Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

LYPHOMED IS COMPUTERIZING LOT REVIEW RECORDS

Executive Summary

LYPHOMED IS COMPUTERIZING LOT REVIEW RECORDS in order to meet annual product review requirements from FDA. LyphoMed reported the quality control move in response to a recent FD-483 report issued by Chicago district investigator John Bruederle, which alleged that the firm's annual product review reports were incomplete in several areas. LyphoMed said it plans "to set up a computer program for the annual review, which will eliminate all of the situations pointed out by the investigator." FDA investigator Bruederle maintained that LyphoMed's summary reports of its annual product reviews "failed to document that all measurable [batch] parameters were actually evaluated." For instance, the FD-483 report states, "some quality control tests are not recorded on the product review forms and are, therefore, not included in the written summary." The annual product reviews were also found to be incomplete by the FDA investigator in failing to evaluate and record stability data and manufacturing discrepancies. In addition, Bruederle maintained, "data listed on the product review forms is not recorded in a format that facilitates the identification and evaluation of transitory problems or trends." Bruederle also noted that written summaries "lack sufficient information to evaluate potential problems or to present a meaningful interpretation of the data summarized from the product review forms." Annual product review reports was one of several GMP problem areas addressed by the FDA investigator following a routine inspection completed in July of LyphoMed's Melrose Park, Ill. plant last July. Minor deviations were also observed in the firm's procedures regarding determination of product fill volume, media filling and microbiological testing in lyophilizer validation, handling of stability test samples, and asceptic practices by employees. The FDA investigator noted in the FD-483 that a few vials of LyphoMed's injectable products did not meet USP standard deviation specifications for content uniformity. The lots in question, Bruederle reported, were released following visual inspection. He informed LyphoMed that USP "does not provide for visual inspection as an alternate means of verification of quantity of contents." LyphoMed indicated in its response to the FD-483 that it was modifying its procedures to include a weight check of samples collected after the visual inspection is performed.

You may also be interested in...



Part D Discount Liability Coming Into Focus: CMS Releases Drug Cost Data

Newly released Medicare Part D data sheds light on the sales hit that branded pharmaceutical manufacturers will face when the coverage gap discount program gets under way in 2011

FDA Skin Infections Guidance Spurs Debate On Endpoint Relevance

FDA appears headed for a showdown with clinicians and the pharmaceutical industry over the proposed new clinical trial endpoints for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, the guidance's approach for justifying a non-inferiority margin and proposed changes in the types of patients that should be enrolled in trials

Shire Hopes To Sow Future Deals With $50M Venture Fund

Specialty drug maker Shire has quietly begun scouting deals with a brand-new $50 million venture fund, the latest of several in-house investment arms to launch with their parent company's pipelines, not profits, as the measure of their worth

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL1126093

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel