A great idea [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-01-22 22:39 (772 d 13:11 ago) – Posting: # 19798
Views: 3,921

Just sayin',

» - BE trials: the BE guideline requires GLP compliance, and this has not been repelled by the publication of the BMV guideline. So: GCP + GLP + reflection paper.

Assessment report template from CMD(h), updated long after the MV guideline was published, page 7 of 11:
Assessor's comment: Is the analytical method acceptable, validated (pre-study and within study), handling of samples adequate. Is there a statement on GLP compliance? Protocol deviations/violations? Are reasons for reanalysis of samples acceptable?

It ain't all easy to comprehend.

All this means to me that finding the right way through this ...erm... situation... implies that one must involve some degree of decision-making on basis of facts that are not in the public domain.

Is the template based on a semantic brilliancy - Perhaps they truly want compliance with GLP and GCP for bioanalysis but for some reason or other the CRO isn't supposed to actually spell out the latter?

I have a great idea. Why don't we include a standardised formulation in all reports, to replace all other compliance statements: "The bioanalytical part of this study was conducted in compliance with GCP and GLP, except GCP (where applicable)".
Less confusing, right?:-)

You can thank me later. :-D:cool::lol:

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

Activity
 Admin contact
21,366 posts in 4,462 threads, 1,493 registered users;
online 9 (0 registered, 9 guests [including 4 identified bots]).
Forum time: Friday 11:50 CET (Europe/Vienna)

The statistician has no magic touch by which
he may come in at the stage of tabulation
and make something of nothing.    W. Edwards Deming

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