All posts by shivpharma2016

SOP on Stability studies of drug products

SOP on Stability studies of drug products

Objective: To lay down a procedure for carrying out stability studies of drug products.

Scope: This SOP is applicable for carrying out stability studies of drug products of

Responsibility: QC Chemist or above

Accountability: Head – Quality Control & Head – Quality Assurance

Procedure:

Stability study shall be carried out:

To understand any chemical, physical and microbiological changes in the Drug products during their shelf life when exposed under different storage conditions.

To confirm that drug products are assured for their efficacy and safety in marketed packs.

To compile data for confirming storage conditions and shelf life for finish products.

In support of product registration in different countries.

Initially three batches are kept for stability study (Initially “means the product is subjected for stability for first time at the location”) for long term, intermediate and accelerated stability. Subsequently minimum one batch per year of each product is subjected for Long Term condition. These samples shall be packed in marketed packs or simulated marketed packs.

The sample shall be charged to stability study for following change:-

Change in formulation-Accelerated and Long Term conditions-03 Batches.

Change in manufacturing process-Accelerated and Long Term conditions-03 Batches

Change in source of API-Accelerated and Long Term conditions-01 Batch.

Change in Batch size-Long Term condition-01 Batch.

Change in Primary container-closure system-Accelerated and Long Term conditions – 01 Batch.

Change in manufacturing equipment (s) having different operating procedure- Accelerated and Long Term conditions-03 Batches.

Additional Stability studies may be carried out as per the customer’s requirement based on the storage conditions and the frequencies of analysis as required by the customers.

Additional stability studies may also to be carried out as per the directives received from Head-QA.

QA shall be responsible to identify reasons for performing stability studies, and shall send the stability study request to QC along with samples, placebo and finish product Certificate of Analysis.

Samples for stability study shall be collected by QA personnel during packing operation, representing start, middle and end of packaging.

Sample for stability study shall be charged into proper marketed packs or whenever necessary shall be charged using simulated packs which is identical to market packs. Label the samples of accelerated, Intermediate and Long Term condition.

In case of dry powder injection and Dry syrup, half of the sample shall be charged in invert position and half of the sample in up-position.

Label for accelerated condition shall be in Red colour, Intermediate shall be in Brick colour and long term shall be in green colour.

Sample shall be charged to stability chamber within 15 days of release of batch and the results of initial analysis at the time of release of batch shall be considered as “0” month results. If this period exceeds 15 days, the sample shall be re-analyzed after allotting AR No. according to SOP treating sample as stability sample before charging to stability study to generate “0” month results. Sample shall be analyzed before charging to stability chamber for additional test if any.

The “Start date” of stability study shall be that date on which sample has been charged in stability chamber.

Subsequent time intervals shall be conducted on the basis of start date.

The due date at each interval (testing station) is the date that the sample shall be removed from the stability chamber.

Withdrawal of the stability sample shall be carried out as per monthly planner. Reconciliation of the same shall be carried out during the withdrawal of the sample and record of the same shall be maintained.

Sample shall be withdrawn from stability chambers at different testing stations within +5 Days from due date for accelerated, Long Term and Intermediate conditions.

Place withdrawn sample at room temperature in a cupboard labeled as “Under Test” and initiate the analysis on the same day of withdrawal.

Batch specific protocol shall be prepared for performing the stability studies. The protocol covers stations (time intervals) and tests required during the stability studies of that product. Stability study protocol shall be prepared. Stability Protocol shall be prepared for all batches, which shall be charged for stability study. Protocol shall be approved by Head-QA.

Each stability Protocol number consist of alphanumerical characters and mentioned as SS-X-YYYY-ZZ.

First “two” (i.e. SS) character indicates code for stability study.

Next character “-“ is a separator.

Next character (i.e. X ) indicates the product code as per SOP.

Next Character “-“ is a separator.

Next four character ( i.e. YYYY) indicates the unique number in which first two Character indicates serial number increases sequentially for a particular product and last two character indicate year of preparation.

Next character “-“ is a separator.

Next two character (i.e. ZZ) indicates the version number.

Each stability protocol consist of details as mentioned below:

Subject indicates subject of document i.e. ‘stability protocol’ shall be mentioned in the Same.

Department indicates name of the department preparing the protocol i.e. ‘Quality

Control’ shall be mentioned.

Product name indicates the generic name of the product for which the stability protocol shall be prepared.

Protocol number indicates the stability study protocol number as mentioned in point number 5.17.

Revision number indicates the version number of the stability study protocol. If it is prepared for the first time then “00” shall be mentioned. For any subsequent revision, the revision number “01” shall be mentioned.

Effective date indicates the date of effectiveness of stability protocol.

Supersedes indicates the previous version number. If protocol is prepared first time then NA shall be mentioned for every subsequent revision the revision number of previous protocol shall be mentioned.

Revise the protocol if required.

As per approved protocol, QC department shall charge the stability samples as per

following procedure:

Segregate the packed containers for the stability conditions as mentioned in stability, Affix the stability label as per stability condition.

Quantity of sample required for the stability study shall be kept doubled the times of samples required for one complete analysis or as per specific requirement from Approximate quantity required on each station has been summarized.

Charge the packed stability samples into the respective stability chamber. Ensure that door of stability chamber shall be locked before leaving. Maintain the details of the product and scheduled station of stability products.

Stability study Conditions / Intervals:

Stability studies shall be conducted at conditions mentioned in table – I (References ICH (Q1A)

After withdrawal of samples, AR No. shall be allotted as per SOP and record shall be maintained. Stability sample shall be given to analyst with worksheet and photocopy of Summary sheet up to pervious station. Stability samples shall be analyzed as per specification mentioned in the stability protocol of the specific batch.

Analyst shall record raw data of stability product in respective worksheet and result shall be verified by analyst for any OOT or significant change with the help of the summary sheet up to previous station.

On Completion of testing after each station, stability data shall be reviewed and these results summarized in summary sheet for Long Term, For Intermediate and For Accelerated. After that stability data shall be submitted in QA.

Inform any significant changes to the Head of Department which is mentioned below :

  • 5% or more than 5% potency changes from the initial assay.
  • Any specified degradant not meeting specification limit.
  • pH not meeting specification limit.

Failure to meet specifications for appearance and physical properties i.e. colour, shape, hardness etc.

Dissolution not meeting specification limit for 12 dosage units.

Notify any “Out of specification” (OOS) or “Out of Trend” (OOT) results to Head of Department and perform the investigation as per the relevant SOPs (for handling of Out of specification and for Handling of Out of trend).

The stability study shall be discontinued in case of failure to comply the specification. Stability study discontinuation shall be done after approval of Head-QA.

The investigation for failure shall be conducted with the help of Head-QA. Head QA shall decide whether investigation shall be extended to other batches manufactured under similar condition and or other batches, which are likely to be affected. Record of the same shall be maintained.

Any failure in stability chamber generate an alarm on stability chamber as well as on security gate. At the time of duty hours stability In-charge shall rectify the problem with the help of engineering person. If any failure in stability chamber happened on Holiday or during off duty hours, Security person shall intimate to Engineering deptt. and stability In-charge. Engineering person shall rectify the problem with the help of stability In-charge.

In case the failure of stability chamber prolonged to more than 24 hours, initiate a deviation. If required, samples from respective stability chamber shall be removed and stored at room temperature and Record shall be maintained.

Stability chamber failure investigation report shall be prepared with the help of engineering and Quality Assurance.

After completion of rectification of chamber, samples shall be charged again in the respective original stability storage condition and rescheduling of the charging and withdrawal station shall be done by adding number of days for which sample stored at room temperature to the existing due dates for withdrawal of samples and close the deviation.

Temperature / RH Monitoring of Stability Chambers:

Temperature / RH of stability chamber shall be recorded by stability chemist or above on manually basis on the interval of 2 hours.

Temperature / RH shall be monitored through software on the interval of 1 hour and print out shall be taken on daily basis by stability chemist or above. This printout shall be reviewed by Executive stability / Nominee.

If any failure in Temperature / RH of Stability Chambers found, investigation shall be done and note down in the Stability chamber failure investigation report and CAPA shall be generated as per SOP.

Executive summary Report:

Product specific Executive summary report shall be prepared at the time of requirement.

Executive summary report shall be assigned as ESR-X-YY-ZZ

First two characters (i.e. ESR) indicate for Executive summary report

Next character ( – ) is a separator

Next characters X is for product Code as per SOP.

Next two character YY is for report number which is a serial number, increases sequencelly for a particular product.

Next character ( – ) is a separator

Next two characters ZZ is for version number of the report.

Each executive summary report consist of details as mentioned below:

Subject indicates subject of document i.e. ‘Executive Summary Report’ shall be mentioned in the Same.

Department indicates name of the department preparing the Report i.e. ‘Quality Control’ shall be mentioned.

Product name indicates the Brand name of the product for which the Executive summary report shall be prepared.

Report number indicates the executive summary report number as mentioned.

Revision number indicates the version number of the Executive summary report. If it is prepared for the first time then “00” shall be mentioned. For any subsequent revision, the revision number “01” shall be mentioned.

Effective date indicates the date of effectiveness of Executive summary Report.

Supersedes indicates the previous version number. If report is prepared first time then NA shall be mentioned for every subsequent revision the revision number of previous report shall be mentioned.

Prepare separate charging schedule, monthly planner and A. R. number register for exhibit batches.

SOP ON HANDLING AND INVESTIGATION OF INCIDENT

SOP ON HANDLING AND INVESTIGATION OF INCIDENT

PURPOSE : To define the procedure for incident reporting and investigation.

SCOPE : This guideline is applicable to, All incidents, which can affect the safety, identity, strength, purity and / or quality of the product which can be,

  • Facility related.
  • Storage related.
  • Production related or occurred during processing.
  • Raw / Packaging / FP sampling or release related.
  • Distribution related.
  • Confirmed failures out of repeat analysis and out of specification investigations.
  • Any other.

Unplanned deviations from approved procedures e.g. Standard operating procedures, protocol, BMR etc., without prior authorization and documentation.

REFERENCE(S)

World health organization (WHO) TRS 908

Pharmaceutical inspection convention pharmaceutical inspection co-operation    scheme (PIC’s): Guide to good manufacturing practice for medicinal products.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

  • Document(s) and Data Control Procedure.
  • Change Control Management.
  • Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA).
  • Quality Risk Management (QRM.)
  • SOP on Investigations.
  • Handling, Management and investigation of Deviation.
  • Good Document Practice (GDP).

ATTACHMENTS

Incident Log.

Incident Investigation Form.

Cause and Effect (Fish Bone) diagram for incident investigation.

Flow chart for incident reporting and investigation.

DEFINITIONS

Incident:

Any unforeseen event.

Deviations from approved protocols or standard operating procedures without prior authorization and documentation.

Any variance from established specification or requirements stated in Quality System document, which includes but not limited to SOP (Standard Operating Procedure), BMR (Batch Manufacturing Record) and BPR (Batch Packing Record), that would affect the safety, identity, strength, purity and/or quality of the product.

Activity or the operation performed in excess of that defined in a BMR, SOP or other approved documents (BMR may allow adjustment of machine, pH, however a excessive number of adjustments is an incident).

Incident report is specific one time document, when applied as an unplanned deviation to established procedure or specification.

Investigation

General process of information or data gathering, analysis & checking possible causes to find out cause and its impact assessment.

Corrective action

The term “correction” usually refers to the repair, rework or adjustment made to the product as part of the disposition of an existing nonconformity.

A corrective action is an action taken to eliminate the causes of an existing non-conformity, defect or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence.

Preventive action

A preventive action is an action taken to eliminate the cause of a potential non-conformity, defect or other undesirable situation in order to prevent its occurrence.

Note: There can be more than one cause for a potential nonconformity.
Preventive action is taken to prevent occurrence whereas corrective action is taken to prevent recurrence.

Root Cause: The identifiable factor based on objective evidence which have been determined to be responsible for the incident.

Probable Cause: The identifiable factor(s) which is most likely to be responsible for the incidence.

RESPONSIBILITY

QA Department Person:

To prepare SOP for inc

ident Procedure.

Concerned Department person:

To report any incident to a supervisor or department head and / or Quality Assurance (QA) within specified time.

To provide the feedback upon interrogation if required during investigation.

To prepare the incident report and perform investigation within specified time period.

Quality Assurance:

To register the incidence and assign a sequential number to each incident.

To review the incident investigation report.

To monitor the incident reporting and incident investigation as per procedure and timelines defined in the SOP.

To review the justification submitted in incident reported prior to the investigation of the incident with respect to potential product or process impact in order to allow the process           to continue to the next phase of manufacturing, packing or release for distribution, if no         product / process impact is evident.

To review the incident investigation report.

To monitor the recommended corrective action / and implementation through relevant

To close the investigation report.

To perform six monthly review of incidents.

Concerned Department Head:

To assign the responsibility to department representative to perform the investigation.

To ensure that incident is reported to QA within specified time.

To provide the guideline for investigation of the incident.

To review incident investigation report.

To monitor the CAPA.

Quality Assurance Head:

To authorize the extended time for incident investigation and CAPA.

To monitor the activity as per SOP.

To review and approve the investigation report.

To ensure implementation of the defined system.

Plant Head:

To review and approve the investigation report.

To ensure implementation of the defined system.

PROCEDURE:

Reporting of incident:

All incidents must be reported immediately to responsible supervisor or department

Incident shall be initiated in following circumstances

Processing deviation that have affected or potentially could affect a product.

A general system breakdown or failure to follow procedure.

An action limit is exceeded.

A value is outside the processing parameters.

At the discretion of QA department, when there are excessive minor errors and/or recording errors. Errors that are found and corrected by manufacturing; however, are repetitive.

When BMRs are reviewed for product release, QA may issue an incident report based on the information (or lack of required information) recorded in the BMRs/ Records.

A single incident report may be used for more than one lot if the incident was repeated and cause for the incidents is mutually related.

Incident report shall not be issued for minor incidents such as undocumented cross out, write over, or missed steps (When it can be proven that the step had been performed),   but doer/ performer and/or checker failed to document the same.

The QA person shall responsible to fill the “Incidence register”.

The incident register shall be filled as per the following guideline.

Incident No:

Mention incident number as per numbering pattern defined under.

The incident number shall comprise of the department code specific for the
particular department as described in SOP on SOP and year of incident.

The department code shall be suffixed by three digits, year shall be mentioned in two digits and last three digit shall be serial number. For example, the first incident report number for Quality Assurance department for the year 2021 shall be allocated.

The incident details shall be entered in the (hard copy of the) register and the register shall be updated.

The register shall be used to make entries of incident details of more than one department (Department wise sections can be created in the same register to make entries of incidents of different departments).

Date of Reporting:

Mention date on which the incident is reported.

Product/Material/system Name:

Mention name of the product /material / system incident is related to it. Otherwise  mention N/A.

Document No. / B. No. / Equipment No. /A. R. No. /instrument No. :

Mention Document No. / B. No. / Equipment No. /A.R. No/ Instrument No.  if incident is related to it. Otherwise mention not applicable (N/A).

Incident detailsMention detail description of the incident which shall include as defined.

Target date for completion : Mention the target date for completion which shall be NMT 30 days from date of occurrence of the incident.

Responsible Person : Mention the name of the concerned persons / department head to whom the incident investigation report is issued.

Status (Open/close/Cancelled) : Mention the status as open /close, as per time line and investigation closure.

Closure Date: Mention the closure date and sign, as per time line and investigation closure.

CAPA No : Mention the CAPA number issued, if any.

Incident investigation:

Incident investigation shall be done as per investigation action plan decided and investigation details shall be recorded in incident investigation report.

Incident investigation report shall be prepared as per guideline given below.

Incident No.: Mention the incident number.

Date of  Mention the date on which the incident occurred.

Date investigation started: Mention the date on which investigation was started.

Product/Material/Equipment /instrument / system Name:

Mention name of the product /material /Equipment /instrument/ system incident is  related to it. Otherwise mention Not Applicable.

Document No. / B. No. / Equipment No. /A. R. No. /instrument No. :

Mention Document No. / B. No. / Equipment No. /A.R. No./ Instrument No.  if incident is related to it. Otherwise mention not applicable (N/A).

Incident details/description:

Mention detailed description of the incident which shall include, when (stage/time), where (location /area/ room no.) what (parameter out of limit / process not followed / followed wrongly / documented wrongly / any other), by whom (person involved if any), How (incident /malfunction) seen / happened / noticed and Magnitude ( no of units affected and intensity of the impact).Also include impact on product if affected due to incident.

  • Following questions can be asked to formulate an incident.
  • Identity:
  • What is the unit with the malfunction?
  • What is the malfunction?
  • Location:
  • Where is the malfunction seen?
  • When was the malfunction seen?
  • When has it been last seen since?
  • Magnitude.
  • What is the extent of the malfunction?
  • How many units are affected?
  • How much of any one unit is affected?

Target date for investigation completion. :

Mention the target date for investigation completion which shall be NMT 30 days from date of occurrence of the incident.

Revised target date for investigation (if investigation not completed in time). :

In case target date exceeds, revised date shall be assigned by QA head with reason for new target date.

Investigation Team:

QA head shall form a “Team for investigation”, considering nature of incident and department(s) involved in the incident. Name and signature of the persons involved in incident investigation shall be included in report.

Action plan for incident investigation:

QA head shall call a meeting comprising of persons involved with the incident along with concerned department head to discuss the incident and to decide on action plan for investigation. To ensure structured approach while preparing action plan for investigation, fish bone      (cause and effect) diagram shall be used to list out all probable causes. While preparing action plan for incident investigation, following shall be followed/ensured.

  • Assemble a team.
  • Do not let the expert dominate.
  • Do not allow criticism on any idea or probable cause. – Filter later.
  • Use a board to record the ideas.
  • Rotate around the room, one idea at a time & discuss.
  • Limit the number of ideas per person vs. unlimited ideas.
  • Leave the notes in place to help others.
  • Do not destroy any materials collected related to incident investigation.
  • Use structured and not haphazard approach while investigation.
  • List out all possibilities & ideas to avoid bias investigation.
  • Suggest additional testing / trials if any.
  • Define data collection i.e.
  • Define observation parameters.
  • Define time period to collect data.
  • Design data collection format.
  • Collect data honestly.

The actions to be taken shall be recorded in incident report by concerned
department head or designee.

Note: Separate, properly identified sheet can be used to record the action plan for incident investigation.

Action plan shall be prepared within 3 days from the date of incident.

Investigation details:

Discussion with concerned person: Summary of interview of the employee who witnessed the incident shall be documented for the exact details of the incident.

Following documents can be reviewed for the investigation of incident based on investigation action plan. Cause and effect diagram shall be referred for investigation.

History (whether such incidents happened in past).

  • Manufacturing documents.
  • Cleaning/sanitization/sterilization/Depyrogenation records.
  • Training documents of concerned persons.
  • Qualification /calibration records of equipments / machines.
  • Environment monitoring records.
  • Trend of process / quality parameters of the product/ equipment/ material used. (comparison of incident batch with other batches).
  • Sequential logs of equipments / machines.
  • Preventive / breakdown maintenance records of equipments / machines.
  • Standard operating procedure.
  • Specification / test procedures /sampling procedure.
  • Stability data/ data of additional testing/data of trials.
  • The investigation report shall also address review of additional testing / trial data as appropriate

Root cause: A clear description of identified root cause of incident shall be recorded based on investigation. If no root cause is identified, it shall be mentioned that assignable root cause not identified and probable cause(s) shall be mentioned. Examples of some of the root causes are given below for guidance purpose.

Causes for production related incidents can be,

  • Equipment malfunctioning.
  • Working process not defined properly.
  • Utility failure.
  • Lack of communication.
  • Lack of knowledge of working personnel.
  • Environment variability (Temperature, Humidity)
  • Use of unqualified / uncalibrated machines/equipment’s.

Causes for storage related incidents can be,

  • Material lost due to improper storage.
  • Not knowing the storage conditions.
  • Storage conditions not followed properly.

Causes for material handling /dispensing related incidents can be,

  • Spillage during storage.
  • Human error in handling.
  • Dispensing error.
  • Wrong potency based calculation of API

Causes for facility related incidents can be,

  • Inadequate facility: Congested, Dirty, cracking, drainage, uncontrolled environment etc.
  • Inadequate Equipment: Not meeting range, non-calibrated, not precise etc.
  • Inadequate Man-power: Insufficient, un-trained, un-experienced, under-educated for that work etc.

Other causes include following.

  • Vendor Change.
  • Wrong Specification
  • Improper sampling technique
  • Improper supervision.

Impact analysis:

Mention the impact of the incident on the quality parameters of the same / other batches, already distributed or ready for distributions. Also evaluate and mention the impact of the incident on different products manufactured on the same / equipment and any other impact the incident may have, depending on the nature of the incident.

Repetitive incident:

If the same incident has occurred more than three times which has impact on product quality or in case of repetitive product failures, QA and Plant head shall decide appropriate actions in consultation with corporate quality assurance head (e.g. discontinuation of further production). To identify the repetitive incident, last one year trend of incident (from the date of the incident) shall be checked. For example if the incident occurred on 15th Jan’ 11, incident history of Jan’10 to Jan’11 shall be checked.

If incident is not repetitive: Release the batch/es and close the incident.

If incident is repetitive: Record the repetitive incident numbers. QA and Plant head shall decide appropriate action plan.

Corrective action taken /Proposed:

Mention the actions taken / proposed to correct machine / system / batch, as applicable.

Preventive actions taken /Proposed:

Mention the preventive actions taken / proposed to correct machine / system / batch, as applicable.

Examples of Corrective action and Preventive action

Incident: Punch breakage while compression of drum no. 5.

Cause identified: Wear and tear on prolonged usage of the punches.

Corrective actions :

Passed the compressed tablets of drum number 5 through metal detector.

Replaced the broken punch set with new punch set.

Destroyed the punch set.

Preventive action: To restrict the use of the tool set upto compression of X million tablets.

Incident: After drying, yield of lubricated granules found approximately X kg less.

Cause identified: Particle flow sensor of FBD was switched off. The operator was not aware of the importance of the sensor.

Corrective actions :

1) Qty of lubricants reduced proportionately before lubrication.

2) Training given to the concerned.

Preventive action: The particle flow sensor shall be put on during the drying operation and shall be ensured by the supervisor and shall be made as a part of FBD checklist.

Information to third party: If required, send investigation report to third party.

Batch disposition: Decision on incident batch/es & other batches disposition whether released or rejected shall be included by QA after approval of the incident report by QA head and Plant head.

Review of investigation Report: Concern department person shall prepared the investigation report and sign/ date. Concerned department head and QA shall review the investigation report and sign  the report.

Remarks of approver: QA head or plant head shall put his remarks, if any, at the time of approval of the incident report. if any.

Approval of investigation report: The concerned department shall forward the incident investigation report to QA and subsequently to QA head and Plant head for review and approval.

Investigation timelines and closing: The concerned department shall complete the report within 30 calendar days of the date of occurrence of the incident. If there is a need of an extension of time, the new time period shall be approved by QA head with justification.

Monitoring of CAPA: Corrective and Preventive actions mentioned in the incident investigation report shall be monitored through relevant SOP at plant e.g. SOP on corrective and preventive action (CAPA). CAPA number shall be recorded in the investigation report where is issued.

Incident Closing: QA shall ensure and evaluate, that all the actions recommended &/or CAPA issued or closed and the related supportive documents attached with the investigation report and close the incident. QA shall mention the incident closure date and sign.

Archival of incident investigation reportsClosed incident investigation reports shall be archived in the QA department. Copy of closed CAPA shall be attached with investigation report wherever issued.

Six monthly review of incidents: Incidents shall be reviewed at least half yearly basis by QA for identification and prevention of repetitive incidents. A review report of the incident shall be prepared and one copy sent to Plant Head along with CAPA, if any.

SOP ON CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTIVE ACTION (CAPA)

SOP ON CORRECTIVE ACTION AND PREVENTIVE ACTION (CAPA)

PURPOSE : This Standard operating Procedure (SOP) provides the requirements for identification, evaluation, implementation, effectiveness monitoring, closure and documentation of Corrective Actions and Preventive Actions (CAPA). The CAPA system is designed to address continuous improvement of Quality Systems.

SCOPE : This procedure is applicable for all Corrective and Preventive actions initiated based on information from internal and external GxP systems, processes and records that are recommended

REFERENCE(S)

WHO TRS 908 Annex-4: Good Manufacturing Practices for pharmaceutical products: main principles

PIC’s Guideline: Guide to good manufacturing practice for medicinal products (PE009-09) Part-I.

ICH harmonized guideline : Pharmaceutical Quality System Q10

EU Guideline for GMP, Volume 4 , Chapter 1 : Pharmaceutical Quality System

Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 CFR 820.100.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

  • Training Program for Employees.
  • Change Control Management.
  • Good Document Practice (GDP).
  • Handling, Management and Investigation of Deviation.
  • Quality Risk Management (QRM).
  • Handling and Investigation of Non Conformance.
  • Handling and Management of Product Complaint
  • Self-Inspection Programmed
  • SOP On Handling Of Online Rejection
  • SOP on Handling of Out of Specification (OOS)
  • SOP on Handling of Out- of Trend (OOT)

Attachment 

  • Corrective   Action   Preventive   Action Issuance & Retrieval Register
  • CAPA and Effectiveness Check Form.
  • Flow Chart of CAPA
  • CAPA TCD Extension  Request
  • Root cause identification for Human Error form.

DEFINITIONS

Corrective and Preventive Action (CAPA) : A concept with current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) that focuses on the systematic investigation of root causes of unexpected incidences to prevent their recurrence (corrective action) or to prevent their occurrence (preventive action).

Corrective Action: Action taken to eliminate the causes of an existing non-conformity, defect or other undesirable situation, in order to prevent recurrence.

Preventative Action: Action taken to eliminate the cause of a potential nonconformity, defect or other undesirable situation, in order to prevent occurrence.

Correction: Any action that is taken to eliminate non-conformity.

Effectiveness Criteria: Measurable standards that, if met, demonstrate a corrective action has prevented recurrence of a finding/issue and/or a preventive action has a prevented a potential finding/issue before it occurred.

Effectiveness Monitoring: A post-execution assessment of CAPAs to verify that implemented actions have the desired outcome, as defined by the success criteria.

GxPs: The “x” in GxP is a variable that stands for manufacturing, clinical, laboratory, or clinical laboratory, Engineering, Warehouse etc. GxP generally refers to GMP, GDP, GLP, and GCP regulations and guidelines established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Target Completion Date (TCD): A date established as a target or goal, as for the completion of action.

4 eye Principle: The Four eyes principle is a requirement that two individuals approve some action before it can be taken. The Four eyes principle is sometimes called the two-man rule or the two-person rule.

Alternate Target Completion Date (ATCD): If action / task is not complete as per defined timeline (TCD), requires additional time (extension of TCD) for completion of action/ task and hence the new date established as a target is called as ATCD.

ATCD Level mentioned as follows ATCD

Level 1: First request for ATCD

Level 2: Second request for ATCD

RESPONSIBILITY

Originating department shall be responsible:

CAPA initiator shall be responsible for initiating and reviewing the CAPA.

CAPA initiator shall be responsible for obtaining reviews from other departments who are stakeholders in developing the CAPA.

CAPA initiator shall be responsible for assessing the impact on the activities that are to be carried out until the implementation of the CAPA and to build adequate controls during the interim period of CAPA implementation.

Head of Originating department/designee shall be responsible for:

To implement the Corrective and Preventive Action.

To complete the CAPA as per define schedule.

To verify the effectiveness check of CAPA.

Quality Assurance department Head shall be responsible for:

To ensure tracking, follow-up and closure of Corrective and Preventive Action.

To approve TCD extension request wherever applicable.

To ensure implementation of define system.

To evaluate the effectiveness check of CAPA.

Plant Head shall be responsible for:

To facilitate for effective CAPA implementation.

PROCEDURE:

SAFETY/PRECAUTION/EHS

CAPA form shall mandatory for major and critical deviation.

Only authorized copies of CAPA shall be made available with QMS documents such as deviation, Incident, Non-conformance, OOS, OOT, OOC, online rejection, etc. (but not limited to).

CAPA shall take for Human error shall report in case of quality control laboratory and microbiology laboratory.

CAPA INITIATION

CAPA shall be initiated as an outcome of QMS documents as mentioned (Out of Specification (OOS), Out Of Trend (OOT), Deviations, Non-conformance or discrepancy during GMP operation, Product Quality Complaints Any other non-conformance (but not limited to),

Concern department submit a CAPA request form along with reference document no. for which CAPA has been taken. Than QA person start issuance of CAPA form as per Attachment-II by flowing procedure.

Take a print of CAPA form and make control copy of CAPA form. QA allocate the CAPA no. as per CAPA numbering system i.e.

“CAPA/Dept. Code/ YY/NN”,

Whereas

CAPA : Corrective Action and Preventive Action

Dept. Code: Refer SOP No. AA/QAD-001 (Preparation, Review, Approval, Issuance & Retrieval of Standard Operating Procedure (SOPs)

YY   : Indicate last two digit of Current year e.g. 25 for year 2025

NN   : indicate serial number starting from 01 and onwards.

For Example this year first CAPA taken in production packaging department, than CAPA number shall as follows:   CAPA/PKD/ 25/01

Than QA shall fill the following detail in the CAPA form i.e. Department, CAPA reference no., Ref. document no. issued by QA, TCD and category for which CAPA has been taken.

QA shall note down the CAPA detail and update the CAPA Issuance & Retrieval Register as per Attachment-I and issue a CAPA form.

Note:-The Target Completion Date (TCD) shall be assigned to each CAPA and implementation of CAPA shall be done as per defined timeline. The maximum TCD shall be assigned to each type of CAPA and TCD is assigned by Head QA/Designee.

Than concern department person fill Description detail of nonconformance, deviation etc… And immediate action in CAPA form and the supporting document (if any).

Than investigation has been conduct to identify the root cause and detail of root cause shall be mention in Root Cause identified column. Investigation shall be conducted using tools mention in Sop on Investigation.

In case any Laboratory nonconformance (Invalid, OOT, OOS, Deviation etc…) investigation will conclude Analyst Error as a root cause, “a root cause for human error” shall be done by Investigation team  to derive exact root cause of human error and same shall be reviewed by designee and Head QC.

Than Responsible person/Initiator forward the CAPA form to concern department head for review.

Than concern department head fill the detail of Corrective action and Preventive action in respective columns and attached the supporting document with CAPA form, than CAPA form shall be forward to QA for review.

Proposed CAPA that require changes shall be handled as per current version of SOP “Change Control Procedure”. The changed process or systems shall be reflected in the current version of documents and training shall be imparted to concerned persons as appropriate. In such cases, TCD of CCF shall not exceed as TCD of CAPA.

After review the CAPA form by QA person, CAPA form shall be forward to QA Head/ Designee for review and approval.

Than QA Head/ Designee review the CAPA form and supporting document, decide the CAPA form is Approved or Not Approved.

After getting approval from QA head CAPA shall be implemented by concern Department. The implementation status of CAPA shall be verify by Concern Department Head/Designee and QA person with supporting document.

Note:-The CAPA implementation as per TCD shall be periodically monitored and ensured by originating department. The details of implementation shall be updated in the log book by QA as per Attachment-I.

In case, the CAPA is not implemented as per TCD, an Alternate TCD (ATCD) shall be requested by concern department in the form.

If CAPA will not be implemented as per defined timeline of second ATCD, than deviation shall be raised by the originating department and justification note  shall be approved by Head QA/designee.

CAPA Closure:

QA shall verify all items have been adequately addressed during review and approval of CAPA closure.

All required steps have been completed.

All decisions and actions have been documented and approved by QA.

Verification that any revisions of approved follow-up activities are traceable to the original CAPA.

QA head/Designee review the CAPA form and evaluate that effectiveness Check of CAPA is required or not required and mention in respective column.

QA head/Designee also mention Additional Recommendation for CAPA (if any).

If the CAPA implementation is found to be satisfactory by QA head/Designee, the CAPA shall be closed.

If the CAPA implementation is found to be ineffective, QA shall return the CAPA to the CAPA initiator (Responsible Person) or concern department for further actions with a review summary.

Flow Chart of CAPA Initiation and closure .

Effectiveness Monitoring:

The review of the effectiveness shall be recorded as per Attachment-II.

QA shall review the effectiveness of CAPA along with respective department, on a regular basis.

The CAPA related to changes/improvement in practice or procedures shall be covered as a part of the effectiveness checks.

The review of the effectiveness shall be recorded as per Attachment-II.

QA shall review the effectiveness of CAPA along with respective department, on a regular basis.

The CAPA related to changes/improvement in practice or procedures shall be covered as a part of the effectiveness checks.

The effectiveness check shall be carried out based on intensity of CAPA or 30 days of its closure.

Any action plan arising out of the effectiveness check shall be completed within 15 working days.

After final review of “Effectiveness of CAPA” as per Attachment-II by Head QA enclose the form with the respective parent document through which the CAPA was identified.

SOP ON DATA INTEGRITY AND DATA RELIABILITY

SOP ON DATA INTEGRITY AND DATA RELIABILITY

PURPOSE : To describe the procedure for data integrity applies equally to manual (paper) and electronic data in all departments.

SCOPE : This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) shall be applicable for all activity performed either manually / electronic data entry in all departments of General Formulation Facility.

REFERENCES

MHRA GMP Data Integrity Definitions and Guidance for Industry March 2015

GMP standards published in Eudralex volume 4.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

Documents and data control

Training Programmed And Management

Preparation, Review, Approval, issuance & Retrieval of standard operating procedure (SOPs).

Attachment Title

Data Integrity Compliance Checklist

Ethics and agreement by individuals.

DEFINITIONS

Data: Information derived or obtained from raw data (e.g. a reported analytical result) i.e. Data must be attributable to the person generating the data, legible and permanent, contemporaneous, original record (or ‘true copy’) and accurate.

Raw data: Original records and documentation, retained in the format in which they were originally generated (i.e. paper or electronic’), or as a ‘true copy’. Raw data must be contemporaneously and accurately recorded by permanent means. In the case of basic electronic equipment which does not store electronic data, or provides only a printed data output (e.g. balance or pH meter), the printout constitutes the raw data. Raw data must permit the full reconstruction of the activities resulting in the generation of the data.

Metadata: Metadata is data that describe the attributes of other data, and provide context and meaning. Typically, these are data that describe the structure, data elements, inter­relationships and other characteristics of data. It also permits data to be attributable to an individual i.e Example: data (bold text)16 and metadata, giving context and meaning, (italic text) are: Levonorgestrel Tablet IP batch No. xxxxx001, 1.5mg.

Metadata forms an integral part of the original record. Without metadata, the data has no meaning.

Data Integrity: The extent to which all data are complete, consistent and accurate throughout the data lifecycle. Data integrity arrangements must ensure that the accuracy, completeness, content and meaning of data is retained throughout the data lifecycle.

Data governance: The sum total of arrangements to ensure that data, irrespective of the format in which it is generated, is recorded, processed, retained and used to ensure a complete, consistent and accurate record throughout the data lifecycle.

Data governance should address data ownership throughout the lifecycle, and consider the design, operation and monitoring of processes / systems in order to comply with the principles of data integrity including control over intentional and unintentional changes to information.

Data Governance systems should include staff training in the importance of data integrity principles and the creation of a working environment that encourages an open reporting culture for errors, omissions and aberrant results.

Senior management is responsible for the implementation of systems and procedures to minimize the potential risk to data integrity, and for identifying the residual risk, using the principles of quality risk management. Contract givers should perform a similar review as part of their vendor assurance programme.

Data Lifecycle: All phases in the life of the data (including raw data) from initial generation and recording through processing (including transformation or migration), use, data retention, archive / retrieval and destruction.

The procedures for destruction of data should consider data criticality and legislative retention requirements. Archival arrangements should be in place for long term retention mention in SOP on Document and Data Control Procedure.

Primary Record: The record which takes primacy in cases where data that are collected and retained concurrently by more than one method fail to concur. The ‘primary record’ attribute explain in SOP on document and data control, and should not be changed in any case. All data should be considered when performing a risk based investigation into data anomalies (e.g. out of specification results).

Original record / True Copy:

Original record: Data as the file or format in which it was originally generated, preserving the integrity (accuracy, completeness, content and meaning) of the record, e.g. original paper record of manual observation, or electronic raw data file from a computerized system.

True Copy: An exact verified copy of an original record.

Original records and true copies must preserve the integrity (accuracy, completeness, content and meaning) of the record. Exact (true) copies of original records may be retained in place of the original record (e.g. scan of a paper record), provided that a documented system is in place to verify and record the integrity of the copy.

Data may be static (e.g. a ‘fixed’ record such as paper or pdf) or dynamic (e.g. an electronic record which the user/ reviewer can interact with).

Example: once printed or converted to static .pdfs, chromatography records lose the capability of being reprocessed and do not enable more detailed viewing of baselines or any hidden fields. By comparison, the same dynamic electronic records in database format provides the ability to track, trend, and query data, allowing the reviewer (with proper access permissions) to reprocess, view hidden fields, and expand the baseline to view the integration more clearly.

Computer System Transactions: A computer system transaction is a single operation or sequence of operations performed as a single logical ‘unit of work’. The operation(s) that make up a transaction may not be saved as a permanent record on durable storage until the user commits the transaction through a deliberate act (e.g. pressing a save button), or until the system forces the saving of data.

Computer systems should be designed to ensure that the execution of critical operations are recorded contemporaneously by the user and are not combined into a single computer system transaction with other operations. A critical processing step is a parameter that must be within an appropriate limit, range, or distribution to ensure the desired product quality. These should be reflected in the process control strategy.

Audit Trail: GMP audit trails are metadata that are a record of GMP critical information

(for example the change or deletion of GMP relevant data), which permit the reconstruction of GMP activities.

RESPONSIBILITY:

Originating department shall be responsible :

To provide accountability for the quality and integrity data.

To properly document the data produced and the data they represent are of known quality.

To ensure that all technical employees are made familiar with the tools and information necessary for the performance of their assigned duties.

Head of Originating department shall be responsible for:

To review the accuracy and integrity of input data and to sign with date wherever necessary.

To check the data error in case of wrong data input found and take necessary corrective action with proper scientific justification and possible impact analysis, same shall be documented with sign and date.

To maintain and improve technical knowledge and professional competence by conducting training from time to time on technical subjects of all working staff.

Quality Assurance department shall be responsible for:

To review the accuracy and integrity of data criticality in terms of impact to product quality attributes.

To conduct training on data integrity on quarterly basis to all departments.

To review data and if issue found in data integrity then inform to reviewer team, originating department Head and Head QA.

To investigate the issue of data integrity and maintain the record.

Reviewer team shall be responsible for:

To check the accuracy, consistency and integrity of data.

To assess the impact of data to product quality attributes.

Reviewer team shall jointly investigate with Head QA if integrity issue of data found, data shall be corrected with proper scientific justification and the same shall be recorded.

Data integrity shall be check as per checklist attached.

Head – Quality Assurance shall be responsible for:

To check and identify the possible impact, in case of integrity issue.

To approve the investigation report of integrity issue and to inform the management and competent regulatory authorities with proper scientific justification.

PROCEDURE:

Data integrity:

Data Integrity training shall be imparted to all new joining, while introduction training by Head-QA/ Designee.

Training of Data Integrity shall be imparted to all staff members, twice in a year.

Data integrity shall be applicable to entire plant activity. ALCOA tool shall be applicable to all the departments in company, but not limited to.

ALCOA Plus details mentioned below.

A denotes to Attributable: Attributable means traceability of the document,

For example: Why did the activity?

Who did the activity?

When did the activity? but not limited to.

L denotes to Legible: Legible means, third person should understand and read the documents adequately.

C denotes to Contemporaneous: Contemporaneous means recording of analysis/process activity shall be recorded online.

For example: Person should record the activity before leaving the place or before start another activity. Based on memory, No recording of activity shall be accepted.

O denotes to Original: First time generated copy/ documents called as original copy/ document. Second copy/ Duplicate copy/ Xerox copy shall not be considered as original. In case, original copy/ documents is faded, second copy/print shall be authored along with original copy.

A denotes to Accurate: All type of activities shall be executed as per written procedure.

For example: In case of sample preparation is 100mg material to be dissolved in 100ml with water. Same shall be followed not a 50mg material to be dissolved in 50ml with water. However dilution factor is similar in both the cases.

Complete: All the data including any repeat analysis/ Re-processing/ Re-working on the product/ material, nothing has been deleted.

Consistence: Documentation practices should be applied throughout any process for consistency in documentation. Available should be in a sequential manner with a sign and date. Date and time should be in a correct sequence to show the reliability and consistency in the process and activity performed. (i.e. Data in sequential manner with a sign and date. Follow GDP for consistency in documentation.)

Enduring: Records should exist for the entire period and readable condition.

Available: Data should be available for review at any time until the defined storage of document. Available at the time of audit or whenever required for review.

Breach of data integrity can be identified by using ALCOA, but not limit to.

If, Breach of data integrity noticed at any time by any one, same shall be informed to immediate supervisor/ head of the department for further course of action.

Supervisor/ department head shall inform to Quality –Head/ Designee and evaluate the impact on product quality.

Head Quality/ Designee shall take action, based on criticality.

In case, any person shall be identified to in matter of breach of data integrity, based on criticality CAPA shall be taken, if required, respective person can be shifted from their responsibilities.

Ethics Training/ Agreement:

Ethics training shall be imparted to all employee during joining of the company by Head QA/ Designee.

Ethics agreement shall be understood by individuals and filled the same.

Monitoring:

QA person shall verify the analytical report and BMR Reports randomly selected by the QA for auditing.

QC Manager/ designee shall review at least one analytical report daily basis by considering all the techniques alternative (Like, HPLC, GC, Chemically, Dissolution, DT …etc.) and same shall be verified by QA person.

QA shall review the audit trail report, once in a week, which are already reviewed by QC person weekly basis as per respective procedure.

Documentation:

Recording of analysis shall be recorded on line.

English language shall be used for documentation to understand by third person adequately.

Recording of analysis/ process activity/ documentation shall be legible adequately and recorded by permanent ink pen.

In case any typographical error or wrong value transcribed, same shall be corrected by respective person by single cut horizontally with sign and date with remark.

Person shall not use whitener / tape / Market to correct the mistake and original value/ word must be legible.

Original records shall not be destroyed before completion of five years.

In case of validation (Analytical method validation/ Process validation/ Instrument qualification) documents will not be destroyed. Details of documents shall be referred to respective procedure.

Data shall be integral and traceable.

In case of thermal prints, photocopy of print shall be affixed along with original print.

The data shall be reviewed and approved as per regulatory /FDA/D&C Act requirement.

Signatures or initials of individuals must be unique and documented as per respective procedure.

Rounding off value shall be reported and rounding off procedure shall be applicable at final time point of results. Multiple rounding off value shall not be used to generate single results.

Date and time shall be followed as per respective procedure according to railway time.

While reviewing raw data, Reviewer shall ensure the correctness and traceability of raw data generated.

Reviewer shall ensure the correctness the raw data/ hard copy along with soft copy.

Audit Trail:

Computerized systems are used to capture, process, report or store raw data electronically, system design should always provide for the retention of full audit trails to show all changes to the data while retaining previous and original data. It should be possible to associate all changes to data with the persons making those changes, and changes should be time stamped and a reason given. Users should not have the ability to amend or switch off the audit trail.

The relevance of data retained in audit trails should be considered by the Company to permit robust data review / verification. The items included in audit trail should be those of relevance to permit reconstruction of the process or activity. It is not necessary for audit trail review to include every system activity (e.g. user log on/off, keystrokes etc.), and may be achieved by review of designed and validated system reports.

There should be evidence available to confirm that review of the relevant audit trails have taken place. When designing a system for review of audit trails, this may be limited to those with GMP relevance (e.g. relating to data creation, processing, modification and deletion etc).

QA shall review a sample of relevant audit trails, raw data and metadata as part of self-inspection to ensure on­going compliance with the data governance policy / procedures.

Data Review procedure describe the actions to be taken if data review identifies an error or omission. This procedure should enable data corrections or clarifications to be made in a GMP compliant manner, providing visibility of the original record, and audit trailed traceability of the correction, using ALCOA principles.

QC person shall review the audit trail of HPLC and GC weekly basis and record the results as per respective procedure.

In case any observations noticed during review, CAPA shall be addressed in same format, If require separate CAPA shall be initiated as per procedure.

In case any Incident/ OOS/OOT occurred during analysis, same shall be recorded and number of investigation shall be mentioned with raw data for its traceability

Computerized system user access / system administrator roles:

QC and other user department must be able to demonstrate the access levels granted to individual staff members as per respective procedure.

Individual users must have individual unique ID and password along with authorization.

List of users along with access control shall be prepared for department wise as per respective procedure.

System administrator access shall be allocated to Head Quality/designee and Head IT. System administrator access shall not be allowed to department –Head/ designee for better control.

System administrator account shall not be used for routine activity.

All changes performed under system administrator access must be visible and approved within, the quality system.

Data archival activity shall be done by IT person as per IT procedure.

Data Backup shall be done by IT person as per respective IT procedure.

 

GOOD DOCUMENTATION PRACTICES

GOOD DOCUMENTATION PRACTICES

PURPOSE : To lay down a procedure for good documentation practices requirements for the compliant, consistent and accurate completion of GxP Documentation.

SCOPE : This SOP applies to all cGxP documents (electronic and handwritten) used in the manufacturing, packaging, labelling, testing, storage and distribution of Drug Products and Drug Substances for commercial. It also applies to documents generated during Process Development, Formulation Development, Scale-Up Development, Analytical Method Development, Technology Transfer, Analytical Method Transfer and processing of Exhibit Batches in the general formulation.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

  • Document(s) and Data Control Procedure
  • Training Programmed and Management
  • Change Control Management
  • Data integrity & Data Reliability
  • Handling, Management and Investigation of Deviation

DEFINITION & ABBREVIATION(S)

DEFINITIONS : Good documentation practices (GDP): Good Documentation Practices are methods for recording, correcting and managing data, documents and records, to ensure the reliability and integrity of information and data throughout all aspects of a product’s lifecycle.

Good Documentation is a term used to describe standards by which documents are created, maintained, retained and dispositioned. Following Good Documentation Practices enables preparation of the documents and making entries of data in a legible and traceable manner.

GXP: Acronym for the group of good practice guides governing the preclinical, clinical, manufacturing, testing, storage, distribution and post-market activities for regulated pharmaceuticals, biological and medical devices, such as good laboratory practices, good clinical practices, good manufacturing practices, good pharmacovigilance practices and good distribution practices.

Document: A document is a physical or digital representation of a body of information designed with the capacity (and usually intent) to communicate intended subject. A document may manifest symbolic, diagrammatic or sensory representational information. For example, SOP, STP, Specifications, Master formula, Quality Policy, Protocols, etc.

Record: Any Document which contains recorded evidence of any GMP activity done during Manufacturing, testing, holding and release of a product. The record could be handwritten or electronically generated. Examples of records: Equipment/ Facility maintenance history, Change Control records, Executed batch manufacturing record, Executed batch packaging record, Validation reports, stability reports, Executed Logbooks, Training records etc.

ALCOA: A commonly used acronym for ‘Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original and Accurate’.

Attributable: All data generated or collected must be attributable to the person generating the data. This should include whom performed an action and when. This can be recorded manually by initialing and dating a paper record or by audit trail in an electronic system.

Note: It is important to ensure a signature log is maintained to identify the signatures, initials of people completing paper records.

For example: During a validation exercise, test results should be initialed and dated by the person executing the test.

Adjustment of a set point on a process or monitoring system should be made by an authorized user and the details of the change logged in an audit trail.

A correction on a lab record should be initialled and dated to show when and who made the adjustment.

Legible: All data recorded must be legible (readable) and permanent. Ensuring records are readable and permanent assists with its accessibility throughout the data lifecycle. This includes the storage of human-readable metadata that may be recorded to support an electronic record.

For example: GDP will always promote the use of indelible ink when completing records.

When making corrections to a record, ensure a single line is used to strike out the old record. This ensures the record is still legible.

Controlling your paper records/forms and formatting them such that there is ample room for the information to be recorded.

Contemporaneous: Contemporaneous means to record the result, measurement or data at the time the work is performed. Date and time stamps should flow in order of execution for the data to be credible. Data should never be back dated.

For example: If executing a validation protocol, tests should be performed and their results recorded as they happen on the approved protocol.

Data that is logged, or testing that is performed electronically, should have a date/time stamp attached to the record.

Ensure electronic systems that log data have their system clocks synchronised.

Original: Original data, sometimes referred to as source data or primary data, is the medium in which the data point is recorded for the first time. This could be a database, an approved protocol or form. It is important to understand where your original data will be generated so that its content and meaning are preserved.

For example: Ensure validation test results are recorded on the approved protocol. Recording results in a notebook for transcription later can introduce errors.

If original data is hand written and needs to be stored electronically, ensure a “true copy” is generated, the copy is verified for completeness and then migrated into the electronic system.

Accurate: For data and records to be accurate, they should be free from errors, complete, truthful and reflective of the observation. Editing should not be performed without documenting and annotating the amendments.

For example: Use a witness check for critical record collection to confirm accuracy of data.

Place controls/verification on manual data entry, for example, temperature results can only be entered within a predefined range of 0-100°C.

ALCOA+ (ALCOA Plus): A commonly used acronym for ‘Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original and Accurate’ which puts additional emphasis on the attributes being ‘Complete, Consistent, Enduring and Available’– qualities which are implicit in the basic ALCOA principles.

Complete: When data is complete in nature, it means there is no deletion that has taken place from the date of documenting. This include any changes that have been made during the life of the data.

Consistent: The data should be chronologically arranged, with time stamps included for any addition to the original data. Consistency should be ensured by applying various audits over the life of the data.

Enduring: The material used to record the data should be in manner which will last a long duration of time without losing the readability.

Available: Data should be accessible whenever needed, over the life of the data. Availability ensures the data meets it’s use, since can be applied when the need arises.

Data: The quantities, characters, or symbol on which operation are performed by a computer, which may be stored and transmitted in the form of electrical signals and recorded on magnetic, optical, or mechanical recording media or factual information(such as measurement or statistics) used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or Calculation.

Controlled Copy: Controlled documents shall be posted server for read-only access or the hard copy shall be stamped “CONTROLLED COPY” in blue. Controlled copy shall be subject to automatic update when a new revision is released. It is for reference only.

Original/Master Copy: The original hard copy of the document that shall be approved and signed by authorized personnel.

RESPONSIBILITY

QA Department shall be responsible for:

To maintain the document movement record.

To follow the procedure of Good Documentation Practice.

All User Departments / Personnel shall be responsible for:

All user department person who prepares the documents and records shall be
responsible to follow the procedure mentioned herein

Quality assurance Head shall be responsible for:

To ensures & responsible for implementation of the defined system.

Plant Head: To ensure implementation of the defined system.

PROCEDURE:

DEFINITIONS

Good documentation practices (GDP): Good Documentation Practices are methods for recording, correcting and managing data, documents and records, to ensure the reliability and integrity of information and data throughout all aspects of a product’s lifecycle.

Good Documentation is a term used to describe standards by which documents are created, maintained, retained and dispositioned. Following Good Documentation Practices enables preparation of the documents and making entries of data in a legible and traceable manner.

GXP: Acronym for the group of good practice guides governing the preclinical, clinical, manufacturing, testing, storage, distribution and post-market activities for regulated pharmaceuticals, biological and medical devices, such as good laboratory practices, good clinical practices, good manufacturing practices, good pharmacovigilance practices and good distribution practices.

Document: A document is a physical or digital representation of a body of information designed with the capacity (and usually intent) to communicate intended subject. A document may manifest symbolic, diagrammatic or sensory representational information. For example, SOP, STP, Specifications, Master formula, Quality Policy, Protocols, etc.

Record: Any Document which contains recorded evidence of any GMP activity done during Manufacturing, testing, holding and release of a product. The record could be handwritten or electronically generated. Examples of records: Equipment/ Facility maintenance history, Change Control records, Executed batch manufacturing record, Executed batch packaging record, Validation reports, stability reports, Executed Logbooks, Training records etc.

ALCOA: A commonly used acronym for ‘Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original and Accurate’.

Attributable: All data generated or collected must be attributable to the person generating the data. This should include whom performed an action and when. This can be recorded manually by initialling and dating a paper record or by audit trail in an electronic system.

Note: It is important to ensure a signature log is maintained to identify the signatures, initials of people completing paper records.

For example:

During a validation exercise, test results should be initialled and dated by the person executing the test.

Adjustment of a set point on a process or monitoring system should be made by an authorised user and the details of the change logged in an audit trail.

A correction on a lab record should be initialled and dated to show when and who made the adjustment.

Legible: All data recorded must be legible (readable) and permanent. Ensuring records are readable and permanent assists with its accessibility throughout the data lifecycle. This includes the storage of human-readable metadata that may be recorded to support an electronic record. For example:

GDP will always promote the use of indelible ink when completing records.

When making corrections to a record, ensure a single line is used to strike out the old record. This ensures the record is still legible.

Controlling your paper records/forms and formatting them such that there is ample room for the information to be recorded.

Contemporaneous: Contemporaneous means to record the result, measurement or data at the time the work is performed. Date and time stamps should flow in order of execution for the data to be credible. Data should never be back dated. For example:

If executing a validation protocol, tests should be performed and their results recorded as they happen on the approved protocol.

Data that is logged, or testing that is performed electronically, should have a date/time stamp attached to the record.

Ensure electronic systems that log data have their system clocks synchronised.

Original: Original data, sometimes referred to as source data or primary data, is the medium in which the data point is recorded for the first time. This could be a database, an approved protocol or form. It is important to understand where your original data will be generated so that its content and meaning are preserved.

For example: Ensure validation test results are recorded on the approved protocol. Recording results in a notebook for transcription later can introduce errors.

If original data is hand written and needs to be stored electronically, ensure a “true copy” is generated, the copy is verified for completeness and then migrated into the electronic system.

Accurate: For data and records to be accurate, they should be free from errors, complete, truthful and reflective of the observation. Editing should not be performed without documenting and annotating the amendments.

For example:

Use a witness check for critical record collection to confirm accuracy of data.

Place controls/verification on manual data entry, for example, temperature results can only be entered within a predefined range of 0-100°C.

ALCOA+ (ALCOA Plus): A commonly used acronym for ‘Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original and Accurate’ which puts additional emphasis on the attributes being ‘Complete, Consistent, Enduring and Available’– qualities which are implicit in the basic ALCOA principles.

Complete: When data is complete in nature, it means there is no deletion that has taken place from the date of documenting. This include any changes that have been made during the life of the data.

Consistent: The data should be chronologically arranged, with time stamps included for any addition to the original data. Consistency should be ensured by applying various audits over the life of the data.

Enduring: The material used to record the data should be in manner which will last a long duration of time without losing the readability.

Available: Data should be accessible whenever needed, over the life of the data. Availability ensures the data meets it’s use, since can be applied when the need arises.

Data: The quantities, characters, or symbol on which operation are performed by a computer, which may be stored and transmitted in the form of electrical signals and recorded on magnetic, optical, or mechanical recording media or factual information(such as measurement or statistics) used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or Calculation.

Controlled Copy: Controlled documents shall be posted server for read-only access or the hard copy shall be stamped “CONTROLLED COPY” in blue. Controlled copy shall be subject to automatic update when a new revision is released. It is for reference only.

Original/Master Copy: The original hard copy of the document that shall be approved and signed by authorized personnel.

RESPONSIBILITY

QA Department shall be responsible for:

To maintain the document movement record.

To follow the procedure of Good Documentation Practice.

All User Departments / Personnel shall be responsible for:

All user department person who prepares the documents and records shall be
responsible to follow the procedure mentioned herein

Quality assurance Head shall be responsible for:

To ensures & responsible for implementation of the defined system.

Plant Head:

To ensure implementation of the defined system.

PROCEDURE:

SAFETY/PRECAUTION/EHS

Never use scrap paper / rough paper for recording the data. This means,
all original observation/information shall always be entered directly the approved
applicable format.

Never use pencil, erase or whitener for corrections of entries.

Make the entry online in the executed documents.

Protect documents against accidental and malicious damage. Store documentation and
associated information in a safe and secure manner.

No further photocopy/Xerox are allowed to Controlled copy (if found shall be treated as Uncontrolled copy/copies).

Stapler pin shall strictly prohibited on MASTER DOCUMENTS, preserved in PVC folder/sheets.

General Requirements for Documentation Practice

All GxP documents shall be accurate, contemporaneous, legible and permanent, truthful and complete, readily retrievable and traceable.

Data integrity shall be given utmost importance in GxP documentation as per SOP on Data Integrity and Data Reliability.

All GxP activities shall be carried out with valid, correct and current effective versions of instruction documents and recording formats as per SOP on Document(s) and Data Control.

Movement of any document (Manuals, QMS file etc.) from QA to other section and department shall be recorded in “Document movement Record” Attachment-I for traceability.

All controlled documents shall have a unique identification number and a revision number. The instruction source and unique identifier shall be documented in the respective record.

For cases where Laboratory Notebooks, etc., are used during Development activities and where instructions are written manually in addition to recording experimental data, the Laboratory Notebook, though being an instruction document, may be excluded from this rule of requiring a version number; only an identification number needs to be provided.

All documents/records shall have page numbers (preferred format: “Page X of Y”).

All Master Documents shall be typed or preprinted. Hand written documents shall not be used as Master Documents.

All Instruction documents shall have the effective date printed or stamped on them.

Formats for date and time shall be described as given below:

Date shall be written in one of the following formats :

Never use scrap paper / rough paper for recording the data. This means, all original observation/information shall always be entered directly the approved applicable format.

Never use pencil, erase or whitener for corrections of entries.

Make the entry online in the executed documents.

Protect documents against accidental and malicious damage. Store documentation and
associated information in a safe and secure manner.

No further photocopy/Xerox are allowed to Controlled copy (if found shall be treated as Uncontrolled copy/copies).

Stapler pin shall strictly prohibited on MASTER DOCUMENTS, preserved in PVC folder/sheets.

General Requirements for Documentation Practice

All GxP documents shall be accurate, contemporaneous, legible and permanent, truthful and complete, readily retrievable and traceable.

Data integrity shall be given utmost importance in GxP documentation as per SOP on Data Integrity and Data Reliability.

All GxP activities shall be carried out with valid, correct and current effective versions of instruction documents and recording formats as per SOP on Document(s) and Data Control.

Movement of any document (Manuals, QMS file etc.) from QA to other section and department shall be recorded in “Document movement Record” for traceability.

All controlled documents shall have a unique identification number and a revision number. The instruction source and unique identifier shall be documented in the respective record.

For cases where Laboratory Notebooks, etc., are used during Development activities and where instructions are written manually in addition to recording experimental data, the Laboratory Notebook, though being an instruction document, may be excluded from this rule of requiring a version number; only an identification number needs to be provided.

All documents/records shall have page numbers (preferred format: “Page X of Y”).

All Master Documents shall be typed or preprinted. Hand written documents shall not be used as Master Documents.

All Instruction documents shall have the effective date printed or stamped on them.

Formats for date and time shall be described as given below:

Date shall be written in one of the following formats :

DD MMM YYYY (For e.g. 11 MAY 2021 wherever stamp shall be used)

DD/MM/YYYY (For e.g. 11/05/2021 or 11/05/21 wherever hand written or preprinted).            

Where,

“DD” is stand for the current date.

“MMM” is stand for first three letter of the current month mention in below table-01.             “YYYY” is stand for current year.

“MM” is stand for the current month in numeric digit.

S.No. MMM Indicates Alphabetic Months MM Indicates two digit numeric months
1 JAN indicate JANUARY 01
2 FEB indicate FEBRUARY 02
3 MAR indicate MARCH 03
4 APR indicate APRIL 04
5 MAY indicate MAY 05
6 JUN indicate JUNE 06
7 JUL indicate JULY 07
8 AUG indicate AUGUST 08
9 SEP indicate SEPTEMBER 09
10 OCT indicate OCTOBER 10
11 NOV indicate NOVEMBER 11
12 DEC indicate DECEMBER 12

 Table-01

All documentation of time and verification of time and date stamps shall be performed as per SOP on Data integrity and reliability.

Time generated from all equipment and computers used for GxP activities shall be synchronized with the company clock provided in the area.

Time shall be verified from the company clock provided in the area where the activity is being performed only.

Time shall be recorded in the following formats:

For all the GMP records change the date after 24 hours cycle daily, i.e. after 23:59:60 or 00:00:00 in the night as per Indian Standard Time.

Time: Write time numerically in the form of HH:MM or HH:MM:SS, as applicable, in the document using 24 hours cycle daily. e.g.,

For 03:45 AM write 03:45 or 03:45:00

For 03:45 PM write 15:45 or 15:45:00

For 12:30 AM write 00:30 or 00:30:00

Time duration to be written as shown below:

Note: 1) If for some process the observed time duration is 2 minutes and 30 seconds then it should be written as 2min 30 sec and not as 2:30min.

2) In case time is printed from a machine or a computer, the time format of the machine or the computer shall be followed.

Attachments shall be cross referenced to the parent document and the parent document shall be cross referenced to the attachments. In case of electronic records, all child or subsidiary records of a parent document shall have an indication of the relationship with the parent document.

Data shall be recorded directly on approved and authorized formats only (e.g., batch production records, batch packaging records, laboratory notebooks, raw data sheets). Data for GxP documentation shall not be recorded on unauthorized documents (e.g. “Post It” sticky sheets, scrap papers, note pads).

All GxP documents shall identify the significant steps that require checks by a second person while performing the activity (e.g. witnessing dispensing materials for batch production).

Impermanent records like data printed on thermal paper, thin layer Chromatography (TLC) etc., shall be copied onto a permanent medium and the copies shall be attached to or stored along with, the original signed records.

Handwritten Documents:

Only indelible ball (preferably only blue colors) shall be used in GxP documents. The ink used shall be such that it can be photocopied.

All departments shall use the permanent blue ball pen for execution of document. In document Issuance and other office work and for IPQA/IPQC activity blue pen shall be used and same shall be used for GxP documents filling.

Permanent BLUE indelible ball pen shall be used for signing of master documents for all departments. It is applicable for each and every department.

QC supervisor shall use BLUE indelible ball pen for checking and approval only.

The QA Person shall use the permanent Blue indelible ball pen to sign all GxP records, checking or approving the data.

All entries shall be concise, legible, unambiguous and accurate.

Handwritten records shall be signed or initiated and dated at the time the information is entered.

All entries related to experiments being performed shall be done in chronological order.

In the case of continuous pages of a notebook that are not being used to record data, continuity shall be denoted by recording the reference of the notebook number or page numbers at appropriate places. For example, if an experiment is recorded in a laboratory notebook on Page 25 and calculations are recorded on Page 35, a cross-reference linking the experiment with the calculations shall be recorded on both pages.

The correct entry shall be written near to the strike out entry. The Person correcting the entry shall put the signature and date along with the corrected entry. It is preferable that the person who made the original entry shall strike through and shall make the correction. If this is not possible then correction shall be made in consultation with QA.

Example Suppose ‘Cleaned’ is recorded in place of ‘Ensured’ by mistake on 10/05/2021 and observed later during BMR review on 14/05/2021, it can be corrected at later date in the following way: Correct way for Correction on 10/05/2021: based on supporting data or investigation conclusion.

                            Cleaned Ensured. Sign/Date

If any observation / signature / date is to be repeated, the same shall be rewritten. Ditto  (—-“—) marking or “as above” or “do” shall not be used.

The following practices are strictly prohibited:

Use of ditto marks (“) or down arrows ( ) to fill in repetitive entries.

Use of pencil or any removable/water-soluble ball.

Use of eraser or ball remover.

Use of “white-out or correction fluid” to cover an entry and then write over it.

Use of a stamp to replace manual dating, initials or signature on GMP documents, except in the case of validated electronic signature.

When one option is to be selected from several text options, the correct option shall be preferably “encircled” or marked with “√”. Other option selection procedures may also be adopted; however, explanation of the use of these shall be provided in related procedures.

Working with Blank or Unused page/space:

Do not leave blank space in any cGxP record.

Blank spaces or pages shall have a single line through them with a signature and date and the reason for the page being blank (e.g. “Not Applicable”, “NA” or “N/A”).

Signature Practices:

Site shall maintain an updated master signature log wherein each employee involved in GxP activities shall provide their signatures and initials. The log shall be used for traceability of signatures for GxP records as per SOP on Specimen Signatures of Employees.

Signatures for all GxP activities shall always be accompanied by the relevant date wherever a separate date column has not been provided.

Signatures indicate that the Signatory is responsible for the accuracy of data and information for the activity being signed for. The Signatory shall confirm the accuracy and completeness of information and data before signing.

Persons preparing, reviewing or approving documents or persons recording, verifying or approving records shall sign and write the current date in the documents.

   Note: Current date refers to the date when the document/record is signed.

For Example: A quality incident occurred on 05/04/2021 and the incident had an investigation conducted to identify the root cause. The investigation team completed the investigation and prepared a report. The investigation report was sent to one of the investigation team members, named “X” on 06/05/2021 for signature. Which date should be written along with A’s signature on the Investigation Report? – The date of the incident or the date when the Investigation Report was being signed?

Analysis of the Example:

Signature in the Investigation Report indicates that “X” has been part of the team investigating the incident and confirms that the investigation proceeded as per established procedures. X’s signature also denotes that said Investigation Report confirms the findings of the investigation and is truthful, accurate and complete.

Such confirmations are completed only once after the entire investigation has been completed and hence, the signature should bear the date on which the report is signed.

Importantly, back-dating is not allowed under any circumstances. “X” signing the Investigation Report on the date of the incident amounts to back-dating.

Hence, if “X” is signing the Investigation Report on 06/05/2021, he/she needs to put the same date along with his/her signature.

All document signatories shall be adequately trained for the activity performed by them.

For each activity/document (as applicable), each person shall sign (with current date) either as a Doer or a Verifier (also called “Checker”) or a Reviewer or an Approver. One person shall not sign for multiple roles for the same activity or entry (e.g. a doer cannot be the “Verifier”/ “Reviewer”/”Approver” for the same activity or entry recorded).

No employee is authorized to sign for an activity performed by another employee.

A clear meaning of each signature shall be provided (e.g. “Performed By”/”Verified By”/”Reviewed By”/”Approved By”).

Definitions/Significance of Signatures:

Prepared By / performed By / Written By / Analyzed By (also called as “Doer”): The signature of the person actually carrying out the operation, test, inspection, calculation or other actions.

Entries in the documents/records along with Signature and Date shall be made at the time when the activity is performed (contemporaneously).

The signature of the “Doer” denotes that the “Doer” has performed the activity and confirms the authenticity of the data as that of the activity performed.

The Doer shall also check the result for its compliance against the specified limits/acceptance criteria and is expected to inform the respective Supervisor/HOD in case the results do not comply.

Verified By/Checked By: The signature of the person responsible for witnessing or conducting an independent check to ensure the operation, test, inspection, calculation or other actions followed required instructions and procedures and verifies the entries made by the Doer.

The “Verifier”/”Checker” shall record and sign concurrently for the ongoing activity being checked.

The signature of the “Verifier” denotes that the Verifier has confirmed that the entries are made correctly and are complying with predefined specifications/acceptance criteria.

Reviewed By: The signature of the person responsible for examining the documentation and certifying that the document/record was prepared / filled appropriately and in compliance with requirements.

The “Reviewer” shall review and sign (with date) for the activity/document/record being reviewed; the reviewer may or may not be present when the activity is being performed.

The “Reviewer” shall review completeness of the document/record and conformance of results recorded during the activity to established process parameters, limits and other applicable standards that define requirements of the activity being performed.

The signature of the “Reviewer” denotes that the document/record has been examined, all requirements have been fulfilled and the document/record demonstrates that the process was followed in accordance with the instructions provided.

Approved By: The signature of the person accepting the document/record for conformity to requirements.

The “Approver” shall review and sign (with date) for the activity/documents/record being approved; the Approver may or may not be present when the activity is being performed.

The Approver shall review conformance of results recorded during the activity to established process parameters, limits and other applicable standards that define requirements of the activity being performed.

The Signature of the “Approver” denotes that the document/record demonstrates that the process was followed in accordance with the instructions provided and is approved for conformity with requirements.

Authorized By: The signature of the person responsible for providing official permission or approval to another individual to perform a particular task.

Designee:

Reviewers/Approvers may delegate authority to another suitably qualified person to review/approve records, as applicable. The designee shall be qualified to perform the delegated task based upon relative job position, training, experience and subject matter expertise. Though a designee may perform the delegated task (of reviewing/approving, as applicable), final accountability of the activity performed by the designee shall reside with the person delegating the task. Supervisors of a signatory and/or members of the same department at equivalent or higher titles may function as designees without prior delegation of authority.

The following signature practices are strictly prohibited:

Pre-dating or post-dating (back dating) either documents or corrections.

Pre-dating is completing an activity and then signing/dating that the activity was performed at a later time/date.

Example of Pre-Dating: An equipment is due for cleaning on 05/05/2021. The maintenance operator responsible for this activity has cleaned the tank on 01/05/2021; however, since this activity was scheduled for completion on 05/05/2021, the operator signs for completion of this activity with a date of 05/05/2021. This is called Pre-Dating, that is, signing for an activity in advance (i.e. with a non-current date).

Back-Dating is completing an activity and then signing/dating that the activity was performed at an earlier time/date.

Example of Back-Dating: An equipment is due for cleaning on 05/05/2021. The maintenance operator responsible for this activity could not perform the cleaning activity on 05/05/2021, but performed the activity on 06/05/2021. However, he signs for completion of this activity with a date of 05/05/2021. This is called Back-Dating, that is, signing for an activity with a back-date (i.e. with a non-current date).

Signing someone else’s name unless the signer is a Designee and it is clearly notated that the Designee has signed on behalf of the person, e.g., if Ramesh Kumar is a designated signer for Suresh Kumar, then Ramesh Kumar would sign as, “Ramesh Kumar for Suresh Kumar.

Signing documents/records that are known to be containing information that is inaccurate, false, misleading and/or untruthful.

Correction of Errors/Handling of Missed entries:

DON’Ts: Entries in documents/records shall not be cancelled, erased obliterated or otherwise rendered illegible by using correction fluid/tape overwriting or crossing out with multiple strokes.

  • DOs: When a correction is necessary, the erroneous/wrong entry shall be crossed out with a single horizontal line such that it shall not obscure the original entry. A brief reason for the correction shall be noted (Calculation Error) Initial/Date as to why the change was made and the correction shall be signed and dated.

Example: This is an acceptable correction as the original information must still be legible after the correction is made.

When the reason for change requires lengthy explanation, it shall be clearly stated and shall be justified by supporting rationale. The reason may be in the form of a memorandum that is referenced in and attached to the original record. If this change affects the outcome of data, an Investigation shall be initiated and, post-investigation, correction of the error shall be made and the change shall be countersigned by a supervisor. Supporting documents shall be attached, if required.

If there is insufficient space to enter a remark, then an annotation mark shall be placed near the incorrect entry and explained on the same page along with signature and date.

Attempts to cover up mistakes are serious data integrity concerns and are strictly prohibited at all levels.

The following conditions that may occur during correction of errors/completion of missed entries shall require evaluation as per current SOP of Deviation/Incident.

The employee who made the error/person who missed recording data is not available in the organization.

The information for an error/missed entry cannot be traced or determined.

Errors/Missed Entries identified after a document/record has been approved/closed by QA.

Requirement for correction of errors, including transcription/typographical errors related to data /missed entries in documents/records have already been submitted to Regulatory Agencies.

Errors identified in approved documents while the activity is being performed.

The following general rules shall be followed for correction of errors/handling of missed entries:

All error corrections/filling of missed entries shall be done by the document “Doer”, irrespective of the time/date at which the error was noticed.

If a worker (the “Doer”) made an error/missed an entry and they are no longer available due to reasons, such as leaving the organization or taking a leave for an extended period, such matters shall be escalated to the Department Head and an investigation shall be initiated.

Based on the impact assessment and investigation outcome, another employee may be authorized to correct the error/fill in the missed entry as part of the corrective action. The employee shall provide an adequate justification and mention the name of the doer while performing the correction.

Not all missed entries can be filled (corrected); if the information for filling in the missing data cannot be traced or determined, the Functional Manager or designee and QA Manager shall be informed immediately and shall take steps for further actions (including a decision for not filling in the missing entry) and provide explanations, which shall be recorded. The corrections/ explanations shall be countersigned by the QA Manager or designee. An investigation shall be completed and used by QA to determine the disposition of impacted product.

Analytical/Manufacturing Documentation:

Production officer and QC Analysts shall record actual results obtained at the time of performing an activity, without bias or prejudice.

Only validated Excel spreadsheets shall be used for calculations wherever such Excel spreadsheets are not available, calculations shall be re-verified with qualified calculators.

During the manufacturing process, sequential steps listed in the MI shall be directly recorded in the batch records as soon as the activity is performed.

In case of laboratory analysis, step-by-step details of the testing procedure, dilutions, critical test parameters and date/time of activity, as required by the Standard Test Procedure (STP), shall be documented concurrently in Analytical template/worksheet/Laboratory notebooks or using controlled forms.

A description of the sample received for testing with identification of source, quantity, lot number or other distinctive code, date sample was taken and date sample was received for testing shall be documented in the sample notebook or equivalent.

All weight slips, printouts, chromatograms, spectrum, records of analysis, etc., shall be signed with date by the person performing the activity immediately after completing the activity and included with the respective record.

If raw data prints/slips are too small to be included with the records (e.g., Batch Production Record (BPR), Record of Analysis, Qualification Documents), they shall be affixed on the specified stationary/space designated for them. These affixed printouts shall be cross-referenced to the parent documents and shall be enclosed with the parent record.

All invalidated/disregarded chromatograms and other cGxP documents shall have supporting justification written by the Analyst performing the activity, be signed/dated and approved by relevant stakeholders.

Wherever data/information for an activity must be captured electronically by an automated system (e.g. PLC, Data logger), the parent document shall contain instructions to attach copies of such printouts. All elements needed to associate the electronic records with the analysis and/or study shall be fully documented. These printouts shall be signed and dated. In such cases, the signature represents that the person performing the activity has verified that the printout is accurate and a complete reproduction of data/information taken from the electronic system.

Site shall implement a “rounding rules” procedure for the standardized management of numerical values during manufacturing/ analysis as per respective SOP.

Readings or values that are to be recorded from digital electronic displays shall be transcribed as they appear from the system to documents.

Example: If a balance is displaying 23.230 kg, then the value shall be recorded as 23.230 kg and not as 23.23 kg.

In case a sample has been analyzed by two or more Analysts for different tests, each Analyst shall complete the test and related documentation for respective tests and sign (with date) his or her part. After ensuring the completion of all tests required per specification, including those sent to the contract laboratory for certain tests, the COA shall be prepared.

Entries like “Complies/Does not comply” only allowed for the binary observations but the binary observation shall be specific .e.g. Limit test shall mention the observation noticed and TLC shall mention the comparison with the spot.

Concordance of another analyst shall be taken for observations of subjective tests. e.g. limit tests, TLC plates etc. Both the analyst shall initialize and sign the observation.

Printouts from the instruments relevant to the analysis shall be retained and no such document shall be discarded even if they are not of use in the calculation.

Rounding – off of values:

The rounding off values is applicable only to the calculations and not to the observed readings. Limits which are fixed numbers shall not be rounded off.

      For Example: If limit is 2 – 8 °C, then observed value 8.2 cannot be rounded off.

When rounding off of any value is required, follow the below procedure.

If last digit is equals to or greater than 5, it is eliminated and the preceding digit is increased by one.

If last digit is smaller than 5, it is eliminated and the preceding digit remains unchanged.

For examples see the below Table-01:

Illustration of Rounding of Numerical Values for comparison with Requirements
Requirements Unrounded Value Rounded Value
Product Yield Limit (98.0% to 99.5%) 98.926 % 98.93 %
98.124 % 98.12 %
99.655 % 99.66 %

Assigning Due Date:

For assigning Due Date in all GMP records, calculate due date as per frequency for that particular activity from the day on which that activity is performed.

Status of the activity can be valid up to the due date.

For example, consider the case of assigning due date for re-cleaning of prefilter for which cleaning frequency is 15 days. Suppose cleaning of pre-filter is done on 01/05/2021, since frequency of prefilter is 15 days, due date for re-cleaning of prefilter can be assigned 15/05/2021 and cleaning can be considered valid upto 15/05/2021.

Record all information in legible handwriting in all GMP records.

Some type faces have characters that are easily misread and create confusion. Few characters are listed below, Requirements (GENERAL)

GxP documents shall be provide a clear, accurate history of an activity or event.

Procedures shall require that all entries in GxP documentation be permanent, legible, accurate, prompt, clear, consistent, complete, direct and truthful.

Only current, approved versions of SOPs or forms shall be used to perform cGxP activities. Systems shall be in place to prevent use of superseded documents.

Uncontrolled documents shall not be used in GMP areas.

Facsimile (Fax) can be used for GMP activities, but must be signed/dated to do so. In addition, the Fax shall be signed / dated by the recipient upon receipt.

Email from non-validated or unsecure systems should not be used as the primary document where a hardcopy is required. When there is no alternative, the responsible person should print out the email, sign and date as being received. Email may be used to confirm receipt of GMP documents in accordance with the requirements of this section. Documents in PDF (or other image formats) sent as an attachment to an email can be treated as GMP similar to a Fax.

Original records shall be kept in a secure location with controlled access.

Original records shall be stored with the batch documentation and archived by the respective documentation cell.

Copies of master documents / raw data shall not be allowed unless justified. When copies of master documents / raw data are required, for example during a regulatory inspection, they should be clearly identified as an “UNCONTROLLED COPY” or “CONFIDENTIAL”.

Use of scrap paper, post-it notes or loose (unbound) paper in GMP areas to record data is not permitted.

When printouts are made that require verification, e.g. proof of weight printout) and are not automatically verified by a validated electronic system, they shall signed/dated manually by personnel performing the work (Doer) and the person verifying the work, as required.

Procedures shall require that batch records include identification of the persons performing and directly supervising or checking each significant step in the operation.

Reviews to ensure documentation is complete and accurate shall be performed by a qualified individual who did not perform the task.

Procedures shall require that reference to other GMP documents/records (i.e. deviation, discrepancy, CAPA or investigation numbers) shall be documented in the appropriate step of the document or in the comment section of the document.

The following elements shall be included, as applicable, when documenting a comment or event on a GMP document/record:

What happened?

When it happened (time)

Where it happened

Personnel involved

Requirements (Applicable For Laboratory Records):

All data generated within the laboratory shall be recorded. The intent/objective of the testing shall be recorded prior to the initiation of data acquisition. The requirements of the testing shall be covered by a specification, validated/qualified method, protocol or investigation.

Laboratory records shall meet the regulatory requirements. The requirements herein are applicable to both hardcopy and electronic records.

Clearly Written Documentation – All documents shall be accurate and recorded in a manner that prevents errors and ensure consistency. Sufficient space shall be provided for entries. If multiple documents or records are used in parallel for documentation, then each shall reference the other and be traceable by formal documentation numbers or record identification.

Notebook/Worksheets – Site SOPs shall describe the types of notebooks/worksheets that may be used to record data. These notebooks/worksheets shall be controlled and designed in such a fashion that pages cannot be removed or replaced.

Pagination – Unbound documents shall have page numbers, such as page XX of YY, to indicate the total number of pages in the document.

Content:

Laboratory records: shall include complete data derived for all tests necessary to assure compliance with established specifications and requirements, including examinations and assays.

Sample: A description of the sample received for testing with identification of source, quantity, lot number or other distinctive code, date sample was taken and date sample was received for testing.

Date/time: Where required, the date/time of activity shall be documented accurately.

 

Electronic Records:

Electronic records shall include elements for control of the process including but not limited to: implementation of an overarching data governance system, ensuring data integrity arrangements, appropriate management of the data life cycle and use of an audit trail.

Systems shall be designed to assure compliance and data integrity including but not limited to:

Restricting control/access to templates used for recording data.

Implementing user access rights that prevent amendments to data or audit trail information.

Ensuring access to raw data for staff performing data checking activities.

Using automated data capture or printers lballed directly to the equipment.

Locating printers in close proximity to associated activities.

Using clocks for recording timed events.

Having persons performing observed task countersign record whenever possible.

Recording the execution of critical operations contemporaneously by the user in single electronic transactions not combined with other operations.

Audit Trail:

When electronic records are used to capture, process, report or store raw data the system design should ensure retention of full audit trails, showing all changes to the data, while retaining previous and original data.

All changes made to data should be associated with the person making those changes, including a time stamp and reason for making the change.

Users shall not have the capability to disable the audit trail function.

Audit trail review shall be included as part of the routine GMP data review/approval process and should be documented.

QA should periodically review a sampling of relevant audit trails, including raw data and metadata, as part of the self-inspection procedures to ensure data governance compliance.

Test Method: A statement of each method used in the testing of the sample. The statement shall indicate the location of data that establish that the methods used in the testing of the sample meet proper standards of accuracy and reliability, as applied to the product tested. (If the method employed is in the current revision of the United States Pharmacopeia, National Formulary, AOAC INTERNATIONAL, book of Methods or in other recognized standard references or is detailed in an approved new drug application and the referenced method is not modified, a statement indicating the method and reference will suffice).

The method source and unique identifiers (e.g. version, issue date, etc.) shall be documented.

Complete records shall be maintained of any modification of an established method employed in testing. Such records shall include the reason for the modification and data to support the valid use and shall align with site-specific change control procedures.

Specification and/or acceptance criteria: The identification of specification and/or acceptance criteria associated with the analysis or study shall be fully identified (e.g. specification number, specification version number, specification name and effective date or protocol number, protocol version number, protocol name and approval date).

Standards, Reagents and Solutions: Complete records shall be maintained of all testing and standardization of laboratory reference standards, reagents, volumetric solutions and standard solutions.

Name, source, grade, date of receipt, expiration date and lot or unique identifier shall be provided for each.

Data on or cross-reference to, the preparation and testing of reference standards, reagents and standard solutions.

For quantitative standards, the actual strength (property value or calculation value) shall be recorded.

Weights: A statement of the weight or measure of samples, standards and reagents used for each test, where appropriate.

Weights taken shall be supported by balance printouts detailing the balance used, weights measured, time and date.

Weighs for individual dosage units tested for Content Uniformity and Dissolution testing can be captured, even though they are not required for calculations. These weights can be very useful supporting data, especially during laboratory investigations.

Printouts, Graphs, Charts and Spectra: A complete record of all data secured in the course of each test, including all printouts, graphs, charts and spectra from laboratory instrumentation, properly identified to show the specific component, drug product container, closure, in-process material or drug product and lot tested.

Any printouts, graphs, charts or spectra shall be appropriately identified, signed and dated and properly retained and crossed referenced.

Where practical, they shall be permanently affixed (with glue or tape) to the notebook or controlled data sheet and be marked such that it would be obvious if they become separated (e.g. marked on a border). Otherwise, all individual pages of a data set shall be maintained and secured together as a packet preventing the intentional or unintentional misplacement of the individual pages.

Laboratory Instruments, Apparatus, Gauges and Recording Devices:

Complete records shall be maintained of the periodic calibration of laboratory instruments, apparatus, gauges and recording devices.

Records shall include validations, calibrations, maintenance and cleaning or repair operations.

Instrument logs can be used to record the daily instrument performance verification check in addition to any instrument incident and unscheduled repairs.

All pertinent instrument parameters need to be documented.

Calculations: A record of a calculation example and all calculation factors in connection with the test, including units of measure, conversion factors and equivalency factors shall be documented.

Results: There shall be a statement of the results of tests and how the results compare with the established specifications or acceptance criteria of identity, strength, quality and purity for the component, drug product container, closure, in-process material or drug product tested.

Signatures and date: The initials or signature of the person who performs each test and the date(s) the tests were performed.

Each notebook/worksheet/template/form page shall be dated with a start date and signed and dated on completion of the page; or if not completed, at the end of the scheduled work day.

The initials or signature of a second person and the review date showing that the original records have been reviewed for accuracy, completeness and compliance with established standards.

Electronic Records and Electronic Signatures:

Persons who use closed systems to create, modify, maintain or transmit electronic records shall employ procedures and controls designed to ensure the authenticity, integrity and, when appropriate, the confidentiality of electronic records and to ensure that the signer cannot readily repudiate the signed record as not genuine.

Signature manifestation information should be subject to all controls required for electronic records and should include the following:

Printed name of signer.

Date and time signature was executed.

Meaning associated with signature (e.g. review, approval, authorship).

Retention of Documents:

It shall be clearly defined which record is related to each manufacturing activity and where this record is located. Secure controls must be in place to ensure the integrity of the record throughout the retention period and validated where appropriate.

GMP documents are confidential and are the property of the company and all documents shall be returned to company archives for proper storage.

Ensuring Proper Security and Storage of Documents, during Review Process. Precautions must be taken to prevent unauthorized persons from entering storage areas. In particular, storage area shall be clean, dry & free from fire hazard, accumulated waste and vermin and maintained within acceptable temperature, humidity & light exposure limits.

Document storage area access shall be restricted to authorized personnel only.

Retention period of all GxP documents as per site specified SOP.

All GxP documents shall be retained for a pre-designated period. Following the expiration of the retention period, GxP documents shall be destroyed in a controlled manner as per SOP on Document(s) and Data Control

 

 

TRAINING PROGRAMME AND MANAGEMENT

TRAINING PROGRAMME AND MANAGEMENT

PURPOSE : To lay down a procedure to conduct training of working personnel at all levels and its evaluation.

SCOPE : This SOP shall be applicable for all employees working in this company.

REFERENCE (S) :

A WHO guide to good manufacturing practice (GMP) requirements.

ASEAN-TMHS-GMP-Training-Chapter-5-Documentation.

PIC/S PE 009-14

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

Job Responsibility

Attachment/Format/Annexure Title

  • Annual Training Calendar
  • Trainer Evaluation Record and Certificate
  • List of Internal Trainer or Departmental Training Coordinator
  • Training Circular
  • Training Attendance Sheet
  • Induction Training Form
  • On The Job Training (OJT)
  • Training Feed Back
  • Training Need identification
  • Individual Training card
  • Training Questionnaire and evaluation sheet / Questionnaire Answer sheet
  • Destruction Record of Training

DEFINITION                                                                             

Employee Training record: It is a record of training activities that employees has undergone.

Transferred Employee: A person transferred from Unit-I to Unit-II such employees shall be treated as a new employee.

Trainee: The person who is being trained on specific subject or activity.

Training: A process that involves the acquisition of knowledge, skills, concepts, rules, procedures, processes etc. Thus, personnel remain competent to perform the task(s) assigned.

Induction training: Training of an employee to introduce/understand the organization systems and policies is termed as Induction Training. A training which includes familiarization of general concepts like organizational structure, rules & regulations, basic concept of cGMP, EHS, facilities, introduction with personnel in various departments Does and Don’t etc.

GMP Training: Training which is given to employee after completion of induction training at the time of joining the organization or during the Job rotation or assigning new task. This training shall include SOP training and Technical skills training.

Awareness Training: Training given to employee on particular topic for awareness purpose only.

On the Job training (OJT): Training conducted at Department where that particular activity is being done shall be termed as OJT.

External Training: Any training / seminar / conference, which is conducted outside the location or by an external faculty is termed as external training.

Training Coordinator: An individual who manages the training program. Departmental TC executing the training program in their respective department.

Training Need Identification (TNI): Training need identification is a list of SOPs that will be identified for employees based on work allocation and job description before plan training. Training shall be conduct of all new employees of all identified SOPs before work allocation.

Refresher Training: The Refresher Training is a training programmed designed for the old or existing employees of an organization, with a purpose to acquaint and update with his/her JD related work to improve their performance or consistency on the jobs.

RESPONSIBILITY

Departmental Training Coordinator(DTC) shall be responsible for:

All departmental training coordinator shall be responsible to maintain their individual training Card.

All DTC shall responsible to submit training calendar and trainer list to QA department.

All DTC or Trainer shall be responsible for evaluation of questionnaire, completeness of employee training, individual cards and feedback form.

Trainer shall be responsible for preparation and Updation of list of certified trainer/ DTC.

QA shall be involved in the certification procedure of trainer.

All employee shall be responsible to follow the procedure in the SOP.

Departmental Head/ training coordinator shall be responsible for compliance of training as per mentioned procedure in the SOP.

Plant Head & QA Head shall be accountable for overall compliance of the SOP.

PROCEDURE

Every employee of the organization shall be trained on his area of operation prior to start the work. The training shall be imparted depending on the nature of job and responsibilities and the cGMP, Health & hygiene, GDP and data integrity and data reliability training is mandatory to all employee / staff in each department.

Training Procedure

The training needs shall be based on the criticality of the operation performed by the employees working in different areas.

Training coordinator of concerned department shall prepare training need identification of individual employee of his/her department with the help of his department head and forward to QA Department. The training need identification shall be primarily based on the scope of cGMP and technical aspect related to the operational area.

At the start of year concerned department Head/Designee/ DTC/ Trainer shall prepare TNI for existing employees on the basis of employee status assessment. The same shall be informed to training coordinator QA. The training coordinator informed to QA Head for identification of general training needs as per   Document the training needs.

DTC Prepare an Annual Training Calendar on the basis of current TNI which shall include the aspect of cGMP and Technical training related to work area.

The Annual Training Calendar shall be reviewed by Head of concerned department after review forward to QA for approval.

One week prior to execution of training, the concerned HOD/designee shall circulate the circular either via mail to all interlinked department about the topic of training, date and time of Training session, so that concern department can plan accordingly the activities of their employees.

Trainer shall prepare the power point presentation or hard copy of training material for the training session.

On the identified training topic, trainer shall prepare the training materials.

All training records with training materials shall be submitted by DTC personnel to QA documentation.

All employees who participate in training shall bring their individual training card at the time of training and update the same after training imparted.

Individual training cards are only for payroll employees / staff it shall not applicable for contract workers.

All the coordinator (TC) shall be responsible to maintained and update individual training card after each training programme and review at the end of each month in his/ her department for completeness.

The training planned date is pre-printed in training calendar and the training execution will be ± 7 Days of training planned date as per the approved training calendar.

Selection of Trainer

Internal trainer from different departments shall be identified based on his / her qualification, communication / presentation skills, experience, knowledge and expertise or combination thereof in the different areas of operation.

For class room training, identified trainer shall conduct pre-certification training on the identified topic based on his / her area of expertise, on the basis of training the trainer shall be evaluated and certified on parameters as detailed in detailed.

QA personnel shall prepare list of internal trainers, which shall be approved by Head – Quality Assurance. The list shall be updated as and when required.

If trainer is absence for training programmed then his/her designee shall be responsible for conduct training as per the approved training schedule.

Prior to start of the training the participants shall fill their attendance sheet as per Attachment-V.

Types of Training : The types of training are divided into two major categories as mentioned below.

  • Internal Training
  • External Training

Planning and Execution of Internal Training

Internal training is the training which shall be conducted within the organization by internally certified trainers only. Internal training is of four main categories as mentioned below:

  • Induction Training
  • cGMP/QMS/GLP
  • On the Job Training (OJT)
  • Refresher / Re-training

Induction Training

Training which shall cover the overview of organization, units, company policies and departments called induction training.

The induction training shall be imparted to every new employee, who joins the organization.

Induction training shall be coordinated by HR department.

Initial induction training is carried out by HR department, which cover topics like

Organizational Structure

Key personnel and organization structure of various departments

Product range

HR policies e.g. shift timing, leave policy and other employee benefit policies.

As per the induction training schedule, the new joinees shall go to applicable departments for the interaction with concerned HOD and staff members.

HOD of various departments or his / her designee shall brief to the new joinee about their departmental structure, departmental functions.

Induction training shall be conducted for 1st day from the date of joining of the new joinee by HRD.

cGMP : cGMP training covers minimum following Sops (Sop On Induction & Behavioral, Sop On Personal Hygiene, Entry And Exit Procedure For Production Area, Documents And Data Control Procedure, Good Documentation Practices, Change Control Procedure, Handing Management And Investigation Of Deviation, Data Integrity And Data Reliability and CAPA )

NOTE: – Employee Joined In Q.C GLP Training Is Mandatory.

Technical training is the training which is designed to develop specific and cross functional skill and to update the technical knowledge.

cGMP/ QMS/ GLP training shall be conducted every new joined employee after induction training and cGMP/QMS/GLP training existing employee per Calendar or whenever needs identified.

cGMP training shall be mandatory for all new joinees within a month of joining.

The cGMP at induction training shall be conducted by trainer as class room training.

Different training sessions shall be conducted for Level – 1, Level – 2 and Level – 3 employees. The levels details are as follows:

  • Level – 1: Includes from Asst. staff and above.
  • Level – 2: Supervisor and Machine Operators.
  • Level – 3: Workmen and Housekeeping staff.

The scope of cGMP / Technical training includes but not limited to the following topics:

Basic cGMP aspects requirement.

Other as identified during the routine operation.

Based upon the topic of training program if required, evaluation shall be done through questionnaire.

After completion of the GMP/QMS/GLP training, specimen of full signature and initial shall be recorded in the specimen signature log available in QAD and job responsibility shall be finalized at the end of the day of Induction training by concern department head/designee.

Photocopy of job responsibility shall be attached to the training file of each employee/staff.

On the Job Training (OJT)

On the job training shall include the in-depth training in the concerned and cross functional departments of the new employees / existing Employee / Staff and other as identified.

On the job training shall be imparted to all the new Joinee / existing employees / staff by the concerned HOD or his/ her designee related to the area of operation. This training program shall include the training related to the specific aspects of an individual’s role including use of equipment, unit operations, safety norms to be followed and adherence to cGMP as per Attachment-IX.

OJT shall be given to concern employees at work place by HOD/ designee / DTC / TCQA.

The mode of imparting training shall be through Standard Operating Procedures, Cleaning Procedures, Operating Instructions, Preventive Maintenance Procedures and Practical Assessment wherever possible.

Concerned HOD / designee shall prepare the detailed schedule for On Job Training (OJT) based on the assigned job responsibilities and record as per Attachment-IX.

Training on the required SOP to the operator / worker shall be imparted by the concerned area HOD/ designee / DTC/Trainer.

After approval of any new / revised SOP the training shall be imparted by the concerned user department to concerned persons before implementation of new / revised SOP.

If any employee is transferred from one area of operation to other area of operation within the department, training on related SOPs shall be imparted to the employee.

Routine training of SOP shall be imparted to the employees as on job training.

HRD shall conduct expert trainings on firefighting, first aid and handling of emergency situations as and when required and attendance shall be maintained in Attachment No.-V

Refresher Training

Refresher training shall be carried out as per ongoing training calendar, and whenever there is a procedural change or revision in the SOP.

Training provision for those person who resume office after more than 30 days leave or after long medical leave shall be carried out as per the ongoing training calendar, and on the basis of evaluation their status assessment.

All employees shall undergo Refresher training on the procedures of their respective functions and related or cross functional department processes, wherever needs identified.

Awareness training

Awareness training given to employee on particular topic for awareness purpose only and there is no need of evaluation of participated employee.

External Training

Any training / seminar / conference, which is conducted outside the location or by an external faculty is termed as external training.

After attending the training program at outside, employee/ staff / trainer shall give same training to all concern person and attendance shall be recorded.

Evaluation

The evaluation shall be conducted for each type of training except the external training by the means of questionnaire.

The questionnaire shall include questions related to training topic and the questions shall be of objective types as well.

If the scored marked is less than 80% or fail, then the employee shall be retrained & re-evaluated.

Evaluation of re-training shall be done and same shall be recorded in training record.

A person shall be allowed to work in the respective area after successful re-evaluation. 

Documentation

All DTC will confirm the completion of training of all employees and related documents.

If any employee leaves the organization, then his training records shall be maintained for a minimum period of five years from the date of relieving of the employee. Subsequently the records shall be destroyed and recorded.

SOP ON SOP

SOP ON SOP (Preparation, Approval and Control of Standard Operating Procedures)

Objective : To lay down a procedure for the preparation, approval and control of Standard Operating Procedures.

Scope : This Standard Operating Procedure is applicable for the preparation and implementation of all Standard Operating Procedures to be followed at pharmaceutical Research and Development and all pharmaceutical formulation plants/ operations Company Name.

Responsibility :

Staff, Initiator Department shall be responsible for:

Development or generation of draft(s) of new SOP as per the procedure given in this SOP.

Updation of the existing SOP whenever required.

Head/ Section Incharge or his/ her designee, Initiator Department shall be responsible for:

Review and verification of SOP.

Approval of SOP and thereby training of the user staff.

Incharge, Documentation Cell -QA or his/ her designee shall be responsible for:

Checking and developing, if applicable, word processing styles and formats for SOPs; printing out the finalized SOPs.

Issuance of a unique number for new SOP.

Head/ Incharge, Quality Assurance or his/her designee shall be responsible for:

Review of SOP for its correctness and adequacy with respect to regulations/ guidelines or company standards related to written procedures, if applicable.

Final approval and subsequently compliance of the SOP.

Abbreviations and Definitions

Initiator Department :Department who shall initiate the preparation of SOP.

SOP: Standard Operating Procedure; a document where step by step instructions are cited to serve as support for methods or manners of fulfilling a function or functions reliably and consistently.

Site specific SOP: An SOP which shall be applicable for a particular site.

Corporate SOP : An SOP which shall be applicable for all formulation plants.

Procedure :

Generation of New SOP

All Standard Operating Procedures shall be written in clear and easy to understand language.

All the SOPs shall be generated on computer. The text of the SOP shall be typed preferably in font face ‘Times New Roman’ with font size ‘12’ or with other appropriate font size as per the requirement of the SOP.

An SOP shall be printed in black colour on standard A-4 size sheet of good quality having company’s corporate logo on the top left hand side of the sheet.

All SOPs shall be prepared using Microsoft Word application software

  • Page setup and Page border settings.
  • Top margin shall be 0.8 inch (0.8”)
  • Bottom margin shall be 0.6 inch (0.6”)
  • Left margins shall be 0.6 inch (0.6”)
  • Right margin shall be 0.6 inch (0.6”)
  • Page Layout from edge shall be header 1.0” and Footer 0.4”.

Page border’s line width shall be 1 point (1 pt) as appears in this SOP.

Form Number of the SOP (format) shall be put in the ‘footer’ and not surrounded by the page border, as appears in this SOP.

Upper portion (non text part) of the SOP (format) shall be put into the ‘Header’ as appears in this SOP.

Description of the format for SOP preparation.

Name of the initiator department e.g. Quality Assurance, Production, etc. shall be typed in bold on the top of right hand side of the page (font size 13).

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE’ shall be typed in bold capital letters (font size 11).

‘Title’ of the SOP shall be brief and self descriptive in nature. It shall be typed in regular text keeping the first letter of the key words in capitals (i.e. title case, preferably font size 11).

‘SOP No.’ shall be denoted in nine characters as described below (to be typed in regular font with font size 11).

The First character shall denote the location of the formulation plant(s)/ operations e.g.

Alphabet A shall represent SOP common for ‘All’ plants/ operations at more than one location

Note: In case, the first letters of two locations are same, then any letter of the new location’s name that is not matching with the first letter of the existing locations’ name can be used while numbering the SOP for that location.

The second character shall be alphabet ‘F’ denoting ‘formulation / operations’.

The third character shall be a ‘-’ (dash).

The fourth and fifth characters shall depict the department code.

The sixth character shall be a ‘-’ (dash).

The seventh, eighth, and ninth characters are numbers, which shall denote serial number of the SOP. The first SOP of any department shall be 001. The subsequent serial numbers shall be 002, 003, and so on. For example, the first SOP of Quality Assurance department common for all formulation plants shall have the number AF-QA-001. Similarly, first production SOP for Goa formulation plant shall be GF-PD-001.

Note: Numbering system can be defined with respect to number of sections or blocks serving a department e.g. If Production department of Formulation Plant located at Goa has different sections or blocks (e.g. tablet section, capsule section, etc.), the numbers for such blocks can be defined in such a way that the SOP applicable in a block or section can be identified by the allotted numbering system; for example, SOP Nos. GF-PD-001 to GF-PD-150 can be allotted for the SOPs applicable for one block or section, SOP Nos. GF-PD-151 to GF-PD-300 can be allotted for the SOPs applicable for another block or section and so on.

The SOPs carrying ‘IF’ in their numbering system shall be the Corporate SOPs (which shall reflect the system to be followed in all the plants or operations located at different locations) and the SOPs carrying ‘GF’ or ‘BF’, etc. shall be the Site specific SOPs.

‘Revision No.’ shall be denoted in two numeric characters. New SOP shall carry Revision No. ‘00’ and the subsequent revisions shall be denoted by 01, 02, 03 and so on. (to be typed in regular font with font size 11).

‘Supersedes’: Superseded number of the SOP shall be given in this column. For example, GF-PD-001 (the first SOP of Production of Goa plant) when prepared for the first time (first version or edition), ‘Supersedes’ column shall be filled with the word ‘None’ and when the same is revised for the first time, ‘Supersedes’ shall be given as ‘GF-PD-001, Rev.00’ and the ‘Revision No.’ for this SOP shall be filled as ‘01’. ‘Supersedes’ column shall carry full SOP number in case of the revision of the SOP carrying SOP number in compliance with earlier numbering system (12 characters number) e.g. when SOP with SOP No. ‘IF-QA-001-03’ is revised as per this SOP, ‘Supersedes’ column shall be filled as ‘IF-QA-001-03’ and ‘Revision No.’ column shall be filled as ‘04’ and ‘SOP No.’ shall be filled as ‘IF-QA-001’. (To be typed in regular font with font size 11)

‘Page No.’ shall be numbered as specific page number of the total pages of the SOP e.g. first page of SOP of total 05 pages shall be 01 of 05. (to be typed in regular font with font size 11)

Standard Operating Procedure shall be prepared and checked by two individuals who shall be involved with implementation of the SOP and accordingly shall write their names and sign with date in columns ‘Prepared by’ and ‘Checked by’. ‘Prepared by’ and ‘checked by’ shall be typed in bold with font size 11.

Head of Department or his / her designee of concerned department shall sign with date in the column ‘Approved by’. ‘Approved by’ shall be typed in bold with font size 11.

Head or Incharge, QA or his / her designee shall also sign with date in the column ‘Approved by’ hence approving the proposed SOP for implementation.

‘Effective Date’ is the date when the content of SOP becomes operational for the user department(s). It shall be given by QA department after completion of training on the approved SOP, in DD-MM-YY format, by hand.

Once the concerned SOP is approved by Head or Incharge, QA, Initiator department shall conduct training of the SOP and evaluation of training thereupon, as per respective SOP on ‘Training of Personnel’ applicable for the respective location.

Note: If a department prepares an SOP that involves other departments(s) in its execution, then the persons from this (these) department(s) shall also be trained as per the effective SOP on training, as applicable at different locations, and the training records generated thereupon shall be compiled by the initiator department or by training manager as applicable and shall be transferred to Documentation Cell of QA.

After completion of training on SOP, the initiator department shall forward the SOP to QA with the date on which training was imparted, for assigning ‘Effective Date’ on it. ‘Effective Date’ shall be typed in bold in font size 11.

The ‘Next Review Date’ shall be after two years from the Effective Date of the SOP given by QA department in DD-MM-YY format, by hand. Every SOP shall be reviewed within two months of the Next Review Date, or earlier, if any amendment is required. ‘Next Review Date’ shall be typed in bold in font size 11.

Note: All the entries made in hand by the concerned personnel shall be in black ink, preferably using ballpoint pen. Ink of good quality shall be used for the purpose.

The content of Standard Operating Procedure shall contain the following headings:

Objective: as first point; an overview of the intention of preparation of Standard Operating Procedure shall be briefly mentioned under this heading. The ‘Objective’ shall always start with the word ‘To’.

Scope: as second point; describes the site(s) / location(s) / plant(s) and/ or departments to which the Standard Operating Procedure is applicable.

Responsibility: as third point; specifies designation of the personnel and name of department that shall be responsible for implementation and compliance of the Standard Operating Procedure.

Abbreviations and Definitions: as fourth point; describes the meaning or explanation of term(s) which is (are) not common or having any specific meaning and expansion of abbreviation(s) used in the Standard Operating Procedure.

Procedure: as fifth point; describes the detailed procedure to be followed in simple and clear sentences. It may include the details of all operations, operational conditions, and precautions to be taken, if any, etc.

Forms and Records: as sixth point; it shall enlist all specimen formats, specimen labels, flow charts or any other attachment with the SOP.

Distribution: as seventh point; describes the distribution of the SOP to various concerned departments.

History:as eighth point; history shall contain a chronological record of significant changes / modifications in an SOP in brief, mentioned in three columns, namely: ‘Date’, ‘Revision Number’ and ‘Reason for Revision’

Note: Under ‘Date’ put date of preparation of the SOP. Under ‘Revision Number’ current revision number of the SOP shall be mentioned. Under ‘Reason for Revision’ give reasons why the SOP at previous revision number is modified. In case of new SOP write ‘New SOP’ under ‘Reason for Revision’ and in case of routine revision when the revision is not being addressed through change control procedure, write ‘Routine Revision’ under this column.

Narrative text of each heading shall be aligned below the heading, not across the length of the heading.

Main headings of the SOP as discussed shall be numbered 1.0, 2.0, 3.0,…….and so on. Each heading shall be typed in bold keeping first letter capital and rest in small for each word. The subsequent numbering for headings or steps shall be typed with outline numbering system through five levels. For instance, first level number for the heading at fifth position shall be ‘5.0’ and its second level shall be 5.1, 5.2……so on and the fifth level shall be ‘5.1.1.1.1’ against the first step of every subsequent level. After fifth level the sub-numbering can be marked as ‘a’, ‘b’ and so on or ‘i’, ‘ii’ and so on.

Note: Method or procedure adopted for typing the text for this SOP can be used as reference for the typing of SOPs.

Recordings, if required, as a result of implementation of an SOP shall be discussed in the relevant SOP by defining a format for the recording purpose which is termed as ‘Form’ of the SOP and shall be annexed to the SOP.

The form, if any, of the SOP shall be numbered with fifteen characters or sixteen characters. and its number shall be mentioned at left hand side of the bottom of each page.

The first nine characters of the form number shall be derived from the concerned SOP and the remaining six characters shall be as follows

The tenth character shall be a ‘/’ (slash).

The eleventh character shall always be ‘F’ which denotes ‘Form’.

The twelfth character (and thirteenth, in case with sixteen characters) shall denote the Form’s Serial Number ranging from 1 to 99 (a single digit number from 1-9 and double digit number from 10-99). Example: If an SOP containing more than nine forms then that SOP shall bear forms from Form Number one (F1) to Form Number nine (F9) with fifteen characters and then from 10th Form (F10) onward the Forms shall be numbered with sixteen characters.

The thirteenth (or fourteenth, in case with sixteen characters) character shall be a ‘_’ (dash).

The fourteenth (or fifteenth, in case with sixteen characters) and fifteenth characters (or sixteenth, in case with sixteen characters) shall denote the Revision Number of the form. The first version of any form shall carry Revision Number ‘00’. The subsequent revisions shall have Revision Number 01, 02, so on.

Example: Form number IF-QA-001/F9-00 is the first version of the ninth form of first SOP of Quality Assurance common for all formulation plants/ operations. Similarly, Form No. GF-PD-001/F11-00 is the first revision of the eleventh form of the first SOP of production for the Goa formulation plant.

e.g. For ninth form of SOP, Form number shall be typed as ‘Form No.: IF-QA-001/F9-00’, in regular fonts in font size 10.

If a form or a record of an SOP is also relevant to another SOP, the attached form or a record shall bear the Form No. as assigned for the initial SOP, e.g. if first form (GF-PD-002/F1-00) of second SOP (GF-PD-002) of production department for Goa formulation plant is required to be attached in SOP with number GF-PD-015, the form shall have the same form number as mentioned on the concerned form attached with its original SOP i.e. GF-PD-002/F1-00. Whenever this form is revised in future, this shall invite replacement in all other concerned SOPs where it has become a part of that SOP.

If a Form of an SOP needs some change(s) and these changes are not affecting the text of SOP then the form shall be revised as per SOP titled ‘Document and Data Control’.

SOP(s) prepared for the operation/calibration/cleaning/maintenance of equipment or instrument of one make and model number can be applied for the operation/calibration/cleaning/ maintenance of other equipment or instrument(s) of same make or model number.

Note: Any SOP that addresses the recording of an operation or an activity in logbooks, the format (when discussed in the concerned SOP) for recording shall carry the form number. All such bound forms (spirally bound or bound with some other type of binding) shall constitute a logbook. Requisition and Issuance of all these logbooks and/ or forms of the SOPs for recording purpose shall be regulated through SOP titled ‘Document and Data Control’.

The initiator department shall forward the draft(s) of SOP under preparation (putting “DRAFT’ word on every page of the SOP as water mark of appropriate size) to QA department for comments and necessary input, if any.

Once the Draft SOP is finalized, QA department shall forward the SOP to Documentation Cell of QA for final printing.

Documentation Cell of QA shall send the SOP to the initiator department for signatures on the relevant columns of the SOP and then initiator department shall forward the same to QA for final approval.

Note: The drafts reviewed by QA, if available with the concerned department, shall be sent to Documentation Cell of QA for the destruction.

After approval, Head, QA or his / her designee shall forward the SOP to Incharge, Documentation Cell or his/ her designee for putting dates by hand in ‘Effective Date’ and ‘Next Review Date’ columns of the SOP in DD-MM-YY format, once the training records are received at Documentation Cell of QA.

Distribution, Review and/ or Revision of SOPs :

Master Copies and Controlled Copies (for distribution) of the SOPs shall be prepared by Documentation Cell of QA as per SOP ‘Document and Data Control’.

Biennial review of an SOP shall be undertaken as per SOP ‘Document and Data Control’ however change in any SOP shall be undertaken through SOP titled ‘Change Control’.

Site QA shall circulate updated list of SOPs once in every four months.

For operational purpose, if any SOP is required to be translated in vernacular language, the same shall be done by the initiator department once the concerned SOP is finalized by QA using same format (Annexure-1) and shall be finally approved by QA along with its main SOP in English language. QA shall maintain the distribution and retrieval record of this SOP separately as per “Titled-Document and Data Control”.

If there is a revision and/ or change in the original SOP, the SOP in vernacular language shall also be revised for the desired changes.

SOP ON DOCUMENT(S) AND DATA CONTROL PROCEDURE

DOCUMENT(S) AND DATA CONTROL PROCEDURE

PURPOSE : To lay down a procedure for control of documents, documented data and records.

SCOPE : This Standard Operating Procedure is applicable for the control of documents and documented data and records.

REFERENCE(S)

Chapter-4: Documentation (EudraLex Volume4 GMP medicinal products for Human & Veterinary use.)

A WHO guide to good manufacturing practice (GMP) requirements.

