Is it Method Validation, Verification or or Just Semantics?

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
May F. Mo FDA/Industry Statistics Workshop
Advertisements

Jack Rowe Certified Laboratories, Inc.
Validation of screening methods (2002/657/EC)
UNDERSTANDING ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY/QC REPORTS Maya Murshak – Merit Laboratories, Inc.
1. (c) Alan Rowley Associates Laboratory Accreditation Dr Alan G Rowley Quality Policy based on Quality Objectives Quality Management System Communicate.
Sources of uncertainty and current practice for addressing them: analytical perspective Roy Macarthur
EMODNet Chemistry Steering Committee January 2014 Rome Giordano Giorgi
World Health Organization
Meeting the ISO/IEC Requirements for Traceability and Measurement Uncertainty APLAC Approaches Dr Bernard King NARL, Australia.
Accreditation & Validation
Copyright © 2015, TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 EPAs New MDL Procedure What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply Richard Burrows.
Copyrights © 2006 Silliker, Inc. All Rights Reserved Challenges In Validating Analytical Methods in an Independent Lab.
Laboratory Validation of Analytical Methods
Introduction to ISO New and modified requirements.
Measurement of Uncertainty – One Lab’s Experience Patricia Hanson Biological Administrator I Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Food.
Method Validation and Verification: An Overview Patricia Hanson, Biological Administrator I Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Food.
Laboratory Technical Issues Presentation to: KWWOA April 9, 2014 Department for Environmental Protection Environmental & Public Protection Cabinet To Protect.
Towards establishing uniform validation procedures in Sasol analytical laboratories Piet de Coning Vina Thakally-Govender Piet de Coning Vina Thakally-Govender.
American Association for Laboratory Accreditation Practical Solutions to Traceability and Uncertainty in Accreditation Presented to CITAC-NCSLI Joint Workshop.
How to Select a Test Method Marlene Moore Advanced Systems, Inc. June 15, 2010.
Validating the Micro PRO™ Technology. Overview of Today’s Presentation Validation Resources Micro PRO™ Applications and Corresponding Validation Parameters.
1 / 9 ASTM D19 Method Validation Procedures William Lipps Analytical & Measuring Instrument Division July, 2015.
Example 1: GHP-based microbiological criteria Rosa M. Peran i Sala European Commission on behalf of the drafting team New Orleans, 11 th November 2012.
Measurement Uncertainty Information in
Quality Control Lecture 5
Laboratory QA/QC An Overview.
Koch, M.: Control Charts© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003 In: Wenclawiak, Koch, Hadjicostas (eds.) Quality Assurance in Analytical Chemistry – Training.
1 Exercise 7: Accuracy and precision. 2 Origin of the error : Accuracy and precision Systematic (not random) –bias –impossible to be corrected  accuracy.
1 International Federation for Consulting GmbH IFC Method Validation and QC for Pesticide Residue Analysis SANCO/2007/3131 by Dr. Michael Scheutwinkel.
Introduction The importance of method validation
Validation Defination Establishing documentary evidence which provides a high degree of assurance that specification process will consistently produce.
Metrology for Chemical Analysis
Limit of detection, limit of quantification and limit of blank Elvar Theodorsson.
Estimating measurement uncertainty
Wenclawiak, B.: Fit for Purpose – A Customers View© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003 In: Wenclawiak, Koch, Hadjicostas (eds.) Quality Assurance in.
Industrial Technology Institute Test Method Validation & Verification H.P.P.S.Somasiri Principal Research Scientist / SDD-QAD /QM Industrial Technology.
Control Charts and Trend Analysis for ISO 17025
Simplifying Measurement Uncertainties Bill Hirt, Ph.D / February 2016.
Proficiency Testing Bryanne Shaw Biology Section Manager.
LECTURE 13 QUALITY ASSURANCE METHOD VALIDATION
 Routine viral diagnostics: indirect and direct detection of viruses. ◦ Indirect detection: serological tests; ◦ Direct detection:  Viral antigens;
Copyright © 2015, TestAmerica Laboratories, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 EPAs New MDL Procedure What it Means, Why it Works, and How to Comply Richard Burrows.
WG2 – Planning of validation studies Convenor: Vicki Barwick.
1 How much and how many? Guidance on the extent of validation/verification studies S L R Ellison Science for a safer world.
TTB M (04/2010) Methods Criteria and Performance Patricia Nedialkova, Ph.D., TTB International Wine Technical Forum May 7, 2015 Prepared for the.
QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICIAL FOOD LABORATORIES WITHIN EURL AND NRL (LABORATORY NETWORKS IN EUROPE) dr. Tina Pirš, dr. vet. med. Quality Manager, Veterinary.
Validation of the AOAC method for pesticides residues analysis in oranges and mandarins in LATU Marina Torres (1) 1, Lucía Alcarraz 1 (2) 1 Laboratorio.
Chemical Contaminants and Residues in Food Community Metals Sub-group SLV Protocol Cory Murphy Canadian Food Inspection Agency.
VALIDATION OF MICROBIOLOGICAL METHODS FOR WATER AND ENVIRONMENT 1 REVISION OF ISO Eurachem Workshop Gent 2016 Method Validation in Analytical Science.
SEMINAR ON PRESENTED BY BRAHMABHATT BANSARI K. M. PHARM PART DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS AND PHARMACEUTICAL TECHNOLGY L. M. COLLEGE OF PHARMACY.
INTERNATIONAL WINE TECHNICAL FORUM, 2015 ALLERGEN METHOD VALIDATION Steve Tallman 6 th May, 2015.
EQUIPMENT and METHOD VALIDATION
ÚKZÚZ - NRL RO Praha1 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 152/2009 of 27 January 2009 laying down the methods of sampling and analysis for the official.
means to “TO CHECK OR PROVE THE VALIDITY OF” According to FDA – “ The goal of validation is to establish a documented evidence which provides a high degree.
Introduction to Quality Assurance. Quality assurance vs. Quality control.
Method Validation-where do I start?
Challenges in Method Validation – A Regulatory Laboratory Perspective
Blake Ebersole ID TESTS, METHOD & LIMITS
The 2015/2016 TNI Standard and the EPA MDL Update
World Health Organization
EPA Method Equivalency
This teaching material has been made freely available by the KEMRI-Wellcome Trust (Kilifi, Kenya). You can freely download,
EPA Method Equivalency
METHOD VALIDATION: AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE MEASUREMENT PROCESS
Chapter 5 Quality Assurance and Calibration Methods
Why Use Them? By: Marcy Bolek – Alloway
World Health Organization
EU Food Safety Requirements: - Hygiene of Foodstuffs -
Multi-laboratory Method Validation
EU-Project: Trade and Private Sector Development (TPSD)
Presentation transcript:

