For well over a decade, there has been an initiative by the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) to standardize formats for new drug applications in the U.S., Europe, and Japan (where the majority of new medicines are developed). In the past, the format and organization of submissions varied by country, which made it difficult and time-consuming for a U.S. drug company, e.g., to submit an application for drug approval in Japan or the United Kingdom, and vice versa. A com
April 18, 2017
By Marci Crane, Staff Writer, MasterControl
The following article is a Q&A regarding the release of the Global Harmonization Task Force Final Document: Role of Standards in the Assessment of Medical Devices (acknowledged in this article as the RSAMD final document).1 Q: What is the Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF)? A: The GHTF is a voluntary group that consists of trade association and medical device authorities from the USA, Canada, Europe, Japan and Australia. Q: Who is the authoring group for the RSAMD final document
April 18, 2017
Antoinette Azevedo, Founder of e-SubmissionSolutions.com
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is taking concrete steps to require the submission of all types of regulatory communication in electronic format. Globally, regulatory authorities are all moving to require electronic submission of regulatory communication. The reasons are many but one reason is clear: the public safety responsibilities of the regulators requires significantly faster access to content that can be supported by paper format.
As of June 1st, 2009 the FDA will no longer accept Establishment Registrations or Product Listings submitted on paper for human prescription drugs, human over-the-counter drugs, or listed biologics and veterinary medicines. After that date, all such filings must be made electronically through the FDA's electronic submission gateway and encoded in XML, according to the rules set out in the HL7 Structured Product Labeling (SPL) standard and the FDA implementation guide. Medical devices are not c
As regulatory agencies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and parallel agencies in Europe, Japan, and Canada, move toward a completely electronic submission environment, tools like templates for Microsoft Word® become increasingly essential to submissions content development processes. Templates can be essential during the preparation of electronic common technical documents, or eCTDs. The eCTD is a standard created by the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH), a
April 18, 2017
By Craig Barrila, World Wide Head of Information and Records Management, Pfizer, and Beth Boucher, World Wide Head of Global Network Services, Pfizer
Like many other pharmaceutical companies, Pfizer has been through numerous mergers, acquisitions and divestitures. Two notable ones were the acquisition of Warner Lambert in 2001 and Pharmacia in 2003. The mergers, acquisitions and silo work practices fractured Pfizer's highly regulated and controlled documentation over many sites and systems. This included our GxP Standard Operating Procedures, product labeling, submissions management and trial master file systems.
April 18, 2017
By Karl Vahey, Director of Compliance, International RA/QA, Covidien
Why should medical device manufacturers perform failure investigations? One reason is that it is a regulatory requirement. The Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR 820) in areas such as Non-Conforming Product, Corrective and Preventive Action and Complaint Files describes the requirements for failure investigations. Performing effective failure investigations is also good business practice which can lead to reduction in scrap and rework, process improvements and the elimination of recurring issue
April 17, 2017
By Denise Dion, Senior Consultant, EduQuest, Inc.
At first glance, FDA's Quality System Regulations (QSR) for medical devices - contained in 21 CFR 820 - may make your eyes cross and your stomach churn. The rules are intimidating, yes - but impossible to follow, no.
Pharmaceutical companies that promote their products for off-label use continue to be the subject of intense regulatory scrutiny. But they are no longer alone. Recent statements by government prosecutors suggest an increased focus on the sales and marketing practices of device companies. The medical device industry should expect heightened scrutiny from the "usual" actors, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and
April 17, 2017
By Dan O'Leary, President, Ombu Enterprises
Process validation is an essential part of medical device manufacturing but doesn't always receive the attention it deserves (and requires). The regulations provide the requirements (FDA QSR 820.75 and ISO 13485 7.5.2), but often manufacturers don't completely understand them and don't fully implement them. The consequences can be audit findings from a Notified Body or Inspectional Observations on an FDA 483.
With the unsteady economy and the ever-changing regulatory world that we find ourselves in, strong design controls within the medical device and biotech industries are a necessity. When faced with a multi-million dollar recall, no medical device company wants to wish it had instituted more robust design controls. Therefore, having a solid design control system is a must in the world in which we live.
IIn the medical device industry, guidance documents set forth by the FDA are often the skeletal backbone for medical device design and development. When a new guidance emerges, the med device industry pays attention.
Consumer complaints are at the heart of every product recall. Whether it's Merck's voluntary recall of the pain medication, Vioxx, or the Class I recall of counterfeit LifeScan blood glucose test strips, chances are both actions stemmed from complaints.The reporting of side effects or adverse events is incorporated in FDA regulations. The agency operates MedWatch, a safety information and adverse-event reporting program that allows health-care professionals and the public to report serious probl
1. Inefficient System of Communication. You need effective communication to be able to implement change properly. For a company that relies on a paper-based or partially electronic system, this is the typical scenario: Once or twice a week, up to 15 people who constitute the Change Control Board meet for two hours each time to discuss engineering and other document changes. Before and after each meeting, documents are routed using the inter-office mail system or via e-mail. The problem wi
Document management is such a fundamental need in any FDA compliance effort, and it poses so many challenges, that we could easily discuss the ?top 20? or more problems that plague life science companies. But in the interest of space, here are the top five document control issues that most companies complain about and some tips on solving them.
