Post Marketing PV AUDIT AND INSPECTION HOSTING. Michael Ramcharan Reumat Consulting Ejaz Butt ZigZag Associates

Similar documents
Pharmacovigilance Inspection Metrics Report

PSMF in Practice Your Questions Answered! GPvP Symposium, 14 March 2014 Jonathan Rowell, Senior GPvP Inspector

UK Standards for Pharmacovigilance Departments 2015

Trends in pharmacovigilance inspection deviations. 8th Scandinavian SARQA/DKG Quality Assurance Conference

PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING PHARMACOVIGILANCE INSPECTIONS REQUESTED BY THE CVMP. Ad Hoc PhV Inspectors Working Group

MHRA GPvP Symposium Summary 6 November 2015 Novotel Hotel, London

Implementation and Impact of the PV Regulations - how are we doing? Sue Rees Eisai Europe Ltd. & John Barber, Dr Reddy's Laboratories

Agency and Internal Labeling

Role of International PVQA. Allison Jack, PVQA Director, GSK 24 th October 2017, Milan

Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP)

Guideline on Good Pharmacovigilance Practices Module V- Pharmacovigilance System Master File

Guidelines for Pharmacovigilance Inspections

Quality Management in PV. Andrea Lohée, Pharm-AD DCVMN training on PV, May 2017

The Pharmacovigilance Quality System. What is it?

Stakeholder Meeting, 17 June 2011, EMA, London. Fergus Sweeney, Head, Compliance and Inspections, European Medicines Agency

Presenter: Ejaz Butt

QA Services. Global. GCP - GVP - GLP - GMP Audits Computer System Compliance Mock Inspections SOP Development Benchmarking and Risk Management

The European Commission's Proposal to Re-design Existing European Drug Safety Rules. An Industry View on Practical Implications

Name of employee: Revised: Title: Department name: (e.g. Patient Solutions Thrombosis) Org. Unit ID (optional): (e.g ) Location: Job type:

Re: PCIM/11/01 Public Consultation on Implementing Measures for Pharmacovigilance

COMMITTEE FOR PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS (CPMP) POSITION PAPER ON COMPLIANCE WITH PHARMACOVIGILANCE REGULATORY OBLIGATIONS

Audit Program Background Definition Management Example Content Risk assessment approach

Inspections: an academic perspective

Pharmacovigilance System in India: Industry Perspective

Safety reporting requirements in the post marketing phase. Pharmacovigilance Specialty Committee SQA Conference March 2017 Washington

Practical Considerations. Andrea Lohée, Pharm-AD DCVMN training on PV, May 2017

Mircea Ciuca, MD Global Head Medical & Clinical Drug Safety

Pharmacovigilance Inspections Time to panic? Marie-Odile Hendrickx, DVM, MRCVS Pfizer Animal Health 13 December 2010

Pharmacovigilance Post July 2012 The new frontier

II.B.4. Information to be contained in the PSMF/ PSSF

Establishing Case Quality Metrics The Sciformix experience

Pharmacovigilance System Master file

Annex IV to guidance for the conduct of good clinical practice inspections sponsor and CRO

Implementing the New Pharmacovigilance Legislation

GCP Inspections: Legal Basis

EudraVigilance Vet. and Pharmacovigilance of vet. Medicinal products in Serbia

PV (Pharmacovigilance) Audit Strategy Planning - A Practical Approach to Design and Implementation

Applying Technologies Across the End-to-End PV Process to Increase Compliance and Quality

Good Clinical Practice Inspections Expectations for Compliance with Sponsor Responsibilities, Part II

etmf A Regulators Perspective Paula Walker, GCP Operations Manager & Senior GCP Inspector

Reflection paper on guidance for laboratories that perform the analysis or evaluation of clinical trial samples

PV (Pharmacovigilance) Audit Strategy Planning - A Practical Approach to Design and Implementation

What is an ideal PSUR? A new focus based on aligned expectations

Recent developments in Pharmacovigilance from the Regulator s Perspective. In strategy, competence, quality and flexibility

R&D Administration Manager. Research and Development. Research and Development

High Quality or Poor Quality DB

Effective Auditing of PV Interfaces

Guideline on good pharmacovigilance practices (GVP)

Pharmacovigilance and the Generic Industry

Good Clinical Practice (GCP): how does a laboratory that supports a clinical trial ensure compliance with these Regulations

George Bernstein, Ph.D. Double Dragon Consulting

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

Outsourcing - managing risks and opportunities over which you now have less control

QUALITY quality standard that the data are credible and the rights, safety, integrity and confidentiality of the subjects are protected HOW???

