Training Workshop: Training of BE Assessors Kiev, October 2009 Frequent Deficiencies Dr. Henrike Potthast Training workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October 2009

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |2 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Inspection of bioequivalence studies Critical and major deviations observed during WHO inspections of CROs by WHO inspectors GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |3 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Introduction Classification of deviations „Critical“ deviation means that this can lead to the conclusion that the study is not of a satisfactory level of compliance with the GCP/GLP. Several „major“ deviations can lead to the conclusion that the study is not of a satisfactory level of compliance with the GCP/GLP. „Minor“ deviations need to be addressed in order to sustained the confidence in the work of the organization. GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |4 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Critical deviations Clinical part eg.: No quality assurance system established (eg.: at the time of the study); Consent form not signed by subjects (eg.: case report form had been lost). GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |5 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The ethics committee is not operating and executing its tasks free from bias and from any influence of those who were conducting the trial. Neither the contract nor the protocol describes the responsibility for the design of the protocol Complex language is used in the informed consent forms to be signed by the subjects ("Stevens-Johnson Syndrome", "toxic epidermal necrolysis", "erythema multiforme" angiodema, neuropathy, anaphylaxis, steatosis ). GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |6 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies No dosing procedure ( eg.: There was no quality assurance system established at the time when the study was done); No record of dosing or not sufficiently detailed (eg.: The dosing form was filled in advance, before dosing: box ticked for Treatment or Reference); No drug accountability form or inconsistencies (eg.: discrepancies between drug dispensed, dosed and returned). GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |7 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The identity of the medicinal product administered to each subject at each period of the trial can not be guaranteed due to insufficient documentation on the dispensing of the product Discrepancy between the protocol, the consent forms and the final report regarding the strength of the test product used GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |8 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The batch and the manufacturing date of the test product mentioned in the Certificate of Analysis were different of those indicated on the shipping letter. Lack of shipping letters for the reference products.

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October |9 | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Reference product Case: manufacturer. Protocol : Study report:

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies No certificate of analysis or not sufficiently detailed (eg.: batch size for the test product was not mentioned or less than units) No record of dispensing or not sufficiently detailed (eg.: - only a typed form prepared in advance to help the staff for the dispensing; - no indication of date of preparation, of the operator, no signature of operator, no mention of double check, no record of line clearance…);

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies No drug testing was performed on the subjects. Therefore in fact there is no guarantee that the drug abstinence is respected. Subject withdrawal due to an adverse event (e.g. vomiting 4 hours post-dose) without any sufficient documentation. The decision was not taken by the investigator until more than 3 h after the event took place and 6 PK blood samples were unnecessarily taken.

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Identical ECGs for different Volunteers:

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The composition of the meals versus protocol is not satisfactory as e.g. pizza toppings could be chosen by the volunteers. Consequently the meals are not standardized. Fasting and meals are not controlled during the study days. Records of the timing, duration of meals and amount of food and fluid consumed are missing.

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Storage condition of blood samples not monitored. (eg.: Temperature records were only kept for one freezer. Proper storage of the samples was therefore not documented. During the inspection the freezer for the blood sample storage did have a temperature drop to give alarm. The system had a red light signal but not the sound signal which should have been also the case according to the laboratory personnel).

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The method of calculating AUC values (linear trapezoidal method or other, method of extrapolation to infinity) is not specified in the trial reports and/or incorrect.

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Case: t max. Blood sampling

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The justification of the reintegration is not apparent (and not acceptable) and there is no source document to prove that the SOP for manual reintegration is followed (no signature, no date, no comment of authorized person on the chromatograms)

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Case: manipulation

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Case: remarkable data GCP/GLP

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies - LOQ: 10 ng/ml, sampling period 96 hours - AUC 0-t : 639 +/- 258 ng.h/ml - AUC inf : /- 379 ng.h/ml - C max : 31 +/- 14 ng/ml Analytical method Case: LOQ (1).

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Case: LOQ (2). Analytical method

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies The sample analysis of one subject is coded as “Outlier” (here: concentration much higher than other subjects for this time). The repeat analysis shows a different value but similar to those of other subject at this time. Therefore, the initial result cannot be left as “outlier”. An explanation must be provided (mixed samples?) and SOPs should cover such deviations.

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Several data found on chromatograms are not consistent with the final concentration reported by the bio-analytical laboratory but used for calculations Only one QC/batch at each concentration (LQC, MQC, HQC) is processed

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Bioanalytical part Critical deviations in %

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Bioanalytical part Major deviations in %

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies Use of correction-fluid and overwriting on CRFs and other raw data. Lack of documentation on monitoring and auditing …and more…

Workshop: Training of BE Assessors, Kiev, October | GCP/GLP Frequent Deficiencies THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION