Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum

Main page Policy/Terms of Use Abbreviations Latest Posts

 Log in |  Register |  Search

Back to the forum  2018-06-22 15:39 CEST (UTC+2h)
Ohlbe
Hero

France,
2018-05-21 16:28

Posting: # 18793
Views: 682
 

 New FDA BMV guideline [BE/BA News]

Dear all,

The FDA have just published their revised guideline on bioanalytical method validation.

Strange, considering that the ICH M10 guideline is on its way. I somehow thought that the FDA guideline had been put on hold.

Regards
Ohlbe
Helmut
Hero
avatar
Homepage
Vienna, Austria,
2018-05-21 17:47

@ Ohlbe
Posting: # 18796
Views: 596
 

 What a monster!

Hi Ohlbe,

THX! What a monster!
At least replaced “Concentrations below the LLOQ should be reported as zeros.” in the 2013 draft by “Study samples with concentrations listed below the LLOQ should be reported as below the LLOQ (BQL).” Someone was quick enough responding within the 90 (!) days consultation period… :-D
Looked over the fence and realised that is a good idea to assess carryover. Still the whacky recovery…

» Strange, considering that the ICH M10 guideline is on its way. I somehow thought that the FDA guideline had been put on hold.

Politics strategy to strengthen the position in the upcoming negotiations? Better to have a final guidance instead of only the 2013 draft (mentioned in the ICH’s concept paper).

Cheers,
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. ☼
Science Quotes
jag009
Hero

NJ,
2018-05-24 03:19

@ Helmut
Posting: # 18808
Views: 356
 

 What a monster!

Hi Ohlbe and Helmut,
»
» THX! What a monster!

I kinda like the format with the requirements being tabulated. Easier to find things...
I knew that 7% ISR is not enough and they admitted it in a seminar later.

John
ElMaestro
Hero

Denmark,
2018-05-22 00:17

@ Ohlbe
Posting: # 18797
Views: 563
 

 Repeats as part of investigations, ja oder nein?

Thanks Ohlbe,

» The FDA have just published their revised guideline on bioanalytical method validation.

for this document.

Now a million dollar question:
Are you on basis of the wording on page 13 allowed to do a repeat analysis as part of an investigation? Is for example absent or low IS response (without obvious poor chromatography) itself an assignable cause? If it is, then that would negate the need for an investigation, right?

If taken literally I am inclined to think the guidance does not allow repeats as part of investigations (to me, investigations are done when root causes are not known but potential root causes are being sought).
Common sense takes me a bit in the opposite direction and I would any day prefer to talk about reported repeats and unreported repeats on basis of the presence of a cause.

if (3) 4

Best regards,
ElMaestro

"(...) targeted cancer therapies will benefit fewer than 2 percent of the cancer patients they’re aimed at. That reality is often lost on consumers, who are being fed a steady diet of winning anecdotes about miracle cures." New York Times (ed.), June 9, 2018.
Ohlbe
Hero

France,
2018-05-22 12:02

@ ElMaestro
Posting: # 18798
Views: 500
 

 Repeats as part of investigations, ja oder nein?

Dear ElMaestro,

» Are you on basis of the wording on page 13 allowed to do a repeat analysis as part of an investigation?

I don't think it would prevent to re-analyse samples as part of an investigation (e.g. to identify a root cause or an explanation for anything weird) as long as:
- the repeat result is not used for PK calculations
- the repeats are clearly identified in advance as being investigation repeats, not to be used for PK
- the whole process is described in a SOP.

» Is for example absent or low IS response (without obvious poor chromatography) itself an assignable cause?

Well... Yes and no...
You may not find an assignable cause for the IS variation (was it a spiking error ? Blocked or dysfunctional SPE column ? Strict application of Murphy's Law ?). But IS variations could be considered an assignable cause for analytical repeats.

Unfortunately I was not able to attend the WRIB this year. They had a full day on IS variation, with folks from the FDA and EU Agencies. Last year there was a presentation from the FDA who talked about the importance of monitoring the IS response. Actually the guideline states An SOP should be developed a priori to address issues with IS variability.

Regards
Ohlbe
Back to the forum Activity
 Thread view
Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum |  Admin contact
18,418 posts in 3,912 threads, 1,173 registered users;
online 28 (1 registered, 27 guests [including 8 identified bots]).

The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability
to understand the exponential function.    Albert Bartlett

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