New pharmacovigilance systems and services

Meeting sponsor s criteria : strategy to collaborate, engage and deliver

GxP Inspections within the Centralised Procedure. Brendan Cuddy Inspections Sector

Feedback on EudraVigilance & new functionalities

The interface between Good Clinical Practice and Good Manufacturing Practice

Pharmacovigilance in Asia: The China Perspectives. Disclaimer

Health Products and Food Branch Inspectorate

GxP Auditing, Remediation, and Staff Augmentation

INTERNAL AUDIT DIVISION AUDIT REPORT 2013/093

Fourth Stakeholders forum on the implementation of the new Pharmacovigilance legislation

Topics summarised in this presentation are: method for defining quality level you want meaning of external controls quality assurance activities

Audit and Regulatory Inspection Nopanan Yaibuathes Clinical Research and Compliance Manager Roche Thailand Ltd.

HOT TOPICS IN PV. Establishing a good Pharmacovigilance system: Essential elements 2 January 2014 Petach Tikva

GxP Auditing, Remediation, and Staff Augmentation

Developing and Implementing a Comprehensive Clinical QA Audit Program

QUALITY ASSURANCE. Pharma Quality Agreements: What Are They, and Why They Matter For Your Study ABSTRACT

Incorporating Risk- Based Monitoring Strategies: Challenges in Implementation Sherri Hubby, Director, U.S. Quality Assurance

FOOD AND DRUGS AUTHORITY GUIDELINES FOR CONDUCTING PHARMACOVIGILANCE INSPECTIONS

Module VIII- Post-authorisation safety studies

ISPE NORDIC COP CLEAN UTILITIES SEPTEMBER TUUSULA FINLAND. Timo Kuosmanen STERIS Finn-Aqua

Central Drugs Standard ControlOrganization

QPPV Association and Training Part 2 Session Introduction

GxP Auditing, Remediation, and Quality System Resourcing

Standard Operating Procedure. GCP Auditing of Research Studies. SOP effective: 23rd January 2018 Review date: 23rd January 2020

Effective Date: October 8, 2015 Policy Number: MHC_RP0301. Corporate Director, HRPP Institutional Official, HRPP

Regulatory Compliance Inspections at MAH Offices: Implications for Manufacturers

EXPERT ISE YOU CAN TRUST

RESEARCH AUDIT Standard Operating Procedure

Documenta tion and Records

Approaches to Risk-Based Quality Management Quality by Design/Quality Systems

Safety Measures in the new Pharmacovigilance System

AUDIT UNDP COUNTRY OFFICE KUWAIT. Report No Issue Date: 20 May 2014

OPERATIONAL RISK EXAMINATION TECHNIQUES

Third Stakeholders forum on the implementation of the new Pharmacovigilance legislation

Pharmacovigilance System in Russia and the EAEU

Periodic Safety Update Reports. Andrea Lohée, Pharm-AD DCVMN training on PV, May 2017

The European Medicines Agency Inspections ANNEX IV TO PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING GCP INSPECTIONS REQUESTED BY THE EMEA:

Internal Financial Control (IFC)& Internal Financial Controls over Financial Reporting (IFCoFR)

Guidance Note on the Compliance Assessment exercise. (under Article 71 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006)

EMA Comments on Implementing Measures for Pharmacovigilance (PCIM/11/01)

The new Pharmacovigilance legislation and implementation planning

Overview of the new pharmacovigilance legislation

Consultation item no. 1 Should additional processes and pharmacovigilance tasks be covered? No, to our mind the list is complete.

The Society for Clinical Trials 34 th Annual Meeting

Transcription:

Post Marketing PV AUDIT AND INSPECTION HOSTING Michael Ramcharan Reumat Consulting Ejaz Butt ZigZag Associates

Agenda Background Preparation Conduct Post Audit & Inspection CAPA Management Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios MHRA Symposium update MHRA Inspection Metrics

Disclaimer The content and opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the presenters and should not be attributed to those of any specific Company

Background - Aims To ensure the processes allows the MAH to comply with the regulatory requirements and identify non-compliance that may cause risk to public health To ensure that process follows company policies and procedures Provide confidence that deliverables (e.g. Aggregate, Signal detection) are using data that is accurate

