LIMS [Regulatives / Guidelines]

posted by Helmut Homepage – Vienna, Austria, 2017-06-06 15:20 (3311 d 22:36 ago) – Posting: # 17451
Views: 4,178

Hi Rasha_J,

❝ can you advise what is the most commonly used and accepted LIMS system (vendor) to be used in CROs for equivalence


Watson LIMS (ThermoFisher Scientific) is quite popular.

❝ knowing that we have Agilent LCMSMS and API sciex LCMSMS so it is better if compatible with both


Be aware that no LIMS will work “out of the box”. You have to define the system specification before you invite offers. An import aspect: Is it possible to adapt the LIMS to your current workflow? It is your responsibility to validate the system (three levels: installation qualification ⇒ operational qualification ⇒ performance qualification. See here, slides 8–19).
Since no vendor of commercial software will allow access to the source code, your only option is a “black box” validation. A “white-box” validation is possible with open-source software (e.g., Open-LIMS) but that requires a lot of coding expertise.
When we validated our LIMS (HP LAB/UX) we evaluated three BE-projects in parallel (stand-alone CDSs vs. the LIMS). BTW, we had chromatographs of three manufacturers and none of them was from HP (now Agilent). We passed our first GLP-certification in 1997…

Dif-tor heh smusma 🖖🏼 Довге життя Україна! [image]
Helmut Schütz
[image]

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮
Science Quotes

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,656 posts in 4,994 threads, 1,570 registered users;
210 visitors (0 registered, 210 guests [including 18 identified bots]).
Forum time: 13:56 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Try to learn something about everything
and everything about something.    Thomas Henry Huxley

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5