The browser you are using is too old. OTRS runs with a huge lists of browsers, please upgrade to one of these. Please see the documentation or ask your admin for further information.
One of the key regulatory problems that are hindering the acceptance of AI in Bio-Pharma is the apocalyptic prediction about Human jobs being traded by machine intelligence and the other Key Problem is the siloed regulatory infrastructure. Although the technological advancements in the field of healthcare have grown heavily, the regulatory ecosystem has bungled to keep up.
One more aspect is that AI, particularly neural nets, is a Pandora box; while we can program it, we really don’t know how it rests with the existing technologies within the Organization. That creates the dilemma of explicability. More than the regulatory Reluctance Forebear AI, regulatory authorities are trying to keep pace.
Another core regulatory challenge is in administrating data accessibility in a way that is lean, balanced for benefits between the data-sources and data-users, and assures confidentiality and prevention of misuse.
How to Regulate AI in Bio-Pharma
Pivoting Ahead:
Leading organizations are taking a new tack, and are at a crossroads with respect to AI strategy despite the apocalyptic prediction about Human jobs being traded by machine intelligence,many life sciences companies are behind the maturity curve in the adoption of automation.
By understanding these considerations, Bio-Pharmaceutical Organizations can pursue Automation opportunities more assertively and potentially trounce the risks of falling behind competitors in technology adoption.
Drug labelling has changed over time because of evolving regulations and has increased in content and length, with a standard format to guide the safe and effective use of the drug. Product labels (drug or devices) contain comprehensive information enriched with product details, such as disease indications, target populations, drug-drug interactions, and ADRs. The labels and labelling documents prepared by manufacturers and approved by the Health Authorities, in its final form, reflect the collective input from regulators, drug manufacturers, and scientific experts. Drug-labelling data is an important resource for diverse applications, including support for policy development.
The global labelling management process continues to be a burden on the life sciences industry and is multiplying at a pace that is already becoming increasingly difficult to manage. Firms’ R&D ambitions are growing, businesses are expanding into multiple markets, and regulators are steadily strengthening safety requirements to protect patients and public health. The pharmaceutical industry operates on a global scale, and regulatory compliance across multiple geographies is fundamental to ensuring that the supply chain remains safe and secure.
As part of the dossier registration, all manufacturers must submit labelling support documents (USPI, SmPC, PIL, IFU, etc.) to HAs to grant marketing approval. Each time the benefit and risk profile or safety factors change, or as regional or local regulatory agencies update their standards, international biopharmaceutical firms must react swiftly with accurate, compliant labelling for all affected markets. This is a real-time and hectic process for multinational companies as there are major content interdependencies. Moreover, managing the local label changes (CCDS vs USPI, SmPC & other local labels) with company core safety information i.e. how a change anywhere along the safety-regulatory-manufacturing-supply chain continuum will affect all label content, from the global core datasheet, to patient-facing product information in each marketed country.
Though the manufacturers shall update and distribute the final updated labels where the products are being marketed. Where submissions are bundled and/or split at the country level to comply with local regulations or company’s internal needs and strategies, there are further considerations as companies try to maintain trace ability especially as changes trickle down to dependent countries. The traditional way of managing all of this has been via a combination of specific systems and manual processes. Typically, tracking of label status and changes are done in Excel spreadsheets internally, and content has been updated on a country-by-country basis using dedicated, often standalone labelling tools.
Triggers for labelling changes can occur at different points during product life cycle. Changes to the benefit/risk profile of a drug that require revised labelling requirements from the company's global core data sheet or local regulatory changes to specific countries can drive the need for a two-way amendment in the supply chain.. As a result, central labelling teams have not found it easy to build up a clear, accurate, and comprehensive picture of all labelling activities. Nor are they able to manage these systematically, end to end, irrespective of where the trigger for a change to the content might come from. In other words, it is difficult for them to efficiently map country/label interdependencies so that changes can be rolled out promptly and reliably wherever the new requirements apply.
In addition to the risk of non-compliance, all of this adds up to a laborious and cost-laden workload for life sciences organisations, as they try to keep track of the latest implemented labels in all of their markets and roll out each new set of changes, as applicable, within the required timeframe. To keep up with the ever-changing emerging safety regulations, companies must upgrade their approach to labelling management with some urgency now.
A modern label management system manages the entire label lifecycle, offers complete transparency throughout the label production process, and facilitates quality control procedures during its distribution. The best modern label management systems now allow business users to design, review, track, and control label data from a document management system. This increases traceability and eliminates scope for errors in the labelling documents for compliance procedures.
Many bio-pharma companies are now looking to ensure compliance, minimize the need for relabeling, and reduce the number of label templates, and transition from paper-based catalogues to digital document management systems. It makes sense to ensure labelling technology is a priority so it can address inconsistencies in processes, mitigate human errors. Timely tracking thus improves business agility for companies to produce compliant, high-quality labels in a cost and time-efficient manner.
Pharma companies, especially those operating from a particular geographical source, will need to rearrange and upgrade their existing labelling processes and compliance structures to conform to the constantly evolving regulatory guidelines. Since details vary from region to region, companies must facilitate tracking units across the supply chain.
LABELai: A Complete Labelling Solution
Automation reduces human intervention and ensures the development of high-quality deliverables that significantly reduce overall operational costs and improve the time-to-market across regions. Some organizations have developed and streamlined the labelling process to minimize the errors, but they often lack the automation required to build a robust and error-free process.
LABELai uses advanced technology to offer end-to-end product labelling by leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) for 90% of the activities. LABELai has been developed with the intention of meeting regulatory requirements in labelling documents, as well as clients’ prospects during the product life cycle management. Our Labelling tool can do the effective process (tracking) for multiple versions of the same document. LABELai has a provision to track the status of labelling documents from production to final distribution and its life cycle management. By using the LABELai tool you can know the label status at any time during drafting, review, approval, and distribution. Corresponding changes to labels along with justifications for changes can also be tracked using this system.
It's a known fact that the Pandemic Effect of Covid-19 apart from creating the hurdles in Clinical Research has also fetched a possibility to many of the new innovations. Supply Chain Management is one of the majorly effected streams due to pandemic which lead to low stock of the API to pursue the Manufacturing of the IMP for clinical trials.
It's time to invest additional efforts on strategy development for managing the clinical supply activities in more efficient way. The scope of the supply chain management can be made efficient by creating solutions to the current and anticipated challenges.
As industry is also focused more on ‘Direct-to-Patient’ model, Drug Supply Chain Management has a primary role in this.
Few areas of focus for DSCM include:
DSCM should use an effective IRT system that can handle most of these activities to help save time. IRT can help in managing the risks by leveraging automation, supply options, timely alerts and maintain regulatory compliance
The complexity surrounding labeling often leads to errors, product mix-ups, and even misbranding. Labeling being an integral part of the quality management system, such errors often lead to product recalls which might have a negative impact on both the image and the finance of the company. The best way out of this might be through digitization and automation. Moreover, as the current scenario asks for remote working, this turns out to be the new normal.
Labeling Content Challenges
Latest studies have shown that labeling content accounts for almost 33% of the product recalls. Some of the challenges are:
Labeling Automation and Digitization Tool
Content Management & Lifecycle Automation
Manual labeling and comparison of documents is a laborious task and due to the number of documents, the chances of error are quite high. Hence, automation will not only assist you in reducing errors but also is beneficial in managing the content and updating them within a given time frame.
Managing CCDS
Company Core Data Sheets (CCDS) need to be reviewed, edited and updated with time and this process generally needs to be automatic as the data becomes innumerable at the regional level. Automation tools help you in the version management to ensure regular updates.
Compliance
Choose a tool that has in-built local and foreign country regulations. This will allow you to have a comparison of the labels and understand the violations so that there is no need of any future manual reconciliation.
Generating Reports
Report generation helps in global marketing and a tool can easily support you in generating labeling change reports related to administration, safety, compliance, version, and HA updates.
Formatting, Reviewing and Publishing
Modern tools can ensure comparison of documents of various formats. Moreover, a tool reviews any document 75% faster than in manual QC. All HAs have a different labeling format and to maintain that manually is difficult. If you can take the help of a tool with all such inbuilt data then it can make the task easier. The labels get published through automation in the desired format leaving a lesser scope for formatting issues.
Digitization and automation can give you the much needed results and let you move ahead towards an error free labeling and thereby preventing the repeated recalls and ensuring a proper approval.
Drug Accountability of the Investigation Medication begins from the selection of location for its storage. Issues with drug accountability are major and the majority of warning letters from regulators are a result of this. Major delays are faced by sites for non-conformity and it often leads to non-acceptance of trial data. Drug accountability is of utmost importance and it is the clinical investigator who remains responsible for the entire process taking place at the clinical site. If the supplies are controlled substances then more attention shall be needed from the Investigator in terms of its storage and disposition. IRT systems allow in streamlining such processes by keeping a single source of data and hence the process of Drug Accountability tracking becomes easier.
Paper-based Drug Accountability Challenges
It is the complexity surrounding the paper-based systems that makes them more prone to errors. Drug accountability shall be maintained at sponsor level and site level. The Investigational medication documented as shipped should reconcile with the documentation of used and unused. The Drug Accountability at site begins once an investigational drug reaches the site. Records need to be maintained and staffs need to confirm that the contents that have been shipped match its previous record. The authorized person needs to put his signature with date after thorough verification. Once these have been completed, the investigational drug needs to be stored securely maintaining the standards specified in the protocol. Entire details need to be updated in the drug accountability log and with the commencement of trials; drug dispensing records are to be updated in writing in multiple documents. Site shall maintain all the data of the drugs right from drug dispensing to final disposition. Paper-based drug accountability never ends with the end of study, discrepancies in accountability logs need to be resolved, and its copies are to be returned with the original shipment records. The sponsor should receive the reconciled log along with the returned investigational drugs. Any discrepancy in drug accountability not only violates the regulations but also points the integrity of the study and public health.
Mitigating Challenges through IRT
Utilizing electronic medium for data collection and tracking helps in mitigating the challenges associated with data accountability. When data associated with a trial gets centralized, then the visibility gets doubly enhanced and a single accountable system improves the process of reporting. This entire method eases regulatory compliance achievement process and accountability audit issues get resolved immediately. As the use of the IRT system increases the pace, end-of-study documents are prepared in no time using the single system as the source.
mIRT has a special feature to track Drug Accountability where the reconciliation of the supplies that are used, lost, damaged and returned shall be captured which enables the system to calculate the compliance of the drug automatically.
Future of Drug Accountability
With the current advancements, as the world is moving ahead and accepting technology, there is an increased level of visibility in the supply chain for both the regulators and sponsors.
Labeling process prominence has increased over the years and manufacturers are trying to manage product labeling & artwork at the same time while maintaining end-to-end life cycle changes of product labeling. In the current scenario, labeling can be in various forms, both physical and digital as well. Controlling the labeling content becomes difficult as it comes from diverse sources and all these content changes during the product lifecycle process is a daunting task for labeling teams. Labeling Automation can help ease these challenges.
Automation & AI
Artificial Intelligence is involved in various domains like education, retail marketing & healthcare sector, etc. To that, data labeling is a vital aspect in the healthcare domain (Pharmaceutical industry) with its keen specifications predefined by the health regulatory authorities (HRA). Systems need to understand what is shown on the display part such as images, symbols, written text & among many other things. Medical labeling is an imperative or integral stage of data preprocessing in supervised learning (machine learning) process. Historical data with predefined target attributes (values) is used for this process model.
Data Organization and Structure
Organizations look forward to collaboration so that all the data is available at the source thus enabling them to keep a check on the labeling content. To ensure this control, e-labeling has already entered the market and with time it is taking up much of the space in the life science industry.
Labeling data service comprises many different tasks. This includes adding electronic markings on image files, text files, categorizing texts, etc. As mentioned above, adding markings on images or text is an important part of data labeling service. Data coding is the key aspect in the Automation process and certain modules or templates to be designed and populate internally. All the labeling functional aspects will be identified, captured and coded in way of business rules (predefined data integrity) to the system. Each data element will give the system a better understanding and execution of the outcome for defined processes. This allows the algorithm to recognize different shapes in various positions and also possible to tag or map the data element. The algorithms can only function properly if there is some sort of human intervention then the system machines can produce human-like results
Data Digitization
The digital revolution is inevitable. It is already happening. Soon it will ease the burden of brand attraction and information which is at the moment moving swiftly onto packages. Converters will become the dominant producer of paper-based information. In simple terms, consumers will get product information online by scanning the RF tag or barcode with their Smartphone. This is already happening, so it is safe to conclude that the future is here. Fortunately, things can only get better and easier for the consumer. It can be combined with packaging and can be used by marketers to encourage potential buyers to purchase the product
Data Capturing & NLP Technology
Some specifications regarding labeling activity are the key thing in the machine learning process. For example, some of the label content may require to represent and executing in a particular native language or coming from a specific region. In other cases, a more detailed description of the individual field is necessary on how and what content to be present. In this process for each assigned task user-based credentials are given as needed by the customer for the required job. Understanding all text would be difficult in the machine learning process. Natural language or Natural language process (NLP) is unlike constructed or formal language and can therefore not easily be parsed by machines.
The next decade will demand bigger changes in process systems and expected greatly reduced materials used in packaging and goals of 80− 90% recovery.
Digitization and automation will enable comprehensive recovery and re-use of packaging materials. So the big question is how ready your teams and your company are for these changes. Take small steps with the phased approach supported by the right technology/tool and start applying to different labeling processes without boiling the ocean or waiting for a big silver bullet to rescue.
What is Data Integrity?
Integrity of data is ensured only when initial remains valid throughout the product life cycle. If the accuracy comes under question at any point in time then data integrity would collapse. ALCOA system is the best method of defining and measuring data integrity. It can be broadly expressed as:
Technology Driven Automation
Attributable: A single person to be held responsible and accountable from the beginning to the completion of a particular task.
Legible: The data gathered should be clear and simplified so that it is easy to read and conceive and can be preserved for future usages.
Contemporaneous: The data created and the activity conducted need to be running simultaneously i.e., in real-time.
Original: The data should be authentic and its validity to be maintained throughout the product life cycle.
Accurate: Resemblance of the task and data is necessary to prove accuracy.
IRT’s Impact on Data Integrity
a. Managing of Blinds Interactive Response Technology (IRT) helps in systematically maintaining data blind. All the data starting with assignment of treatment and continuing towards ultimate data analysis can be easily viewed in the audit trail timeline. Unblinding of data is generally the outcome when there is no or a poor IRT system in effect. Finally, it is the responsibility of all the stakeholders to pay special attention while the blind is being enforced so that it can be maintained all through.
b. Streamlining Audit Trail Data of Audit Trail are extremely significant as later inspections related to pharmacokinetic studies; randomization or a double-blind could be benefitted from it. The final data can be reviewed by comparing the source data with the end data. It is enough to reveal whether the subjects received opposite treatment meaning active drugs and not a placebo or they received mixed treatment where they were given both active drug and placebo or the drugs were given under wrong dietary conditions like dosage to be given in fasting were given after feeding and vice versa. IRT system makes it easier to trace all these details through the audit trail so that issues can be handled on time rather than discovering them during an inspection.
It is data integrity that the entire industry is concerned about and IRT systems will ensure it only if it is properly verified. So, for vendors it is of utmost importance to verify the IRT not only for vendor qualification but also during the implementation of protocol change or any such other changes. This will ensure that the data that you retrieve is completely integrated.
Current situation has led the world to remain secluded and engage more into remote activities. In such situations, like most other industries, healthcare industry too has been forced to think out of the box. Areas that have been mostly impacted are those where congregation and engagement of multiple people was necessary. One such section in healthcare is that of clinical trials. Data sharing, analysis and accumulation remains to be a major and most significant part while conducting a clinical trial. Now it is for us to find out how technology is driving the change.