Background Key Drivers Over the years there has been an increase in Regulators performing pharmacovigilance Inspections and different approaches being adopted (eg; desk-top assessments by MHRA). References outlined below: USFDA POSTMARKETING ADVERSE DRUG EXPERIENCE (PADE) REPORTING INSPECTIONS http://www.fda.gov/downloads/drugs/guidancecomplianceregulatoryinformation/uc M332013.pdf Statutory MHRA Pharmacovigilance Inspection statutory since 2003 http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_gb/document_library/scientific_guideline/2012/ 12/WC500136230.pdf Legal requirement in the EU to perform Pharmacovigilance Inspection GVP Module III Pharmacovigilance Inspections https://www.gov.uk/guidance/good-pharmacovigilance-practice-gpvp Pharmacovigilance Inspection Metrics: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/ 550781/Pharmacovigilance_Inspection_Metrics_Report_2015-2016_FINAL.pdf

Background- Types of Audits & Inspections System/Process Review procedures, systems, personnel and facilities in place to determine compliance with regulatory obligations. Product specific examples may be used to demonstrate the operation of the PV system Product Primary focused on product-related pharmacovigilance issues including product specific activities and documentation. Some aspect of the general system may still be examined

Background- Types of Audits Systems & Processes Affiliates Vendors Partners Distributors Routine For-cause

Background- Types of Inspections Routine Inspections Pre-Authorisation Inspections For Cause Inspection

Background- Identifying Audit & Inspection Candidates Risk based Audit programmes Assessing each audit entity against agreed criteria (eg; Audit history, outsourcing, product safety profile) Likelihood versus Impact versus Detection = total risk score High, Medium and Low risk candidates Conduct audits (Remote and/or on-site) based on risk

Background- Criteria for Risk Based Assessments Products with a known safety issue/class effect Critical finding from another GXP inspection Major finding related to clinical safety/phv from a GCP Inspection or related to quality complaints from a GMP Inspection A previous critical finding related to PhV Unsatisfactory responses received from previous PhV Inspection Poor compliance for submission of expedited reports

Background- Criteria for Risk Based Assessments Poor quality ADR reports or PSURs Vaccines/biologicals/NCE products Previously withdrawn products due to safety concerns A major increase in the number of products authorised Mergers Divestment of products Grant of first MA for a company Number, status and types of products Reports of non-compliance from other Competent Authorities

Preparation Confirm the Scope & Logistics Audit/Inspection Plan Timings Locations Personnel Involved ( SME, Host, back-room, management room)

Preparation Key Documentation to consider Maintenance of PSMF Review Audit history and CAPA s Provide all Pre-Audit/Inspection document requests Internally review documentation and locations Gather Authority inspection intelligence (metrics) Mock Interviews QA support

Preparation Audit Tools: Document Request Forms (see next slide) QC forms Tracker for Document Requests Standard e-mails Communications (Roles & Responsibilities) Written Process required to outline this

Conduct Opening Meeting Clarify and confirmation of the inspection agenda Provide a short presentation, relevant introduction focusing on key aspects e.g. high level overview of systems Areas that may be covered: Inbound Reporting case receipt and case processing Outbound Reporting case submission and aggregate reporting Review of Regulatory Affairs activities & local regulatory requirements Safety Reporting in Clinical Trials Literature Search Activities Product Quality Complaints (PQCs) Medical Information Activities/Call Centre Marketing and Sales Activities Quality Management including training and QA/QC Activities Quality Assurance: internal/external audits and inspections, including CAPA management and follow-ups 3rd Party Contracts Process for PV & Clinical Activities Market Research Activities Data Storage, On-Site and Off-Site Archiving, Business Continuity Plan & Disaster Recovery Plans

Conduct Document request process: Plan on managing document requests: Tracking of documents Robust QC with speed and accuracy Always anticipate questions and requests Keep Auditors & Inspectors informed of any delays + Ad hoc sessions

Conduct Closing Meeting to cover: Summary of the inspection findings to ensure that the results of the inspection are clearly understood An opportunity to correct misconceptions and misunderstandings in response to the findings Reporting process CAPA process

Post Audit & Inspection Lesson Learned meeting Commence preparations of Observation responses

Post Audit & Inspection SMART Specific (Does the action address the finding?) The Company must consider not only how to address the specific examples cited, but also the root cause of the problem. The period under review for retrospective activity should be justifiable Measurable (How can completion be checked?) The Company should clearly state what actions it intends to take to address the finding, to an appropriate level of detail. Achievable / Realistic (Will it be happening?) The Company should not make promises it cannot deliver on, as corrective actions will be followed-up by an inspector at re-inspection. Companies must comply with the appropriate legislation and so should consider the best way to do so in the context of their business model. Time Driven The Company should clearly state the timeline for the corrective / preventative action (s) for each finding.

