographic Methods - HPLC, GC, TLC, GC/MS, etc. Pharmaceutical Analysis - In support of CMC. Bioanalytical Analysis - In support of PK/PD/Clinical Studies. Spectrophotometric Methods – UV/VIS, IR, AAS, XRD, ICP-MS, AAS, XRF, etc Particle Size Analysis Methods - Laser, Microscopic, Sieving, SEC, etc. Automated Analytical Methods - Robots, Automated Analysis.

6. Considerations Prior to Method Validation Suitability of Instrument Status of Qualification and Calibration Suitability of Materials Status of Reference Standards, Reagents, Placebo Lots Suitability of Analyst Status of Training and Qualification Records Suitability of Documentation Written analytical procedure and proper approved protocol with pre-established acceptance criteria

7. Purpose of Method Validation Identification of Sources and Quantitation of Potential errors Determination if Method is Acceptable for Intended Use Establish Proof that a Method Can be Used for Decision Making Satisfy Requirements

8. Published Validation Guidelines 1 978 Current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs) 1987 FDA Validation Guideline 1989 Supplement 9 to USP XXI 1994 CDER Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Method 1995 ICH Validation Definitions: Q2A, Text on Validation of Analytical procedures 1997 ICH Validation Methodology: Q2B, Validation of Analytical Procedures: Methodology 1999 Supplement 10 to USP 23 <1225>: Validation of Compendial Methods 1999 CDER “ Bioanalytical Method Validation for Human Studies ” 2000 CDER Draft “ Analytical Procedures and Method Validation ”

9. Today ’ s Validation Requirements I C H / U S P GMPs (legal) FD A

10. 2016 ICH/USP Validation Requirements & Parameters ICH Specificity Linearity Range Accuracy Precision Repeatability Intermediate Precision Reproducibility Limit of Detection Limit of Quantitation USP Specificity Linearity and Range Accuracy Precision Limit of Detection Limit of Quantitation Ruggedness Robustness

11. Specificity/Selectivity Ability of an analytical method to measure the analyte free from interference due to other components . Specificity is the ability to assess unequivocally the analyte in the presence of components which may be expected to be present. Typically these might include impurities, degradants, matrix, etc. Purity Tests: to ensure that all the analytical procedures performed allow an accurate statement of the content of impurities of an analyte, i.e. related substances test, heavy metals, residual solvents content, etc. Assay (content or potency): to provide an exact result which allows an accurate statement on the content or potency of the analyte in a sample. Selectivity describes the ability of an analytical method to differentiate various substances in a sample

12. Linearity 2016 12 Ability of an assay to elicit a direct and proportional response to changes in analyte concentration.

13. Linearity Should be Evaluated By Visual Inspection of plot of signals vs. analyte concentration By Appropriate statistical methods Linear Regression (y = mx + b) Correlation Coefficient, y-intercept (b), slope (m) Acceptance criteria: Linear regression r 2 > 0.95 Requires a minimum of 5 concentration levels

14. Range 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 containing amounts of analyte within or at the extremes of the specified range of the analytical procedure. Acceptable range having linearity, accuracy, precision. For Drug Substance & Drug product Assay 80 to 120% of test Concentration For Content Uniformity Assay 70 to 130% of test Concentration For Dissolution Test Method  +/- 20% over entire Specification Range For Impurity From MDL to 100% of Impurity Specification Limit

15. Accuracy Closeness of the test results obtained by the method to the true value . Should be established across specified range of analytical procedure. Should be assessed using a minimum of 3 concentration levels, each in triplicate (total of 9 determinations) Should be reported as: Percent recovery of known amount added or The difference between the mean assay result and the accepted value.

16. Precision The closeness of agreement (degree of scatter ) between a series of measurements obtained from multiple samplings of the same homogeneous sample. Sh o uld be investiga t ed using homogeneous , authentic samples . Precision Considered at 3 Levels : Repeatability Intermediate Precision Reproducibility

17. Repeatability Express the precision under the same operating conditions over a short interval of time. Also referred to as Intra-assay precision Should be assessed using minimum of 9 determinations (3 concentrations/ 3 replicates) or Minimum of 6 determinations at the 100% level.

18. Repr o ducib i li t y Definition: Ability reproduce data within the predefined precision Determination: SD, RSD and confidence interval Repeatability test at two different labs.

19. 2016 Detection Limit (LOD)/ Quantitation Limit (LOQ) LOD Lowest amount of analyte in a sample that can be detected but not necessarily quantitated. Estimated by Signal to Noise Ratio of 3:1. L O Q Lowest amount of analyte in a sample that can be quantified with suitable accuracy and precision. Estimated by Signal to Noise Ratio of 10:1.

20. Definition: Capacity to remain unaffected by small but deliberate variations in method parameters Determination: Comparison results under differing conditions with precision under normal conditions Examples of typical variations in LC Influence of variations of pH in a mobile phase Influence of variations in mobile phase composition Different columns (different lots and/or suppliers) Temperature Flow rate Robustness

21. THANK YOU