Another two... [GxP / QC / QA]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2021-09-17 10:42 (1040 d 06:16 ago) – Posting: # 22576
Views: 6,886

Yikes Ohlbe,

❝ It looks like the FDA has just keelhauled 2 CROs again: Panexcell and Synchron Research. The FDA will reject all data from both CROs due to data manipulation. All Panexcell data had already been rejected in the EU.

❝ The FDA letters are very explicit regarding what they have found, and their conclusion is crystal clear:

Put simply, because you have been responsible for the creation of false data in the studies discussed here, we have no reason to believe that any data that you have produced are reliable. Thus, FDA has determined that all study data from all studies conducted at your firm must be rejected.

thanks for posting the info. These stories justify the existence of the SatoWIB and Buster software that's used to detect exactly the type of manipulation that FDA are worried about. FDA sends a remarkably clear message there.

One good question is what happens now. I would not be surprised if PanExcell and Synchron will cease to exist (might pop up under another name?), sponsors using the two CROs will be forced to abandon some/all of their MA's and/or repeat studies even for EU and WHO, and regulators will more seriously start to consider how statistical (or pharmacokinetic) software screening for indicators of manipulation in their own right should be used routinely within agencies. There may be a little wars going on between assessors and inspectors all the while. E.g. whose job is it to screen and who takes decisions on the basis of the outcome? But Rome wasn't built in a day :-D :-D

Bonus question:

Have a look at the pdf files from FDA. Now answer this question: Which day were the letters issued?

Not written in the file? Well, then how about the meta-info embedded in the pd file? Oh, a date is not there either? Well, then... Do we really need to go looking for the date on the linking FDA page?
It is funny how, in this day and age when ALCOA and so forth is so fashionable, letters like these are not explicitly dated. Is there a reason?

Edit: 2 successive posts merged [Ohlbe]

Pass or fail!

Complete thread:

UA Flag
 Admin contact
23,118 posts in 4,859 threads, 1,647 registered users;
34 visitors (1 registered, 33 guests [including 11 identified bots]).
Forum time: 16:58 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

You can’t really say “similar” if it’s the same again you want.
“Similar” means something different.    Anthony Burgess

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