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Safety Information Common Issues Out of hours PV training No Reconciliation

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Case Processing Common findings from Audit and Inspection experiences over last few years: Incorrect day 0 assigned Inadequate quality control procedures Lack of appropriate follow-up of ICSR reports Inadequate procedures for identification of duplicate reports No control of deletion of ICSR reports from safety database Lack of reconciliation Significant back-log in ICSR report processing Cases are not medically reviewed or incorrectly assessed

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Expedited Reporting Common Findings Non-compliance with expedited reporting timelines Lack of understanding of expedited reporting requirements Incorrect decisions made regarding expedited reporting

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Literature Review Common findings Inadequacies in the construction of, or process used for, literature searching sources used adequacy of scope of search with respect to search objective (how will information on non-clinical data be identified?) lack of QC

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Medical Information Common findings Adverse events not forwarded to drug safety Ineffective QC processes Staff not trained to identified and report adverse events No access to up-to date local label and therefore safety information Agreements with vendors does not contain safety reporting language

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Product Quality Common findings Not all Combined AE/PQCs Identified as AEs Reconciliation not performed to catch missed events LOE not treated as safety data Especially important in products such as contraceptives and life threatening treatments Investigations of PQC not completed in a timely manner Results of investigations not forward to drug safety for assessment and entry into the safety database

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Regulatory Affairs Common findings Following identification of a new safety signal & MAH decision to update the CCDS, delays in submitting variation(s) to update the SPC(s). Delays of over a year have been observed. Delays in implementing SPC and PIL changes following approval of safety variations. Poor processes for ensuring that the minimum core safety information contained in the CCDS is consistently represented, as appropriate, in local product information. Unwarranted inconsistencies in safety information between reference documents e.g. CCDS, SPC(s) and IB. Use of inappropriate reference safety document for the determination of expectedness.

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Marketing/License Partners Common findings Reconciliation not performed with partners resulting in missed cases Case exchange not occurring Contract not updated when PV contact details change Staff not aware of requirements Insufficiently detail in contracts Do not contain safety reporting requirements Responsibilities of each party Exchange of ADRs (and other special situation cases) and product complaints Exchange of changes to Reference Safety Information Timelines Reconciliation Review period (changing regulations will likely change the agreement)

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Organised Data Collection Activities/Marketing/Medical Affairs Common findings Safety data not collected from all solicited sources No process for Safety Departments to be aware of market research studies MAH could not provide list of on-going research related activities Staff performing activities not trained in pharmacovigilance requirements

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Sales and Marketing Common findings Sales force not reporting adverse events Source documents not forwarded to Local drug safety Not carrying most up to date reference safety information Websites contain out of date reference safety information

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Audits & Inspections Common findings No procedures for handling audits/inspection Not all corrective actions completed as stated Not all actions completed on time Issues not fixed even though identified in previous audits or inspections Audit universe is incomplete Auditors not trained in pharmacovigilance Lack of PV audits (conducted and future plans) Extent of audits (affiliates, contractors) Scope of audits - key functions (signal detection process, label updates)

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Vendor Oversight Common findings Incorrect day zero used No assessment performed of suitability by Affiliate. Not appropriately trained No contract No Safety data exchange within contract No oversight of delegated activity Safety Departments not aware of local contracts

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Signal Detection Common findings No formal procedures for signal detection/trend analysis activities No formal and periodic review of information to identify new safety issues Documentation relating to performance of signal detection/trend analysis not retained Failure to communicate new safety issues in a prompt manner to competent authorities Not including all relevant data as part of signal detection process No signal detection other than at time of PSUR production Documentation regarding signal evaluation not produced / retained Completion of investigation not completed and tracked in appropriate timeframe

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Aggregate Reports Common findings Production No procedure, not in desired format, not a consistent standard Standard searches not validated (no impact assessment of database changes on queries generated) Lack of Quality control Incomplete missing cases, no summary tabulation, does not address Competent Authority requests Submissions No mechanism to track, late submissions, no submission Delays in reporting significant new safety findings from post authorisation clinical trials and studies

Audit & Inspection Findings/Scenarios Quality Management System common findings Archiving BCP Training Procedural Documents

Q&A