dispelling the myths of cleaning validation
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation
Destin A. LeBlancCleaning Validation Technologies
Capital Chapter PDA Gaithersburg, MDOctober 30, 2002
![Page 2: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
CV myths
“Things the FDA doesn’t allow”Covers 8 mythsWill discuss issues relating to those mythsRationale: not unnecessarily restrict scientifically justified options
![Page 3: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Myth #1
“Regulatory authorities don’t like rinse water sampling”Fact: FDA and PIC/S guidance documents says rinse water sampling is one of two acceptable sampling methods
![Page 4: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Issues
“Direct measure” of target residueRelating rinse water concentration to potential contaminationRinse recoveryAdequate coverage of rinse solution
![Page 5: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Myth #2
“You must correlate rinse sampling results with swab sampling results”Fact: Rinse and swab measure two different things; don’t expect correlation
![Page 6: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Issues
Swabs focus on small areaRinses focus on larger areaSwab measures worst caseRinse measures average
![Page 7: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Issues
If both done correctly on same surfaces, may pass on rinse but fail swabIf both done correctly on same surface, if swabs pass, rinse should also pass
![Page 8: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Myth #3
“You can’t use non-specific analytical methods”Fact: Non-specific methods such as TOC are widely used and are accepted by regulators
![Page 9: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Issues
TOC limit set on dose based calculations, not PW/WFI specs
Calculate and express limit as activeConvert analytical TOC value to activeCompare measured value to limit
![Page 10: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Issues
Assume worst case,all TOC due to target residueNote: Correctly applied, TOC is more stringent than specific method for target residue
![Page 11: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
FDA support
Human Drug CGMP Notes --
“We think TOC or TC can be an acceptable method for monitoring residues routinely and for cleaning validation.”
![Page 12: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Myth #4
“If you use TOC, you must correlate it with HPLC”Fact: As long as TOC is validated with appropriate standards, do not need to “correlate” with HPLC
![Page 13: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Issues
What’s point of running both TOC and HPLC on same standard for correlation?Method validation of TOC with target analyte is adequate and sufficient
![Page 14: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Issues
In CV protocols, TOC will never correlate with HPLC results
TOC is subject to interferencesCan’t express exactly how much target residue present, but can assure is at or below measured amountAs long as interference increase TOC, will be worst case
![Page 15: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Myth #5
“Any residue is unacceptable”Fact: With newer methods or with TOC, will always find some residue
![Page 16: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Issues
Detection limits of analytical methods achieve lower levelsIssue is whether residue is medically safe and whether it affect product qualityBut, any visible residue is generally unacceptable
![Page 17: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
FDA support
Human Drug CGMP Notes --“Should equipment be as clean as the best possible method of residue detection or quantification?”
ANSWER: “No…”
![Page 18: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
Myth #6
“Dose-based (MAC) limits calculations are unacceptable” Fact: Are referenced in FDA and PIC/S guidance documents
![Page 19: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Issues
Have been misusedSafeguards against unreasonably high limits
Consider cumulative residues from equipment train Default limits (such as 10 ppm)Visually clean criterionReasonable “safety” factors
![Page 20: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Issues
Are defaults arbitrary?Yes, but so what?If medically safe limit is X ppm, and I set my limit is below that, from a regulatory perspective, should there be a concern?
![Page 21: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
IssuesConsider other medical or safety concerns unrelated to “dose”
AllergenicCytotoxicityReproductive hazards
May result in –Limits = LOD of best methodDedicated equipment
![Page 22: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Myth #7
“Recovery percentages at different spiked levels should be linear”Fact: Recovery percentages are highly variable. It is not reasonable to expect linear response
![Page 23: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Example
71%3.0 µg/cm2
81%2.0 µg/cm2
91%1.0 µg/cm2
RecoverySpike
![Page 24: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
Issues
Swabbing is a manual procedure (analogy to manual cleaning)High variability in recoveries recovery for one individualHigh variability in recoveries among individualsAs practical matter, will use lowest
![Page 25: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
25
Myth #8
“You can’t validate manual cleaning”Fact: You will validate manual cleaning processes
![Page 26: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
26
Issues
Manual cleaning more variable than automated processesConsistency of manual cleaning depends on adequate detail in written procedure and adequate training of operatorsRequires more attention to validation maintenance
![Page 27: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
27
Origin of myths
Probably misinterpretation or misapplication of 483’s
Example: “Your use of rinse water sampling is inappropriate to….”Faulty conclusion: Can’t use rinse water samplingCorrect response: Use rinse sampling correctly
![Page 28: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
28
Suggestions
Don’t chase latest 483Design a comprehensive, defendable cleaning validation programConfirm (or disprove) “You can’t…” statements by regulatory documents (Human Drug CGMP Notes, Warning Letters, Guidance Documents, GMPs)
![Page 29: Dispelling the Myths of Cleaning Validation](https://reader031.vdocument.in/reader031/viewer/2022020305/5868c16e1a28ab65328b5adc/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
29
Q&ADiscussion