Guidance on Good Data and Record Management Practices- WHO working document QAS/15.624 September 2015.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMETS

Preparation, Review, Approval, Issuance & Retrieval of SOPs

Good Documentation Practices

Change Control Management

Handling, Management and Investigation of Deviation

Quality Risk Management (QRM)

Data Integrity and Data Reliability

Corrective action and Preventive Action

Attachment Title

  • Document Issuance and Retrieval Record
  • Additional copy Requisition form
  • Document Requisition form
  • Log book issuance and Retrieval Record
  • List of department code with Number
  • Template for Annexure/Addendum
  • Storage Period of Major Documents
  • Documents/Data  Destruction record
  • Specimen Copy of Stamp
  • Template for list of authorized person for issuance of controlled documents
  • Request For Review or New Document Preparation

DEFINITION

Data: the quantities, characters, or symbols on which operations are performed by a computer, which may be stored and transmitted in the form of electrical signals and recorded on magnetic, optical, or mechanical recording media or factual information (such as measurements or statistics) used as a basis for reasoning, discussion, or calculation.

Documents: a written or printed paper that gives information about or proof of something.

Records: The facts, events, etc. that are known (and sometimes written down) about somebody/something or  to write down or film facts or events so that they can be referred to later and will not be forgotten.

RESPONSIBILITIES

User department shall be responsible for:

Initiation /preparation of document. (SOP, STP/STS, format, Annexure, Attachments, worksheet and Labels, Protocol etc.).

Submitting the approved document to Quality Assurance (QA) for Preparation of master copy and control copy and issuance.

User department responsible for maintain the issued /controlled copies.

Head of User department/designee shall be responsible for:

All HODs shall be responsible for follow the procedure mentioned in this SOPs.

Quality Assurance department shall be responsible for:

Quality Assurance shall be responsible for maintaining and controlling of the documents as per this SOP and shall review the documents for compliance with the relevant documentation procedures.

Head Quality Assurance/Designee shall be responsible for:

Head QA or his/ her designee shall be responsible for compliance of this SOP.

Plant Head shall be responsible for:

To ensure the implementation of the defined system

 PROCEDURE

 SAFETY/PRECAUTIONS/EHS

The formats for all SOPs in various departments shall be kept identical.

Only Controlled copies of SOPs shall be made available at the point of use.

No further photocopy/Xerox are allowed to Controlled copy (if found shall be treated as Uncontrolled copy/copies).

Stapler pin shall strictly prohibited on MASTER DOCUMENTS, preserved in PVC folder/sheets.

Only blue colour ball pen used for filling of cGMP / cGxP documents such as BMR / BPR / Protocol / requisition etc.

All the documents shall be the part of QMS documents and QMS shall comprise the following:

Quality Manual: The Quality Manual shall contain a statement of the company’s Quality Policy and Quality Objectives. It shall include the systems being followed for the implementation of the Quality Policy. Quality Manual shall be prepared by QA personnel and shall be approved by QA Head.

Master Documents: These are detailed documents for implementation of Quality Management System covering all activities that individually or collectively influence the quality of a product, whether directly or indirectly. These include facility layouts, Master Formula Records (MFR), Batch Manufacturing Records (BMR), Batch Packing Records (BPR), specifications and standard test procedures of materials and products, Qualifications / Validation protocols and SOPs. These documents are prepared by user department personnel and shall be approved by QA Head.

Only sign/date to be maintained manually and other information shall be printed in master formats, list and attachment.

We proposed to change the Digital signature in place of Manual signatures for prepared by, checked by, reviewed by, approved by & authorized for preparation of documents. (BMR, BPR, MFR, MPR, SOP and all their attachment, Protocols and Reports).

If authorized DSC person not available in premises and any other type error face during creation of master documents. Then manually procedure shall be follow without any QMS document complies.

Records: Records can be categorized as:

Primary records (original raw data):g. executed batch records, analytical records, log books, maintenance records, calibration records, Temp-RH records, pressure differential records.

Secondary records/documents: These are generated as report / certificate using primary raw data.

Sundry records/documents: These are records/documents which do not have direct effect on GMPs.

All the documents shall be prepared by taking into account the relevant statutory requirements.

All documents shall be written by using “Arial” font, size 11.

All documents shall be identified and traced by a unique title & unique document number.

English language shall be used in all documents.

Any allotted document number must not be allotted to any other document.

No hand written document shall be considered as a master document.

User shall prepare documents or make data entry in records by considering the following points:

Be sensitive to GMP compliance.

Record activity immediately and correctly.

Check entry of records for accuracy.

Sign and date immediately on recording.

Preserve all records / evidence in case of deviation or OOS.

Checker/ Reviewer shall check/ review the documents by considering the following points:

Verify record for adequacy/ accuracy.

Sign and date for review.

Approver shall approve the document by considering the following points:

Ensure adequacy/ accuracy of document.

Sign and date on approval of document.

Preparation of the Document(s):

For initiation of any new document generation, the initiator department personnel shall prepare the draft document with “DRAFT” watermark.

After completion of drafting the document, the user shall send it to his Department Head for review.

Department Head shall review the draft document, put the remarks or suggestions if any and forward it to QA department.

QA shall circulate the draft copy of document to the other concern interlink departments for review (if required).

After receiving the comment from other concern interlinks departments (where applicable), QA personnel shall review the draft copy of the document, write the comment (if any).

After QA comment on the draft copy of the document, QA personnel send it to QA Head for comments, if any.

QA Head or his/her designee shall review the draft copy of document and put the comments, if any, and finally QA Head or his/her designee shall approve the draft copy of document by making his initial.

After approval of the draft copy of document, QA forwards the finalized draft document to initiator department for final print.

Initiator department takes printout of the final document in black ink on A4 size white paper (on one side of the paper only).

Initiator department’s officer signs the document in “Prepared by” column and the initiator department’s head signs in “Checked by” column and forwards the signed document with the final draft document to QA for approval.

In case of rejection of the draft copy of document by Head-QA or his/her designee, the same shall be maintained by QA personnel.

Once the concerned document is approved by Head QA, initiator department shall conduct training on the document and evaluation of training there upon.

Note: If a department prepares a document that involves other interlink departments(s) in its execution, and then the persons from other concern department(s) shall also be trained.

Department Head shall ensure that the training is imparted to all concerned and the initiator department shall forward the training record to QA.

Annexure Shall be attached or used wherever if space is not sufficient for writing or used as a reference purpose. It shall be prepared.

An addendum is used to clarify and add things that were not initially part of the original Documents/Contract/Agreements.

Addendum/Annexure approval contain only two person from concern department i.e. prepared by and checked by Colum only.

Master copies of documents

Master copy shall be an approved original copy of document and shall be prepared by QA by stamping of “MASTER COPY” stamp in red color on each page of the document at left top corner position.

Master copy shall be kept in the custody of QA. Each master list shall be allocate unique Number.

Controlled copies of documents

Controlled copy shall be prepared by QA by photocopy of master copy with stamping of “CONTROLLED COPY” stamp in Green colour in the top right corner of each page.

Controlled copy is a distribution copy of a master document and shall be distributed to users their intended use.

Copy No. of the document shall be written in the following manner: Department No. / No.’s of copies send to departments (for department code No. e.g. for QAD controlled copy, copy No. shall be 01/02, in which “01” represents the department code No. and “02” represents that second copy of document shall be issued to QA.

Issuance and retrieval of controlled documents shall be maintained.

Uncontrolled copies of documents

Uncontrolled copy shall be distributed on need as a reference copy for external regulators, any auditors and governmental authorities.

Uncontrolled copy shall be prepared by QA by photocopy of a master copy with stamping of “UNCONTROLLED COPY” in Blue colour on each page top center of the document.

Issuance of uncontrolled copy shall be maintained by QA. Retrieval of uncontrolled copy shall not be done.

Issuance & control of documents

All documents like validation protocols/ reports, qualification documents, SMF, VMP, Quality Manual, manufacturing master formula, specification, STP, BMR, BPR, method validation protocols, stability protocols and reports, log books of equipment and instruments etc. shall be under the control of Quality Assurance department.

Controlled copies of the documents, if needed, shall be distributed to user department(s) by QA.

All the external calibration data of equipment / instruments shall be kept / maintained by the QA department e.g. QA shall maintain all the data of calibration for thermometers, gauges, PLCs, motors, pumps etc. QC shall maintain all the external calibration data of its analytical instruments such as HPLC, auto titrator, spectrophotometer, balance etc.

All the data maintained in laboratory software / production PLCs shall be password protected.

A printed hard copy of analytical & processing data, duly signed by doer and checker, shall be preserved along with the respective documents, e.g. chromatograms, reports and electronics print outs (if any), in QC department.

All data shall be executed by doer, checked by supervisor or above and verified by QA (if applicable).

Issuance and retrieval of the entire controlled document is governed by QA.

For issuance of any type of controlled document, user shall fill the Documents Requisition Form, which is maintained by QA documentation personnel. Issuance of logbook shall be maintained.

The new copy of the document shall be issued only after retrieval of the old copy of the same document.

Separate issue procedure for followed for BMR, BPR and Worksheet issuance.

If any additional copies of documents are required, a request shall be made to Head – QA/Designee in the specified format.

In case of BMR/BPR, additional sheets, document like worksheets, Raw data sheet, paper formats/Attachments/ worksheet either daily/ monthly/quarterly or yearly basis shall be issued by QA Department along with green colour round stamp of “………..” on all pages.

Issuance of documents through software by using scan copy of master documents. Digitally issuance by using Software to be used for all type documents Issuances, issued by name and current date issuance is print in header part right side.

In case of any technical fault such as networking or internet problem or if software have any issue then alternate method of issuance shall be used for controlled documents. As in case of BMR/BPR “ISSUED BY QA” in green colour shall be affixed on front page and other remaining pages top right corner with sign and date in blue pen only and documents like analytical worksheet, raw data sheet, paper formats/ attachment shall be stamped by “ISSUED BY QA” in green colour at top right corner on each pages and signed by Q.A in blue ink ball pen shall be continue in use for controlled documents. Trial batch BMR shall be issue as per above mentioned procedure.

Validation batches & stability Batches BMR & BPR shall be issue with stamping “VALIDATION BATCH” Stamp in Blue colour, on front cover file of BMR and BPR & below Issuance stamp on first page of BMR and BPR with sign & date & “STABILITY BATCH” Stamp in Blue colour, on front cover file of BMR with sign & date.

“REVIEWED COPY” stamp shall be affixed all certificates provided by vendors, etc. in blue colour at bottom right corner on each pages.

“REFERENCE COPY” with sign and date shall be affix on Photocopying of reviewed vendor certificate for other department, traceability certificate, supporting attachments and document send for mankind CQA or its subsidiary group of companies in blue colour below footer signature on each pages.

“INVALID DATA” with sign and date stamp shall be affix on all invalid data in blue colour at bottom center of each page and attached with the VALID DATA.

“QA VERIFIED” stamp shall be affix on pre dispatch inspected corrugated box before batch release in blue colour on front top right corner with sign and date by IPQA person.

Date stamp in blue colour ink used for effective date and next review date shall affixed at its designated place.

Specimen for stamps are mentioned in annexure titled as Specimen for stamps.

Review of the Documents

All the documents shall be reviewed ±30 days the ‘Review Date’ assigned on the concerned document or review frequency mention in document.

Concerned Department person shall issue “Request For Review of Document” form for review of document and after review submit the Document to QA deptt along with the review form.

Revision procedure of documents shall be of two types:

Routine or periodic revision

Provisional or conditional revision

Routine or periodic revision: Revision of a document as per assigned review period of respective documents.

If there is no change in SOP/Documents, concerned person submit the Form by commenting in form. Then QA Personal shall be extending the Date in given column of documents for next review period with stamping by date. However, the SOP shall be essentially revised after every 4 years, even if there is no change.

Document revised by routine or periodic revision shall be revised with change control and version no. of the document shall be changed.

If any change is required in the respective document, then such type or revision shall be initiated by “Change control form” as given procedure in the SOP on change control Management .

Provisional or conditional revision: Revision of documents before the assigned review period of respective document.

If any change is observed in the respective document before the assigned review period, the revision shall be initiated only through “Change control form” as given procedure in SOP on change control Management.

All the documents shall be reviewed by QA in the following manner:

The initiator department shall undertake the review of the concerned document as a draft copy.

The initiator department shall forward the reviewed document with comments to Quality Assurance department.

QA shall check the comments. If required, QA can send back the same to the initiator department for further information on the subject and/ or to other interlink department(s) for the comments, if required.

After receiving the final comments from the concerned departments, Quality Assurance shall assess the proposed changes. If proposed changes are acceptable to QA, then QA Head shall approve the draft copy of the respective document.

QA shall forward the approved draft copy to the initiator department for preparation of the final copy of document.

After incorporating all comments, the initiator shall take a print of the final copy of the document, the initiator department’s officer shall sign the document in “Written by” column and the initiator’s department head shall sign in “Checked by” column and the signed document with final draft document shall be forwarded to QA for approval.

Revised copy of the document shall be approved by QA Head.

After approval of the document follow the above mentioned procedure of preparation of the master copy, controlled copy of a document, issuance and control of documents.

Distribution and Retrieval of the Documents

All the controlled documents shall be distributed and retrieved by QA.

Distribution and retrieval of the all the controlled and / or uncontrolled documents shall be done using the form titled “Document Issuance and retrieval Record” as described.

Archiving of documents

Archiving of all documents shall be done by QA.

QA shall arrange all documents department wise so that it can be easily identified and traceable.

All the records received should be reviewed and then stored in the designated area according to the sequence no.

The master copy of superseded document shall be retained by the QA and stamped as “SUPERSEDED” at middle diagonally of each pages.

Discontinued SOP and documents shall be preserved in QA department and stamped “OBSOLETE” on Master copies, in middle diagonally on page in red ink.

Obsolete copies shall be archived in QA.

Footer and effective date will be remove from all loose formats which is issued by QA department for routine use.

Footer and effective date will be remove form printed log book from outside party when use for routine purpose.

Retention Period of Documents.

Documents shall be archived and retained at QA as per their storage period.

Handling of Records

Each concerned department shall be responsible to fill all the records relevant to the approved written procedure.

The documented data or records shall be forwarded to QA at appropriate intervals.

Each concerned department shall co-ordinate with QA in maintaining the reference documents like machine manuals, protocols etc.

raining questioner and answer sheet will submitted with SOP when prepare the master copy after approval and after training questioner feedback form not issued by QA department it will be handle by concern department HOD and training coordinator for routine purpose.

Pre-printed name and designation in all master formats, annexure, attachment, master list, MFR and MPR etc.

Destruction of documents and records

After expiry period of documents, QA personnel shall destroy the documents by shredding.

After destruction of documents QA personnel shall make necessary entries in “Document/Data Destruction Record”.

SOP PROCEDURE FOR INVESTIGATION OF OUT OF TREND RESULTS (OOT)

PROCEDURE FOR INVESTIGATION OF OUT OF TREND RESULTS (OOT)

PURPOSE : To lay down a procedure for investigation and evaluation of Out of Trend results, obtained during the release testing and stability study analysis.

SCOPE : This SOP is applicable to for investigation and evaluation of Out of Trend results, obtained during the release testing of key staring material and the release testing/stability study analysis of drug products manufactured

It is also applicable to any unusual trend observed during In-process analysis. In stability study, OOT will not be considered at following time points/study :

At last time point for specific condition e.g. 6-month time point is last time point for accelerated condition.

Test result at expiry

Test results after expiry time point.

Anti-oxidant (because of its high degradation nature).

This SOP is not applicable for engineering batch, demo batch.

This procedure is not applicable to microbial test results, hold time study results, Method Validation and Method Transfer analysis, Cleaning Validation samples during the analysis of laboratory testing. This shall be handled through respective SOP.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

SOP on investigation.

SOP on handling of out of specification.

Preparation and review procedure of Annual product quality Review (APQR)/ Product quality review (PQR).

Handling, Management and investigation of deviation.

Attachment Title

  • OOT Investigation form issuance log
  • OOT investigation Report
  • Flow chart for investigation.
  • Handling of OOT Results

DEFINITIONS

An Out of Trend (OOT) result can be defined as: A stability or release result that does not follow the expected trend and is scientifically questionable with respect to the previous result(s) collected during stability studies or observed during the regular batch releases or A stability or release result that predicts out of specification result in future/within shelf life.

OOT Number: The sequential number assigned to any given investigation within the respective

Laboratory Investigation: A documented investigation of an OOT result performed by the laboratory as soon as possible after identifying an OOT result.

Analyst: The person who performs the analysis.

Supervisor: A person with the combination of necessary education, training and experience to approve an initial laboratory investigation.

Hypothesis testing: Testing performed in order to verify a hypothesis which has been put forward as possible cause of an OOT result. Hypothesis testing may consist of repetition of the test procedure or part of the procedure, or of experiments designed specifically with the purpose of identifying an analytical problem. Hypothesis testing can be used in the laboratory investigation or the comprehensive investigation. The results from hypothesis testing can be reported only as part of an investigation report and thus cannot be used for release.

Laboratory Error: Error caused in the laboratory , examples includes but may be not limited to,

Analyst error in connection with performance of the analysis,

Malfunction of the equipment,

Error in the use of standards, calculation of results or transfer of data.

Most probable error: Scientifically justified determination that the results appear to be laboratory error.

Transient equipment malfunction: An isolate instance of faulty operation of the instrument, example of the occurrence or passing of air.

Replacement test/Repeat Test: A test performed on the original sample to replace an OOT result invalidated by a laboratory investigation.

Suspect cause: A hypothesis that cannot be proven, regarding what might have caused the OOT The suspect cause is set forth after an inconclusive laboratory investigation.

Sample (original sample): A sample consists of a defined number of units or a weighed/measured amount of material that is drawn based on rational criteria to ensure that the sample represents the material being sampled.

Resample: A sample drawn at a different time and with a different purpose than the original Re-sampling is permitted in case of sampling or transportation errors or as part of a comprehensive investigation.

Retest: Additional testing performed on the original sample in order to confirm or not confirm an OOT result, where a laboratory error cannot be documented.

Statistical outlier: A test result which by statistical analysis is identified as belonging to a different population than the other test results.

Production: In general, the manufacturing department, but in this procedure production is defined as the department that sends samples to the laboratory for testing. This means that e.g. stability and development departments are included.

Comprehensive Investigation: A documented investigation, which involves relevant organizational units such as QA, QC, production and production development/support. It is initiated as a consequence of an inconclusive laboratory investigation.

Averaging: The validity of averaging depends upon the sample and its purpose. Using averaging can provide more accurate results. For Example:

With HPLC consecutive replicate injections from the same preparation (the determination is considered one test and one results), however, unexpected variation in replicate determinations should trigger investigation and documentation requirements.

Averaging cannot be used in case when testing is intended to measure variability within the product such as powder blend / mixture uniformity or dosage form content uniformity.

Test Plan: A test Plan designed to evaluate and assignable cause hypothesis. The test plan should include a detailed description of the steps to be performed and evaluation criteria for the results. Evaluation criteria may include system suitability requirements, conformation criteria based on the system variability limits, and / or standard repeatability.

RESPONSIBILITY

QC Analyst:

To follow the laid down analytical procedure & protocol and document all the observations during analysis.

To check the data for compliance with the specification before discarding test & standard preparations.

The analyst is responsible to inform QC Executive & above about any Scientifically Questionable results/OOT result.

QC Executive /Astt. Manager/Designee:

To review OOT results objectively and timely.

To issue the OOT form from QA Department.

Initiate and complete the investigation along with analyst

Compilation of raw data and investigation report and ensure that it is documented.

QC Manager/Designee:

To review the investigation report for its correctness and completeness.

To permit Hypothesis testing (if required) and review results.

To authorize retesting (if required) and review results.

To evaluate the cause of OOT whether due to laboratory error.

Communicate the findings to the Head QC and forward the investigation report to QA.

For laboratory error, to implement Corrective and Preventive Actions (CAPA).

QA Executive /Asst. Manager:

Registration of OOT   issuance    of    form    for documentation.

To maintain the OOT form Logbook (Attachment-I).

Deriving recommended action and concluding finding of investigations.

To authorize Hypothesis testing and repeat analysis (if required) and review results.

To investigate the sampling error (If required).

Deriving and Initiating CAPA based on type of OOT observed.

Concluding the finding of investigation.

Ensuring completion of investigation with documentation with specified time frames.

Trending of OOT including information of analyst, instrument, test, API/drug product name, cause of failure

QA Manager/Designee:

To review OOT result, QC- Laboratory Investigation Report.

To authorize repeat analysis (if required) and review results.

To check and ensure Training records of Analyst and sampling personnel, MOA, Specifications.

To review the Manufacturing Investigation.

Timely disposition of the batch as concluded through investigation.

To ensure    timely    implementation    of    CAPA, recommended in the Investigation Report.

To maintain the OOT form Logbook (Attachment-I) and to archive the filled & completed OOT.

To authorize re-sampling (if required).

Executive/Manager Production:

To initiate manufacturing Investigation

To review BMR/ BPR Stability/ PQR/ Product history

To investigate sampling error (If required).

To compile the documents and to assign actual or probable cause.

PROCEDURE:

OOT results obtained in the laboratory shall investigate in two phase:

Phase-I: Laboratory Investigation

Phase-II: Non-process-related or operator error & Process-related or manufacturing error.

The cause of the OOT result shall be investigated adequately and thoroughly and in timely manner. The results of such an investigation shall be documented. None of the result, including initial aberrant result is omitted from the report.

Identification of OOT results

For existing Products, where a statistical trend is available based on minimum 10 batches data, first evaluate the statistical trend, evaluate UCL and LCL, any result that falls outside of UCL and LCL limit shall be treated as OOT. UCL and LCL ‘ shall be calculated as defined in the SOP on APQR/PQR (Annual Product Quality Review).

For new Drug Products and Drug Substances, where a statistical trend is not available following Criteria 6.4 shall be used to identify the OOT results.

Formulation Release (New Products-whereas 10 batches not manufactured):

Abnormal increases or decreases in pH, LOD/Water shall be investigated under OOT results.

OOT shall be considered in assay, CU, Dissolution and Related Substances results.

Assay: acceptance criteria for assay test as per given table below:

Specification Limit Result is OOT if
Specification limit as 90.0% to 110% The result outside 97.0% to 108% shall be considered as OOT.

This acceptance criteria shall also be applicable for, wherever overages added in product.

Content Uniformity: If any product is passing at CU at L2 Stage, then the obtained result shall be considered as OOT. Further 10 batches trend (Including previous 3) shall be established to derive specification window for OOT. While Product continuously passing at L2 Stage (Like 7 batches out of 10) shall not be considered for OOT. The reference of investigation can be given for same kind of OOT event e.g. all value either on higher side or all values on lower side for content.

