Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum 09:18 CEST

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log in |  Register |  Search

vish14184
Regular

India,
2018-05-09 17:43

Posting: # 18759
Views: 564
 

 Haemolysed sample identification in BA/BE study and others [Regulatives / Guidelines]

Dear all,

Please share your experience/view on below points. Thank you in advance.

1. Is it acceptable regulatory point of view (AnVIsa, EMA), If we identify haemolysed samples with it's grade (severe, moderate, slightly) during sample receipt in bioanalytical lab instead of haemolysed sample identification at clinical stage during sample separation as per defined procedure in SOP.

2. As per ANVISA requirements: is it required to evaluate ECG by cardiologist in BA/BE Study or ECG evaluation by medical qualified person is acceptable?

3. What is x-ray validity is acceptable for BA/BE Study? One year is acceptable if Ethics committee approving it.

Thank you

With regards
Vishal
Ohlbe
Hero

France,
2018-05-14 10:38

@ vish14184
Posting: # 18763
Views: 365
 

 Haemolysed sample identification in BA/BE study and others

Dear Vishal,

» 1. Is it acceptable regulatory point of view (AnVIsa, EMA), If we identify haemolysed samples with it's grade (severe, moderate, slightly) during sample receipt in bioanalytical lab instead of [...] at clinical stage during sample separation

I can't answer for ANVISA. On the European perspective: there is nothing about this in the EMA guideline.

But I would not put this only on a regulatory perspective. I would test it practically: is it easier to detect and grade haemolysis in thawed samples or frozen samples ? And does it not result in a delay in the proper storage of the samples once received ?

It may actually make sense to evaluate and record haemolysis after thawing the samples when you process them (unless you have bench top stability issues and have to process your samples quickly under specific conditions). One advantage: I have seen once a case where the first aliquot was haemolysed and the duplicate was not. The reason is that the plasma had not been separated properly and some red blood cells were aspirated and transferred into one of the tubes. The first aliquot had been processed and the red blood cells were lysed when thawed. The second aliquot had not been thawed and some RBC were visible at the bottom of the tube, if paying attention. This is not something you can easily see before freezing the samples, nor in frozen samples, but which becomes obvious once you thaw them.

» 3. What is x-ray validity is acceptable for BA/BE Study? One year is acceptable if Ethics committee approving it.

This is more of a medical and scientific discussion than regulatory. Once again I can't answer for ANVISA. EU: nothing in the EMA guideline. I would say it depends on the prevalence of TB in your region.

Regards
Ohlbe
Activity
 Thread view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
18,782 posts in 4,002 threads, 1,260 registered users;
online 20 (0 registered, 20 guests [including 16 identified bots]).

To propose that poor design can be corrected by subtle analysis techniques
is contrary to good scientific thinking.    Stuart J. Pocock

The BIOEQUIVALENCE / BIOAVAILABILITY FORUM is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5 RSS Feed