Is it Method Validation, Verification or or Just Semantics? Michael Brodsky Brodsky Consultants mhbrodsky@rogers.com

Objectives Distinguish method validation from verification Consider the requirements for method validation and in-house verification from an ISO Standard 17025 perspective Review AOACI OMA and RI SLV and Multi-Lab Collaborative Study validation protocols as applicable to “in-house” validation Outline the requirements for a verification protocol that defines a method’s fitness-for purpose

What is Test Method Validation? Validation is the establishment of one or more performance characteristics for a test method By single laboratory validation (SLV) By multi-laboratory collaborative study Always by comparative analysis to a “Reference” Method

Verification Demonstration of Analytical competency. Performance characteristics of the method, when performed, as prescribed, by laboratory analysts, conforms to the performance characteristics of the method as established during the validation study. Ensures that the method is fit for its intended purpose Includes determination of uncertainty of measurement (quantitative methods).

Performance Characteristics of Microbiological Methods Relative Accuracy (%Recovery) Precision (Repeatability and Reproducibility) Specificity (Selectivity for target analyte) Sensitivity (Distinguishing target from non target) Inclusivity (Range of target analytes detected by method) Exclusivity (Range of non-target analytes excluded) False Positive and False Negative Rates Limits of Detection (LOD) Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) Scope of application

Categories of Microbiological Test Methods Performance Characteristics Included in a Validation Study Performance Characteristic Identification Quantitative Qualitative (P/A) Relative Accuracy No Yes Matrix Effects (Scope) Precision Sensitivity Specificity Inclusivity Exclusivity False Positive Rate False Negative Rate LOD LOQ Ruggedness Linearity/Range

Performance Characteristic Categories of Microbiological Test Methods Performance Characteristics Included in the Verification of a Validated Method Performance Characteristic Identification Quantitative Qualitative (P/A) Verification (Where Applicable) Relative Accuracy No Yes Matrix Effects (Scope) Precision Sensitivity Specificity Inclusivity Exclusivity False Positive Rate False Negative Rate LOD LOQ Ruggedness Linearity/Range

17025 Requirements Methods requiring validation are: Modified official methods In-house developed methods Previously validated methods extended to a component, analyte or matrix not previously tested or included in the validation study

Food Categories and Types

Food Categories and Types (Based on Physiochemical and Innate Microbial Characteristics)

Food Categories/Matrices Raw milk and dairy products Heat processed milk and dairy products Ready-to-eat, ready-to-reheat meat products Raw poultry and ready-to-cook poultry products Ready-to-eat, ready-to-reheat meat poultry products Eggs and derivatives Raw and ready-to-cook fish and seafoods (unprocessed) Ready-to-eat, ready-to-reheat fishery products Fresh produce and fruit Processed fruits and vegetables Infant formula and infant cereals Dried cereals, fruits, nuts, seeds and vegetables Chocolate, bakery products and confectionary Multi-component foods or meal components Pet food and animal feed Environmental samples (food or feed production)

Food Categories and Types 9. Fresh produce and fruit Types: Cut ready-to-eat fruit Cut ready-to-eat vegetables Produce grown in or in contact with the ground Sprouts Raw fruit/vegetable juices (unpasteurized) Leafy greens Vegetables and fruits (unprocessed) not described above

Food Categories and Types 15. Pet food and animal feed Types: Animal origin ingredients Plant origin ingredients Other ingredients Dry food (aw ≤ 0.7) Wet food (aw > 0.7) Canned Animal feeds (bovine, ovine, pig) Animal feeds (poultry) Animal feeds (fish)

AOACI Pre-Collaborative/PTM Study Design (SLV) For Each Food Category to be claimed: ≥2 food types/category If claiming if applicable to a broad range of foods: Test ~20 samples from 9 different Food categories

AOACI Pre-Collaborative/PTM Study Design (SLV) (Quantitative Method)* 20 analyses for each food type: 5 portions of each matrix @ Low, medium and high levels of contamination and uncontaminated Comparison of recovery to reference method using ANOVA and comparison of means *Use as guide for “in-house’ validation

AOACI Pre-Collaborative/PTM Study Design (SLV) (Qualitative Method)* 30 analyses for each food type: 5 replicate test portions per level the high inoculation level, 20 for the fractional positive level 5 for the uncontaminated level Comparison to reference method using Chi-square analysis &/or Probability of Detection (POD models) *Use as guide for “in-house’ validation

AOACI Collaborative Study – Quantitative 10 - 12 laboratories Minimum of 8 labs with acceptable data Test samples* 1 Matrix Low, medium and high contamination +uncontaminated Five samples tested at each level Both naturally and artificially contaminated food Compare against a reference method Repeatability, Reproducibility and differences between means *Use as guide for “in-house’ validation

AOACI Collaborative Study (Qualitative Method) 12 - 15 laboratories Minimum of 10 labs with acceptable data Test samples* 1 matrix 12 test portions per high analyte level 12 test portions per fractional Positive samples 12 uncontaminated test portions *Use as an alternate guide for “in-house’ validation Comparison to reference method using Chi-square analysis &/or Probability of Detection (POD models)

"I think you should be more explicit  here in step two."

17025 Requirements Official reference methods already published and intended for a specific matrix will be incorporated into the current method document format. Do not need to be fully validated. The ability to perform the analysis must be verified using spiked samples, proficiency samples or CRMs

Verification of Quantitative Microbiological Methods Precision (Repeatability and Reproducibility) Uncertainty of Measurement Fitness-for-Purpose

Validation Data from Collaboratively Studied Methods Provides reference values for RSDR and RSDr e.g. Pour Plate counting (SMEDP) e.g. RSDr ≤ 7.7% (0.077) (within analysts) e.g. RSDR ≤ 18.2% (0.182) (between analysts)

Validation Data from Collaboratively Studied Methods Can also be used to estimate uncertainty of measurement e.g. Pour Plate counting (SMEDP) e.g. RSDr ≤ 7.7% (0.077) (within analysts) e.g. RSDR ≤ 18.2% (0.182) (between analysts)

Calculation of Combined Uncertainty Calculate the combined uncertainty (Uc) using standard propagation of error rules (the square root of the sums of squares of SDs known as the “root sum of squares” - RSS).

Validation Data from Collaboratively Studied Methods Calculation of Combined Uncertainty (Uc): Root Sum of Squares: √(RSDr)2 + (RSDR)2 For Pour Plate (HPC) Sum of Squares: (0.077)2 + (0.182)2 =0.0371 Uc = √(0.0371) = 0.193=19.3% Expanded uncertainty (Ue): (Use coverage factor k=2* for 95% confidence) = 2 x 19.3% = 38.6% *≥30 Observations

Verification of Qualitative Microbiological Methods Specificity Sensitivity Fitness-for-Purpose

How Many Samples Are Needed for Verification?

How Many Samples Are Needed for Verification? No fixed number But, a minimum of 15 positive samples run in duplicate (30 observations) per matrix is not unreasonable 10 is the minimum requirement

Who’s Doing What ISO: Microbiology of food and animal feed – Method Verification– Part 4: Protocol for the verification of reference and alternative methods implemented in a single laboratory HC/CFIA: Part 5: Guidelines to Verify Standard Food Microbiological Methods for Implementation in Routine Testing

ISO Protocol for the verification of reference and alternative methods implemented in a single laboratory (under review ) Minimum of 10 artificially inoculated samples Use CRM, if available For Qualitative methods inoculate with 1-5 CFU per test portion.   For Quantitative methods, the levels of contamination shall cover the range of the method Analyse samples on 10 different occasions or days be performed by at least 2 technicians working independently and with separate samples and reagents.

How to Interpret Verification? For Quantitative methods, ISO proposes to accept: participation in interlaboratory comparisons such as proficiency testing and plotting z-scores to show any trends; use of microbiological RM or CRM; recovery experiments with spiked samples using a non-selective method.

For Qualitative Methods, Part 5: Guidelines to Verify Standard Food Microbiological Methods for Implementation in Routine Testing by Health Canada (April 2015) For Qualitative Methods, Analyze 3-5 samples spiked at 3-5 times the reported or determined LOD (1-3 CFU/analytical unit) For Quantitative Methods using selective medium, measure repeatability by analyzing 10 or more replicate samples of a representative food matrix naturally or artificially contaminated

How to Interpret Verification? For Qualitative methods, ISO and HC agree: 100% (comparative) sensitivity All samples must be correctly identified For Quantitative methods, for acceptable precision as suggested by HC, the repeatability (r) must be less than half of the reproducibility (R) data. 2r < R. If R value if published. If there is no published performance characteristic data, ??? Calculate Ue

17025 Requirements Fitness-for-Purpose The data obtained from the method approval process must show it is fit for the intended use and relevant to customers’ needs. Does the method have performance characteristics that meets the expectation of the laboratory and the needs of the client?

References AOAC International Methods Committee Guidelines For Validation Of Qualitative And Quantitative Food Microbiological Official Methods Of Analysis, Appendix J. The Fitness for Purpose of Analytical Methods, A Laboratory Guide to Method Validation and Related Topics, EURACHEM Working Group How to Meet ISO 17025 Requirements for Method Verification, 2015, AOAC Technical Division for Laboratory Management (TDLM), the Analytical Laboratory Accreditation Criteria Committee (ALACC) ISO/FDIS 16140-2 Microbiology of the food chain — Method validation — Part 2: Protocol for the validation of alternative (proprietary) methods against a reference method (ISO/TC 34/SC 9) 2014-09-05 (Draft)

Thank you for your attention Any Questions? mhbrodsky@rogers.com