Dissolution: If of any product is passing at S2 stage, then the obtained results shall be considered as OOT. Trend shall be established to derive specification window for OOT. While product continuously passing at S2 stage shall not be considered for OOT. The reference of Investigation can be given for same kind of OOT. E.g. All values either on higher side or all values on lower side for drug release. Any individual dissolution result that is scientifically questionable shall be considered as OOT. If product Passing S3 &L3 stage, then reject the batch.

Related Impurities:

Any RI (Known or Unknown)/RS value beyond or 80% of the specification limit shall be considered as OOT and must be investigated to see if the product will meet its full shelf life or the same needs to be reduced. E.g. If the specification limit for RI (known or unknown)/ RS is 0.10%, then any value obtained greater than or equal to 0.08% shall be considered as OOT and must be investigated.

If the specification limit for RI (Known) is 1.0%, then any value obtained greater than or equal to 0.8% shall be considered as OOT and must be investigated.

Any individual RI result, which is scientifically questionable, shall be treated as OOT.

Formulation stability:

Assay: Any assay results which is not within 5% of the previous time point result, shall be consider as OOT. e.g. If the specification limit for assay is 90.0% to 120.0%, and previous time point assay value is 97.0%, then the results obtained as 102.0% or greater and 0% or less shall be consider as OOT.

Dissolution:

If the Difference between any time points from its previous time point is greater than 10%, then it shall be treated as OOT.

Laboratory Investigation

Following to be considered for investigation if results are found Out of Trend:

Results found out of trend.

Any scientifically questionable results obtained due to an error observed by

Any other analysis and analytical data that do not comply with the trend due to any unforeseen reason and leading to discontinuation of analysis.

Any discrepancy observed during data review.

A Laboratory Investigation must be initiated and documented as soon as possible an OOT results is identified. Whenever possible, this should be done before test solutions, reference solutions, control solutions or reagents are discarded. This way, hypothesis regarding laboratory error or instrument malfunctions can be The analyst who had performed the initial analysis shall be designated as Analyst ‘A’.

Preserve all test preparation (including the composite or homogenous source of aliquot) used glass apparatus, original sample, dilutions, powdered sample of crushed tablets printouts etc. related to the analysis until the result are reviewed and verified for correctness. This is vital to facilitate the investigation e.g. transfer crushed powder sample of solid dosage form in double polythene bag and further in closed bottle and preserve. Store the bottle in appropriate storage condition in suitable tray to avoid deterioration.

For any deviation from this SOP e.g. deviation from written specification, sampling plan, test procedure or any other laboratory control mechanism follow procedure specified in SOP for Handling, Management & investigation of deviation.

QC Executive/Asst. Manager shall initiate OOT and shall inform QA department.QA Person shall issue OOT form.

The numbering of OOT is given as per the Following: OOT/NN/Y/XX/ZZ/AAA

 Where,

OOT    :           Denotes out of specification

NN       :           Denotes Plant Code i.e AA

Y          :           Denotes API or Formulation (Use A for API & F for Formulation).

XX       :           Denotes type of sample i.e FP & ST (FP For finished product & ST for stability).

ZZ        :           Denotes current Year (e.g. 25 for 2025)

AAA     :           Denotes serial no. of OOT (starts with 001 in each year)

Note: Numbering shall be done separate for both unit.

Investigation by QC Person (Executive/Asst. Manager):

The QC Executive/Asst. Manager shall carry out the investigation and report the finding (Phase-I).

The purpose of the Laboratory Investigations is to identify the root cause of the OOT.

The investigations shall be scientifically defendable and based on the knowledge of the critical parameters of both the sample and the analysis

In the laboratory investigation the possible causes of the OOT results are examined by the analyst and the laboratory supervisor, this shall include initial assessment of laboratory data and evaluation whether failure is due to laboratory error.

The examination should focus on possible causes regarding the actual result and there should be an evaluation of possible causes.

If the laboratory investigation is inconclusive, the laboratory should state a suspect cause in the laboratory, whenever possible.

Following additional checklist items, but not limited to, are to be checked (documented as such) using, as applicable:

Carry out the assessment of the OOT result as soon as the result is reported.

Analyst training verification.

Interview analyst to assess knowledge of correct procedure.

Discuss the test method with the analyst to confirm that the analyst has performed the test procedure correctly.

Examine the test data sheet and accompanying attachments in order to find out whether the results can be attributed to laboratory error.

Arrange for the re-examination of actual test preparations used by the analyst and to the extent possible, the glassware used in the original testing.

Verification of weight balance calibration.

Standardization of Volumetric Solutions used for Analysis.

Quality of Solvents, Reagents and Analytical Solution.

Correctness of Working Standards and/or Reference Standards.

Evaluate the performance of the testing method to ensure that it is performing according to the authorized documents (Specification / MOA / STP/ SOP).

Storage and Handling of Original Sample.

Raw data review.

Calculation and or transcription errors.

Error in dilution/Contamination – of samples, dilution medium, mobile phase etc.

Calibration status and Performance of Instruments used for analysis.

Adequacy of test method with respect to analytical method validation and historical data.

Any previous issue with this product/stages

Any issue with environmental temp./humidity within the area whilst the test was conducted.

Any other parameter pertaining to laboratory error.

Hypothesis Testing:

In case laboratory investigation revealed an obvious cause then regarding what might have happened should be tested to determine the assignable cause for OOT test result after approval and coordination with Quality Assurance Department.

A single/multiple experiments can be initiated based on OOT results observed. The Plan should be prepared by AM/Manager QC or his designee and authorized by Assistant Manager/Manager-QA. The experiment to be performed, sound scientific justification, steps to systematically eliminate possible laboratory error to determine if the failure is due to laboratory error in the testing or product itself.

Hypothesis testing must be documented and may include:

Re-injection of the test solution from original HPLC/GC vial, where an equipment malfunction is suspected.

Re-injection of the test solution after further shaking if homogeneity or dissolution problems are suspected. If possible, re-injection from the original HPLC/GC Vial should be done in the same series.

Further extraction of a dosage form to determine whether it was fully extracted during the original analysis.

Re-weighing or re-pipetting may be used to support a suspect cause but cannot in itself invalidate the original analysis

Use of a different equipment.

Performance by a different analyst.

Prepare and test new stock solution from the original composite sample after approval of QA, if applicable, to determine whether original stock was correctly prepared.

Prepare and test new Composite from the original sample, if applicable, to determine whether original sample prepared was non-homogenous.

Prepare and test a new sample solution from original sample, if applicable, to determine whether the flask used for initial sample solution preparation is suspected to be contaminated.

Prepare a new sample solution after approval of QA if the reagent or chemical used are suspected to be contaminated, deteriorated or wrongly used. Make two aliquot one using existing chemical or reagent and other using new chemical or reagent to identify the probable cause.

“Fresh Preparation of sample shall be restricted for injection only in case if test preparation is not stable” (Ideally fresh preparation should be avoided).

The results from hypothesis is testing can be used only as part of the investigation & thus cannot be used as reportable results for release.

During Phase-I Investigation if required to perform any additional testing apart from hypothesis testing. The Additional testing shall be approved with justification prior to execution.

Conclusive Laboratory Investigation:

After satisfactory review of the above, if cause is assigned, manager/AGM shall allow repeat analysis of same aliquot (if available). In single set/ sample (Original sample drawn) by analyst A (if available) in duplicate set. During repeat analysis usage of same aliquot/ sample (Original sample drawn/ Re sample sample) shall be justified in attachment-II. However, any re-sampling activity shall be approved by QA.The OOT results were caused by an error in calculation or data transfer, valid result can be obtained by correction of the error. For conclusive laboratory investigation QC should evaluate if the laboratory error impacts other batches or products.

Action:

If cause is assignable,

Invalidate the initial OOT results and data shall be stamped as “Invalid Data”.

If the result meet within the trend, release the subject batch.

Identification and implementation of CAPA and implement the action as per CAPA review SOP and CAPA effectiveness SOP.

If the root cause is not assignable to a laboratory error, on the basis of the investigation results, the QC Manager/AGM, in co-ordination with the QA Manager/AGM shall decide on the testing disposition.

They can decide to confirm the OOT. In this case the OOT will be confirmed on the basis of the evaluation of the results obtained.

Further actions shall be made as per Phase-II investigation i.e. full scale comprehensive investigation and all OOT results should be a part of disposition decision.

In case of OOT result reported by external laboratory along with investigation report. The investigation report shall be reviewed by Manager-QC/Quality Head. If Required, Manager-QC/Quality Head shall facilitate a joint investigation at external laboratory.

Reporting of Data:

All results obtained during investigation shall be used for reporting of analytical data.

The use of any replicate injection should be specified in a written, approved test procedure. Acceptances limits for variability should be specified in the method and each individual results obtained from the replicate injection and should be within the required specification.

It is in appropriate to use averaging to hide variability in results, in addition, it is not appropriate the average the initials OOT Results and additional retest or resample results because it would potentially hide variability in the individual results.

Time Frame:

All laboratory investigation shall be completed within 20 working day. Depending on the nature of investigation, if the defined time frame is inadequate, additional time required shall be justified by executive/Assistant Manager and same shall be authorized by manager-QC/Designee.

Documentation and Approval:

Each step in the laboratory investigation must be documented. It should be stated clearly what is an observation and what is hypothesis. The documentation shall include all investigation, findings, evaluation, hypothesis and final justified conclusion which states if the laboratory phase-I OOT investigation is conclusive or inconclusive.

QC Executive/Astt Manager shall compile the report and submit the same to Manager-QC/Quality head. If cause is assignable to laboratory error, Manager-QC/Quality head shall review the report and invalidate the initial OOT results. If immediate assessment does not indicate laboratory error, The QC-Executive in consultation with Manager-QC proceed to initiate Phase-II Investigation.

Manager-QC/Designee shall compile the laboratory Phase-I OOT investigation report and submit the same to QA Department for further evaluation by Astt. Manager/Manager-QA.

Laboratory Phase-I OOT investigation report shall be reviewed and concluded by Head-QA/Designee.

CAPA review shall be made as per requirement. Phase-I OOT report shall be closed after initiating appropriate CAPA in case of Laboratory error, while in case of non-assignable laboratory error, the OOT investigation shall be proceed to Full-Scale Phase-II investigation.

PHASE-II Full-Scale OOT Investigation

The purpose of the comprehensive Investigations is to identify the root cause of the OOT.

The Phase II OOT investigation shall be initiated by Executive/Asst. Manager- QA and manufacturing and shall be reviewed by Manager /GM- Manufacturing as per Attachment-II in close coordination with Manager/AGM of QC and QA Department.

On receipt of the Phase-I OOT investigation report from Quality Assurance Department, the Executive/Assistant Manager-manufacturing reviews the report to know the details of the OOT.

Using the form in Attachment-II, the Executive/Assistant Manufacturing reviews records and documentation of the manufacturing process to determine the equipment, personnel and adherence to the laid down

If necessary, trend analysis of previous batches shall be reviewed for product consistency, ruggedness and prediction to probable cause for OOT

Depending on the nature of investigation and probable cause, personnel from other department such as R&D/ PD Lab/ RA/ CQA may be requested to assist during investigation. Such participation shall be documented in the investigation report.

To ascertain the probable cause, if necessary and justified, analysis of previous batch shall be carried.

The nature and extent of investigation may vary on a case-to-case basis. Detailed investigation shall be carried out by use of tools, but not limited to, 5 Why Analysis, Fishbone diagrams, Brain storming, Failure mode effect analysis etc., to find the root causes.

Review the batch record and other supporting document for the following:

Authorized changes, if any.

Deviations from the standard process.

Quality of the input   materials   (whether, released   on   any authorization).

Yields in comparison with regular approved batches.

Time delays, if any.

Change in facility / equipment, if any.

Breakdown of the equipment.

Calibrations of equipment.

Improperly validated process.

Manufacturing operator error.

Improperly functioning equipment / services

Improperly functioning components such as pressure gauge / temperature gauge.

As a part of Phase II Investigation if required, Evaluation of sampling, sample handling and transportation (Including of storage of product prior to sampling) shall be initiated by Executive/Asst. Manager-concerned and shall be reviewed by Manager / AGM of concerned department and QA.

The investigation include:

Review of analytical data for any variation.

Determination of whether there is adequate evidence to establish errors such as contamination or wrong labeling details, inappropriate sampling device or container, etc.

Determination of whether, it could be established unambiguously that the original OOT result was due to Faulty Sampling or Errors in sampling procedure. If yes, proceed as per Attachment-Ill.

Allow re-sampling of the batch.

Re-sampling shall be performed by the same methodology.

Re-sampling shall be authorized by Manager/AGM – QA and documented.

The analysis of resample shall be performed in triplicate by Analyst A, if all the 3 results are passing, then Analyst B (i.e. second analyst) shall carry out analysis of resample in triplicate.

The results are evaluated by Manager / AGM- concerned department & Manager / AGM QA.

If the result complies with the specification, invalidate the initial OOT result and the batch may be released.

If OOT is assigned due to “Sampling Error”, corrective action plan shall be documented and implemented.

Any other actions may be incorporated and apply in certain situations.

Additional Investigations (Including retesting) can be performed to identify potential non-process related errors. The scope of the investigation depends on the issue. This means that the level of investigation and its documentation is anticipated to increase from OOT results at non-critical production steps to OOT results at critical production steps, from OOT results at first purification step to OOT results at last purification step, from OOT results at the API level to OOT results at drug product level.

Re-testing/Additional Testing/Re-sampling

In case it becomes necessary during an OOT investigation, performed additional retesting and protocol should be prepared. This protocol should be approved by QA Department before start of the additional retesting.

Retesting can be part of the Phase-II investigation

Decision to retest should be based on the objective of the testing and sound scientific judgment. It should be initiated by QA after approval of the laboratory investigation if the laboratory has stated a possible (but not proven) cause a laboratory error. Additional investigation in the laboratory can be recommended during the Phase-II investigation.

If no probably root cause is stated in the laboratory Phase-I OOT investigation: Retesting may be initiated later during the Phase II Retesting may be initiated by QC (with QA approval) for unstable samples where retesting shall be initiated as soon as possible after the inconclusive laboratory Phase-I investigation has been completed in order to ensure that the sample material represents the batch.

The number of retest to be performed and the testing endpoint must be determined and documented prior to retesting with a protocol approved by

Retest shall be performed if possible, on multiple days, using different analytical instrument and using different analyst(s).

Generally, all retests approved in the test plan are completed as part of the Phase-II investigation. Each individual test results should be confirmed to its specification limit. However, any failure results observed during the additional re-testing, this also shall report i.e. All valid data should be reported even if more OOT data is generate

Re-sampling

Re-sampling may be part of the Phase-II investigation Re-sampling should be approved by Quality Assurance Department.

Re-sampling can be justified when the Phase-II investigation supports that the original sample is not representative of the batch (e.g. a sampling or transportation error has been identified), or when the original sample is consumed in the analysis.

Attempts to avoid later case should be taken by drawing an original sample large enough to allow retesting.

Re-sampling with the purpose of retesting is only allowed for homogeneous material. The rationale for re-sampling should be documented.

Root Cause:

Report root cause all possible causes listed, investigated and evaluated. To identify the cause, the tool of 5 why analysis may be adopted. By adopting this tool, cause shall be derived in a structured manner. The possible effect of the cause may be evaluated in respect to effect on product quality, compliance with GMP, written documents, validation state etc. and regulatory requirements (what is filed with the authorities).

Document the investigation of possible causes. If possible, attach photos, copies of log books etc.

Corrective Actions:

Once the root cause is identified, immediate corrective action shall be derived. As part of the investigation, mention any further corrective actions to be taken based on identified root cause to isolate the problem, to minimize impact on compliance, product quality and to ensure the safety of consumers.

The Corrective Actions shall describe the details as what has been done to solve the problem.

Preventive Action:

Preventive Action shall identify the actions to prevent reoccurrence of the problem. These may include such things as revision of processes or procedures, creation of new systems, training or re-training if required.

In the column of Preventive Action identify the actions to prevent reoccurrence of the problem. These may include such things as revision of processes or procedures, creation of new systems, training or re-training if required.

Describe in the Preventive Actions the detailed as:

What will be done to prevent the problem from happening again?

In case of a human error, is re-training required?

Should suppliers be contacted?

Should maintenance programs be revised?

Evaluation by QA:

QA evaluates each OOT & shall ensure for the availability of sufficient data, rationale or justification to support the suspected cause as well as challenge the correctness of data.

QA shall also assure that any affected products/items are separated from non-affected Products/items.

QA shall evaluate & give comments as QA Evaluation Part. In case, the OOT Investigation Report needs the evaluation of any other departments such as Regulatory Affairs, Corporate Quality Assurance, Engineering, IOD, as per relevance & customers as applicable QA shall specify the name of the department in Evaluation of relevant department part in the OOT Investigation report to get the evaluation from other relevant departments as specified by QA.

If investigation is likely to extend the time frame, General Manager -Manufacturing shall justify and document the requirement of additional time. The extension of time frame shall be authorized by Head-QA.

Corrective and   Preventive   Action   and   Disposition   Status   of   the batch (CIosing of OOT)

The CAPA proposed by GM-Manufacturing shall be reviewed by GM – Quality including conclusion of Investigation report, suggested corrective and Preventive action plan for the batch and overall impact on product quality.

The disposition of the batch or other batches / product and CAPA shall be authorized by General Manager – Quality.

After satisfactory completion of investigation, decision shall be taken by GM Quality for batch disposition and based on that batch shall be approved or rejected.

Time Frame

OOT Investigation must be handled as quickly as possible.

All Phase-II OOT investigation shall be completed within 30 calendar days. Depending on the nature of investigation, if defined time frame is insufficient, extension of time frame shall be justified by head manufacturing and authorized by Head-QA.

Target Completion Date (TCD):

Implementation of Corrective and preventive actions. The document must state the priorities/ Timelines for the completion of corrective & preventive action.

Product disposition

Product disposition should be based on case by case, documented, evaluation of the outcome of the OOT (Phase-I and Phase-II) investigation. All test results, both within trend and OOT, shall be reported and considered in batch release decisions.

Quality Assurance decides the final product disposition. The conclusion must be justified and documented.

OOT results identified and invalidated

In those instances where the OOT investigation has revealed a cause not related to the quality of batch (i.e. laboratory error) and all impacted, results are invalidated, the results should not be used to evaluate the quality of the batch(es).

OOT results identified and confirmed

In those cases, where the investigation indicates an OOT results is caused by a factor affecting the batch quality the results should be used in evaluating the quality of batch. A confirmed OOT results indicates that the batch does not giving the within trend results.

Inconclusive Investigations

In cases where the OOT investigations does not reveal an assignable root cause for the OOT test results and whereas example one OOT results and three within trend results have been found, the original OOT results should be retained in record. Scientific judgment should be used in order to assign the disposition of the test results.

Closure of OOT Investigation Report:

Investigation closure should be performed at the point where conclusions have drawn, corrective preventive actions taken or identified.

Although an investigation may be considered closed, additional, long-term preventive actions may have been identified.

The implementation of CAP A shall be completed as per the target completion date specified in OOT report by the concern department in coordination with The CAPA status shall be monitored periodically & the status of its completion shall be reviewed on target completion date by Quality Assurance department.

Alternate CAPA Target Completion Dates (ATCD):

In case, if the CAPA for the OOT Investigation are not closed/ completed within the said timeline, an interim report including a justification for extension of TCD must be prepared by Concern Department, Any Extension of the TCD must be approved by the AGM-QA/Head Quality.

After implementation of CAPA, the CAPA closure must be reviewed by QA. The CAPA closure shall be attached to the relevant OOT investigation report. Based on the review and compliance of CAPA, QA shall approve the CAPA The CAPA closure approved shall be recorded in CAPA register as per respective site SOP.

Trending & Preventive Action Monitoring:

QA department carries out monitoring & trending of OOT. Trend analysis shall be reviewed by the Heads of Production, Engineering, and Quality. The document shall be approved by Head-Quality. Trending shall be done on every six month basis.

Prepare the trend of the OOT with bar and pie chart for better understanding. Pie charts to be used to identify % of contributory factors causing OOT result i.e. Analyst error, material/product failure, instrumental error or method

Based on evaluation of trending plan of improvement for specific area shall be made and accordingly further actions shall be taken or to plan the further actions.

SOP ON HANDLING OF OUT OF SPECIFICATION (OOS)

SOP ON HANDLING OF OUT OF SPECIFICATION (OOS)

PURPOSE

To establish a procedure for evaluation and handling of ‘Out of specification (OOS)’ test results identified by Quality Control department.

SCOPE

This SOP covers procedure involved in investigation of out-of-specification (OOS) results pertaining to Starting materials, Packaging materials, finished products, in process samples and stability samples, applicable for this company. This SOP is not applicable to OOS results observed during the product development (Trial batches) and method validation.

EXCEPTION:

  • In-process real testing performed for equipment, or process/ system adjustment to prevent process drift
  • Market samples for which the storage conditions and transportation along with authenticity are not traceable.
  • In process physical tests (e.g. average weight, hardness, thickness, etc.), conducted in production, these are handled through SOP on “Handling, Management and Investigation of Deviation”.
  • Testing with environmental monitoring.
  • Analytical data generated by Analyst / Chemist at the time of training and Analyst qualification.
  • Product complaint samples sent by Complainant, but evaluated by quality assurance (QA) to be not fit for testing and/ or having an “unknown” on “unacceptable” handling/ storage.

REFERENCE(S)

  • EU guidance: Good manufacturing practices
  • MHRA guidance for out of specification investigation, 2013.

CROSS REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

  • Document(s) and Data Control Procedure
  • Training Program for Employees
  • Change Control Management
  • Good Document Practice (GDP)

ATTACHMENTS

Format of Log Book for  Out of Specification

Format for Out of Specification (OOS) Report.

Extension for OOS Record No

Format of Periodic Trend of OOS

Format for Assessment of developing trends.

Format for Intimation of OOS to Purchase Department

Flow chart for Laboratory Investigation

Flow chart for Phase I a Investigation

Flow chart for Phase I b Investigation

Flow chart for Phase II Investigation

Flow chart for Phase II (Conducting Laboratory Failure Investigation)

Flow chart for Phase II (No Assignable Cause)

Flow chart for Phase III investigation

DEFINITIONS

Assignable cause: An identified reason for obtaining an OOS or aberrant/anomalous result.

No Assignable cause: When no reason could be identified.

Reportable results: is the final analytical result. This result is appropriately defined in the written approved test method and derived from one full execution of that method, starting from original sample.

Most probable cause: Scientifically justified determination that the result appears to be laboratory error.

Investigation: Review and experiments jointly conducted by an investigator and the analyst to find the root cause attributing to OOS results. This could be a Laboratory (Phase-I) and/ or Cross functional Investigation (Phase-II). This should be through, timely, unbiased well documented and scientifically sound.

Retesting: Testing of Portion of original sample. The sample used for the retesting should be taken from the same homogeneous material that was originally collected from the lot, tested and yielded the OOS results. For a liquid or single use formulation pack it may be from the original unit product or composite. For a solid it’s to be an additional weighing from the same sample composite prepared for the original test. This may include the preparation of fresh standards and/ or other test reagents as appropriate.

Re-sample: A new sample from the original container where possible, required in the event of insufficient material remaining from original sample composite or proven issue with original sample integrity.

CA (Corrective Action): Corrective action is an aspect of quality management that aims to rectify a task, process, product, or even a person’s behavior when any of these factors produce errors or have deviated from an intended plan. Corrective actions can be thought of as improvements to an organization to eliminate undesirable effects.

PA (Preventive Action): Action to eliminate the cause of a potential nonconformity or other undesirable potential situation.

Hypothesis / Simulation Study: Structured documented sequence of experiments which are designed to identify the root cause for the failure. This shall be based on series of discussions, thought processes and scientific rationales’ focused on what might have occurred to yield the OOS results. Each Experiment shall have pre-defined expectation that actually what outcome we want to observe through that particular experiment. Investigational tools can be used to design Hypothesis / Simulation protocol i.e. five whys? ; Cause and Effect Diagram; FMEA; Fish Bone diagram etc.

Cross Functional investigation: Cross functional investigation includes all the departments that could be implicated (e.g. Manufacturing process, Development, Maintenance, Engineering etc.) in the OOS results. This process to investigate the OOS failure through review of manufacturing process, conditions, input materials and it’s documentation as defined in SOP.

RESPONSIBILITY 

Originating department shall be responsible:

Analyst is responsible for reporting the OOS results and inform to Executive and above.

To ensure that instrument used for analysis is calibrated.

QC reviewer is responsible for review of analytical data.

Executive and above is responsible for laboratory investigation of OOS results, preparation of hypothesis protocol, Preparation of retesting & resampling plan.

To immediately inform the OOS results to the Head QC or designee and shall not discard sample solution/stock solution/ instruments settings until evaluation of failure analytical results.

To participate in the investigation, participate in finding root cause and carry out the experimental analysis where applicable.

Head of Originating department/designee shall be responsible for:

Head/Designee Quality control is responsible for review of hypothesis protocol, retesting & resampling plan.

Head/Designee Quality control is responsible for preparation of trend and identification of human error during investigation of OOS on monthly basis and submitted to QA department.

Quality Assurance department shall be responsible for:

QA shall issue OOS form, CAPA (if required) and investigation form for identification or root cause of OOS.

QA reviewer is responsible for review of analytical data.

Quality assurance is responsible for review of hypothesis protocol and resampling or retesting plan.

Head – Quality Assurance/ Designee shall be responsible for:

Quality assurance is responsible for review & approval of hypothesis protocol and resampling or retesting plan.

To review, revised and approve of Out of Specification SOP.

To ensure implementation of the defined system. 

Plant Head shall be responsible for:

To approve new or revised SOP.

To ensure the implementation of the defined system.

PROCEDURE:

Out of specification results:

Test results that does not comply with the pre-determined criteria (i.e. filed applications, drug master files, approved marketing submission, or official compendia or internal acceptance criteria)

Test results that fall outside of established acceptance criteria which have been established in official compendia and/ or by company documentation (i.e. Raw material specification, In-process / Final product testing, etc.)

The OOS shall be handled as follows; however, in case of contract manufacturing products if contract giver (MAH) has provided any procedure for handling of OOS, the same shall be adhered to. MAH procedure must cover all the aspects regarding the investigation of OOS results as mentioned in Company procedure.

However, if Company procedure in handling of OOS is found to be more elaborative and covering certain important aspects which are not addressed in MAH procedure then Company SOP shall be followed for investigation of OOS results. Such decision shall be conveyed to MAH holder.

The OOS process applies to in-process samples if data is used for batch calculation/decision and if in a dossier and on Certificate of Analysis. OOS shall not be applicable for in process testing while trying to achieve a manufacturing process end point i.e. adjustment of manufacturing process (e.g. pH, Viscosity, etc.), and studies conducted as variable parameters to check the impact of drift (e.g. process validation at variable parameters).

Note: During OOS investigation, in case of process validation samples from Various stages for variability evaluation like layer wise samples of in-process container, sample of filling Operation, samples of speed variability etc. retesting shall be done by single set of samples following the correct laboratory procedure preferably by original analyst from remaining set of samples collected during validation study.

The OOS process applies to previous released batch used as reference sample in an OOS investigation showing OOS or suspect results. However, a controlled sample prepared by using API and placebo in similar composition can be used for OOS investigation, if required.

OOS results noted for different tests for a particular batch shall be logged and reported as separate OOS. OOS for multiple samples in one sample set sequence can be addressed through single OOS only.

In case any OOS result is observed by an analyst, He / She shall report to immediate Executive QC or above.

After Identification of OOS, immediate executive QC or above then shall report this to QA within same day or next working day but not later than that, QA shall issue OOS form to QC on requisition with allocation of OOS numbers in the OOS log.

In case if OOS observed in samples analysis received from outside than QA will inform to contract giver/s within same day or next working day but later than that in reference to technical agreement. Also, if any operating staff fails to raise the OOS within same day or next working day but later than that, appropriate disciplinary action shall be taken.

The activity in OOS shall be initiated as follows:

The OOS details shall be recorded in the Log book as per Attachment-I.

Out Of Specification Numbering Allocation:

The OOS numbering system in Out of specification reports shall be generated from 1st January of the current year to the 31st December of the same year.

The number given to the Out of specification reports shall be unique and shall not be repeated.

The Out of specification report number consists of Eighteen characters.

As per define Plant code OOS numbering system shall allocated during issuance and maintained logbook by quality assurance department.

Analyst shall fill the section 1.0, sample /test details .

All solutions, reagents, glassware (Pipette, Volumetric flask, Measuring cylinder, etc.) and instruments must be retained until all data has been verified by second person.

The sequence of events followed for laboratory analysis are given in the flow chart.

Phase I a (Preliminary laboratory investigation):

Phase I a investigation is to determine whether a clear obvious errors due to external circumstances such as powder spillage or those that the analyst has detected prior to generating data such as spilling samples that will negate the requirement of a Phase 1b investigation.

Preliminary laboratory investigation shall be followed as per flow chart.

Preliminary laboratory investigation shall be carried out by Executive QC or Above to determine if there is clear obvious error due to any external circumstances such as:

Check the calculation part used in the analysis. If any calculation error is observed, it shall be corrected and documented.

Check any power failure in the instrument. If any power failure is identified, document the event and annotate power failure. In such case analysis shall be repeated and documented.

Check any equipment failure during analysis. If any equipment failure is identified; then document the event, annotate equipment failure. In such case analysis shall be repeated and documented.

Check any spilling or incomplete transfer of sample solutions, if any error is identified, correct the error and analysis shall be repeated and documented.

Check any incorrect instrument parameters. If any error is identified; then document the event and annotate incorrect instrument parameters. In such case analysis shall be repeated and documented.

All the above information shall be recorded by Executive QC or above respectively. In case any obvious cause observed from above investigation, invalidate the result and repeat analysis as per QSD shall be performed by the preferably same analyst who had performed the original test and record the observations.

This shall be further verified by Executive QC or above shall forward his/her comments to Head QC/ Designee. Head QC/ Designee shall review the findings and shall take the final decision to close the investigation.

In case no QC error is identified during the preliminary laboratory investigation (Phase 1 a), initiate Phase-I b investigation as per flow chart.

Phase I b investigation:

Phase-I b Investigation- Initial investigation conducted by Executive QC or above using the laboratory investigation checklist to find out any assignable root cause for OOS results.

Phase-I b investigation shall be performed by Executive QC or above as per check list mentioned.

Investigation by the Analyst along with Executive QC or above shall be carried out as follows:

To check the label details (correct sample taken / used) of the sample.

Check the sample preparation or dilution (unusual events or problem) used in the analysis.

Check the expiry date and appearance of the reagents used in the analysis.

To check the calibration status of balance and instruments used for analysis.

To check the correct and clean glassware has been used for analysis.

Whether the analysis is carried out as per STP.

The volumetric solutions and reagents used during analysis with respect to strength and grade.

To check for correct working standard / reference standard’s potency is used.

Check the approved shade card, approved artwork used during packaging material analysis as per specification.

Check for correct methodology has been used e.g. version number.

Check for correct sampling method with current version has been used.

Check for any potential interfering activity at the time of testing.

Check if any other OOS results obtained on the batch of material under test.

All the above observations shall be recorded.

Analyst shall give his/her findings to executive QC or above for further verification.

Further investigation shall be carried out by Executive QC or above, the executive QC or above assessment shall be objective and timely.

The Analyst investigation should be restricted to data/ equipment/ analysis review only.

The Executive QC or above shall investigate the OOS results as follows:

To check the label details of sample and correct sample container used in analysis by Analyst.

To check that sample integrity is maintained and the sample chain of custody is appropriate.

To check the possibility that sample contamination has occurred during testing / re-testing procedure (e.g. sample left open to air or unattended). All glassware should be clearly labelled and kept securely.

Verify the sample storage condition and prepared solutions used in the analysis.

Discuss the test method with the concerned Analyst, confirm Analyst’s knowledge and performance of the correct procedure.

To check that analyst is trained on the method used in the analysis.

To check that correct specification / acceptance criteria applied.

Review the equipment log book used at the time of analysis.

Examine the raw data obtained in the analysis, including chromatograms, spectra, and identify anomalous or suspect information.

Check the system suitability conditions met before analysis and during analysis.

Verify that the calculations used to convert raw data values into a final test result are scientifically sound, appropriate and correct; also determine if unauthorized or invalidated changes have been made to automated calculation methods.

Confirm the performance and calibration status of the instruments used in the analysis.

Determine that appropriate reference standards, working standards, solvents, reagents and other solutions were used and they met quality control specifications.

Evaluate and assess the performance of the test method to ensure that it is performing according to the standard expected based on method validation data and historical data.

To check any issues with environmental temperature / humidity within the area while the test was conducted.

To check the previous issues with the same test.

Review of other data for other batches performed within the same analysis set.

On completion of Analyst and executive QC or above investigation, re-analysis can be started only after initial hypothesis is documented and approved.

Re-Analysis shall be carried out on the original prepared sample solution (s) which was tested and yielded the OOS results.

A fresh sample solution may be prepared only if the original sample is unstable or if the STP requires the use of a freshly prepared solution; however this shall be properly documented.

Examples of Re-analysis may include further testing regarding sample re-injection, re-filtration, re-dilution and re-sonication/extraction. Multiple hypothesis can be explored.

Re-Injection: Re-injection of original sample preparation may be done where any equipment malfunction is suspected during the Preliminary Laboratory Investigation. Re-Injections can provide strong evidence that the problem should be attributed to the instrument, rather than the sample or its preparation. Re-Injection from the same vial may be conducted in a chromatographic analysis to investigate if the ‘OOS’ result is due to an injection error or programming error. The same vial (if necessary, after replacing the septum) shall be injected along with fresh system suitability.

Re-Filtration: Re-Filtration of the sample may be done to investigate if the ‘OOS’ result is due to filtration error such as improper filtration, inappropriate filter paper used, insufficiently saturated filter or contaminated vials / filters. The same dilution of the sample shall be re-filtered (taking all necessary precautions) and analyzed.

Re-Dilution: Re-Dilution may be done in case of any deviation identified in sample preparation / sample handling during the Preliminary Laboratory Investigation. The same stock solutions shall be re-diluted, wherever applicable and analyzed.

Re-Sonication: Re-Sonication/Re-Shaking or Re-stirring may be done if it appears that the ‘OOS’ result is due to incomplete solubilization of the analyte in the test preparation due to inadequate shaking and/or sonication or improper grinding of the test sample, wherever applicable. Further extraction of the sample shall be performed (the same stock solution may be sonicated and/or shaken for a longer period of time) and tested.

All the above observations from shall be recorded.

This investigation shall be fully documented and preserve the records of this laboratory assessment.

Whenever laboratory error is identified, the executive QC or above shall determine source of that error, perform impact assessment of the error on previous analysis and take corrective action to prevent its reoccurrence.

If no assignable cause is identified, hypothesis testing (i.e. an extension to initial hypothesis testing) can be explored. All the possible root causes shall be listed in the hypothesis.

Repeat testing shall not be performed if no laboratory error is identified.

If an assignable cause is attributed to OOS, repeat testing on the same sample shall be carried out as follows:

Repeat testing shall be done as per STP by the Analyst other than one who had performed the original test.

If the repeat tested sample results are as per the specification, Analyst shall report the results.

If the investigation determines Laboratory error then original test results shall be substituted with the Final repeat test results.

The original test results and all repeat test results must be retained along with the explanation recorded. It will not be included for data evaluation. Analyst shall submit his investigation to executive QC or above.

QC executive QC or above shall forward his comments to Head QC/ Designee. Head QC/ Designee shall review the findings and give his comments to Head- Quality Assurance, who shall take the final decision to close the investigation.

If the repeat testing on original sample does not yield result as per specifications, Head QC/ Designee shall submit the findings to QA reviewer. QA reviewer shall forward recommendation for extended investigation which shall be further approved by Head Quality Assurance.

If no assignable cause or evidence of error remains unclear then inform to QA and QA shall further inform to Production / Contract Giver / MAH / QP as the case may be.

No data shall be invalidated unless laboratory error is confirmed.

After phase I b investigation, if OOS is confirmed from quality control department. Phase II investigation shall be carried out as per flow chart given in the Attachment-X. Further testing not to be done in Quality control Laboratory.

Phase Ia & Ib investigation shall be completed by next working day unless justified.

Note – Phase II and phase III investigation are not applicable in case of Packaging materials and Raw materials as these are directly procured from approved vendors, so manufacturing investigation are not possible at our end. Whenever required OOS shall be informed to vendor for further investigation.

Phase II investigation:

Note: Manufacturing investigation shall be conducted only during first instance of OOS observed for a Stability batch, Ex. if OOS observed for the first time at 2nd month data station and also observed at subsequent test stations for same test parameter then shall be conducted only at 2nd month and the investigation done earlier shall be referred wherever required. If observed in different parameters at subsequent test station, then manufacturing investigation shall be conducted.

Phase II investigation shall be conducted when phase I b investigation did not reveal any assignable cause of laboratory error. Phase II investigation includes the initial manufacturing investigation to determine whether the root cause OOS pertain to some deviation in manufacturing activity.

During phase II investigation, manufacturing of batch shall be investigated as per the “SOP on Investigations” and report shall be compiled.

In case any assignable cause of OOS is attributed in manufacturing process, the same shall be forwarded to QA reviewer along with CAPA and impact assessment. QA reviewer shall give its comments and forward the same to Head Quality Assurance for taking action on disposition of batch.

In case no assignable cause is identified during the manufacturing investigation, conduct laboratory failure investigation as per flow chart given in the Attachment XII.

Hypothesis / Investigative testing – is testing performed to help confirm or discount a possible root cause i.e. what might happened that can be tested. Investigational testing shall not be used to replace the suspected analytical results.

Hypothesis testing shall be performed during laboratory failure investigation. A written protocol shall be prepared for investigational testing which shall include the following points:

The description must fully document the hypothesis to test the theoretical root cause being investigated.

The description must fully document that what samples shall be tested.

The description must fully document the exact execution of the testing.

The description must fully document that how the data shall be evaluated.

Protocol for hypothesis/investigational testing shall be prepared and reviewed by Quality Control and same shall be approved by Quality Assurance.

The re-sampling must be discussed and agreed by QA/Contract Giver and can occur which shall include the following point:

If upon investigation, sufficient doubt is generated that the original sample is not adequate or representative of batch quality, insufficient quantity of the original sample or proven issue with original sample integrity, under such circumstances; Analyst/ Executive QC or above shall propose the re-sampling and QA evaluate the reason for re-sampling and shall put forth the proposal for re-sampling along with the justification thereof. Respective details for the same shall be filled as per Attachment-II. QA reviewer shall evaluate the justification of re-sampling. If sufficient reasons are found for re-sampling, QA reviewer shall document and give his/her recommendations for re-sampling to Head Quality Assurance. Head Quality Assurance shall finally approve of re-sampling, if any.

Re-sampling shall be performed by the same qualified, validated methods that were used for the initial sample. However, if the investigation determines that the initial sampling method was in error, a new accurate sampling method shall be developed, qualified and documented. Impact assessment on the previous batches shall be performed which were sampled using the same technique.

The re-sampling of material is not applicable for the packaging material; hence OOS shall be confirmed on repeat testing.

Re-Test shall be performed using the material from the original sample composite, if it has not been compromised or still available, a new sample shall be used from the original container where possible. Re-testing can also be performed on 2nd aliquot from the same sample that was source of original failure.

The retests shall be performed by a different analyst on different instrument. Retest protocol must be approved by Head Quality Assurance and /or MA Holder (if applicable) before re-testing and number of retests shall be done in five replicate preparation (in case of Assay, Related Substances and Residual Solvent). In case of Content Uniformity /Blend Uniformity/ Dissolution testing, multiple units are tested, hence retesting shall be performed by different analyst as per STP on different instrument. Analyst involved in retesting shall be at least as experienced and qualified in the method as the original analyst.

Note: In test parameters like Dissolution, Uniformity of Dosage units where Pharmacopoeia itself says for multistage testing, OOS shall be triggered if the test results at any stage of testing indicates that the sample will not comply with Pharmacopoeia requirement.

Different Analyst shall report the retest results which shall be further verified by executive QC or above.

In case investigation determines analyst error, all analysis using the same technique performed by the concerned analyst shall be reviewed.

If all re-tested sample results are as per specification and meets the acceptance criteria of RSD. Initial analysis data shall be invalidated and all re-testing results shall be used for reporting. Head Quality Assurance will take decision for disposition of such batch along with impact assessment.

If any or all re-tested samples results are not as per specification and / or not meets the acceptance criteria of RSD. All results shall be used for reporting and no data shall be invalidated.

During Phase II investigation, if any anomalous results are observed, it’s investigation will be done starting from Phase–I using additional copy of controlled formats of the SOP.

Acceptance criteria of analysis by different analyst is tabulated below:

Acceptance Criteria: % RSD of results from five replicate preparations by  different analyst should be:

1. Assay:  NMT 2%

2. Residual Solvents:

Observed results % RSD
Less than LOQ Not Applicable
LOQ to 200 ppm NMT 20 %
201 to 1000 ppm NMT 15%
Above 1000 ppm NMT 10%
Related Substances / Impurities / Degradation substances (individually specified/unspecified  and total):
Observed results % RSD
Less than 0.05% Not Applicable
0.05 % to 0.10 % NMT 50 %
0.11 % to 0.20 % NMT 25 %
Above 0.20 % NMT 15 %
Note: Individual results of different analyst shall complies the specification for all test parameters

After the completion of Phase II investigation, initiate Phase III (if required) investigation as per flow chart given in the Attachment-XIII.

Phase III Investigation:

The phase III investigation includes the review of completed manufacturing investigation and combined laboratory investigation in to suspect analytical results and/or method validation for possible causes in to results obtained.

Phase III investigation shall perform as per Flow chart.

During Phase III investigation, other batches history shall be investigated and all the results shall be evaluated.

In charge production shall review the completed manufacturing investigation along with CAPA and impact assessment. Incharge production give his comments to QA reviewer.

In charge QC shall review the combined laboratory investigation along with CAPA and impact assessment. Head QC/ Designee give his comments to QA reviewer.

The impact of OOS result on other batches, ongoing stability studies, Batches in market (if OOS observed in stability samples in commercial product) validated processes and testing procedures shall be determined by Quality Control and Quality Assurance. This shall be documented in the conclusion along with appropriate corrective and preventive actions.

QA reviewer shall give his findings to Head Quality Assurance and he will take decision for disposition of such batch and close the OOS.

An OOS investigation shall be completed within 30 working days.

If the investigation exceeds more than 30 working days, a prior approval from Head Quality Assurance shall be taken for further investigation.

CA and PA shall be recorded in CAPA log for tracking as per SOP No. of corrective and preventive action. Record of implementation and effectiveness shall be maintained with source document i.e. OOS.

If any OOS is confirmed, justification to not perform any other remaining testing shall be written by QC Head of Impacted area. For e.g. In process, FG, RM etc. Approval of Head Quality will essentially be required for not doing so.

Whenever any OOS is observed in RM and PM section, it shall be immediately inform to respective section of purchase.

conclusion:

An initial OOS result does not necessarily mean the subject batch fails and must be rejected.

If no laboratory or calculation errors are identified in the Phase I and Phase II there is no scientific basis for invalidating the initial OOS results in favor of passing the retest results. All the results, both passing and suspected, should be reported (in all QC documents and any COA) and all data has to be considered in batch release decision.

The OOS result shall be investigated and the findings of the investigation including retest results shall be interpreted to establish the root cause & to evaluate the batch and reach decision regarding release or rejection.

A confirmed OOS result shall indicate that the batch does not meet established standard or specification and shall result in the batch rejection.

Records shall be kept of complete data derived from all tests performed to ensure compliance with established specification and standards.

Trending

OOS record shall be trended on half yearly basis  and accordingly appropriate corrective and preventive action shall be taken wherever required.

Assessment of developing trends (i.e. errors which have gone up from previous trends, any new type of error) shall be done  on half yearly basis and appropriate corrective and preventive action shall be taken wherever required.

Handling of OOS at contract testing laboratory:

In case of OOS result generated at contract laboratory, contract laboratory shall communicate its analytical data, findings and supporting documentation to the quality control manager on immediate basis for further assessment.

Manager shall take immediate corrective action based on instructions available in approved effective SOP and discussion with plant Quality head or designee.

Material Disposition:

A summary of the concerns not resolved and how the concern(s) influence the disposition of the lot(s), product(s), and process(s) associated with the OOS shall be provided. The recommended disposition shall be documented.

The rationale for the disposition decision shall be summarized, documented and approved by Plant Quality Head, Plant Head and Head QA as applicable.