Remote Monitoring
To conduct the ongoing clinical trials remotely, monitoring and management of data and document is necessary. There is no fixed method that can be implemented and hence files are generally shared in the form of email, fax or such other cloud-based tools. This leads to compliance risk issues if not kept under proper surveillance. Such file sharing systems are generally used as they are low in cost but they fail to be compliant with the authority regulations. Moreover, fax and mailing services require huge manual work and provide greater scope of error in updating the retrieved data. In areas of clinical trial such minute errors too can have severe impacts.
Technology Driven Automation
Automation is of great help in current situation as it allows collaboration and a seamless exchange and upgradation of data. Access to Electronic Medical Record (EMR) tends to be of great help in addition to SaaS based tools. These being cloud based, perform the tasks automatically and hence there is less of manual task and lesser scope for errors. This advanced technology comes with a central repository for the storage of bulk data which gets analysed regularly and in real time, thereby easing out much of the task.
Technological transformations especially in the field of clinical trials have already started. Automation has provided greater control, access to vast data, accountability, lesser compliance risks and scope for continuous communication. This allows in performing remote clinical trials with added visibility and helps more people to come forward and adopt the change.
Companies who did large implementations (like RIM, EDMS, Change Management, ERP, others) have all noticed their costs and timelines doubled than what is budgeted initially.
These large systems that BioPharma implemented have helped them streamline business functions and track data. However many of these systems still require significant manual processing. PwC's 2017 effectiveness benchmark report found that users spend half their time focused on mundane, repetitive tasks of gathering data from various systems. This led to many of the systems reaching the point of diminishing returns.
On positive side, the speed, scale and cost of automation are evolving better with help of robotic automation, natural language processing, machine learning systems that offer companies new opportunities to improve process performance and realize significant cost savings
For Regulatory processes, some of these technologies can be implemented in short sprints, focused on specific sub-processes, with manageable costs. This approach of "small & smart" automation leads to "fast" implementation of flexible and adaptable technologies that fill the gaps left by your current or legacy enterprise tools or document systems, thereby enabling much higher productivity for labeling teams
Small automation can improve the productivity of individual regulatory processes by 80 to 100 percent and overall labeling functions by 30 percent or more
Small automation does not replace large enterprise systems or your future big automation initiatives. These are easier to implement and much less expensive. They can be applied to individual processes or tasks without having to go through complex cross-functional discussions (negotiations) and coordination in large projects.
Traditionally, companies could not begin to capture gains from large IT implementations until they had standardized processes and databases that were accessible to a broad set of users, which could take years. In contrast, automation doesn't depend on standardization or centralization (unlike your large projects or systems) leading to higher flexibility and adaptability
Applying small automation is anew way of working, and company leaders will need to ensure that both they and their teams have right knowledge to be successful.
"small" automation can be applied to several processes like auto authoring, data with document merging, document publishing, submission readiness checks, translation automation, compliance checks, broad QC checks, and few more areas
Please reach out to us to discuss how we are helping customers achieve these automation goals using our patent-pending REGai which is a cloud based modular focused Regulatory platform that will work with your current systems / technology
The COVID-19 pandemic has taken a toll on the entire world affecting various sectors including the pharmaceutical industry. Unlike the other industries, the pharmaceutical industry has not come to a halt because of its need in such difficult times but some severe restrictions have been imposed. In the wake of this pandemic, some ongoing activities have been hampered and one such activity is the clinical trials that are already in process. As the borders of the countries have been sealed and opened from time to time and with the number of stakeholders associated in the process, maintaining the supplies has been difficult. This situation demands some strict measures that would help in easing out the ongoing clinical trial processes.
This situation has prevented most subjects from visiting the sites to collect the drug samples that lead to the dropout rate of subjects and has affected the recruitment rate as well. On the other hand, some have left the trials halfway. Moreover, the risk is higher when there is a need for multiple visits and financial prospects are affected when there is a stock overage. Taking these into consideration there aroused a scope for a special feature of IRT that is ‘Direct to Patients’ which has been discussed over years in the conferences. That if implemented in a situation like this, could give unthinkable results.
"Direct to Patient" (DtP) is the answer in which supplies can be directly sent to the subjects of clinical trials in a contactless manner. This would prevent them from coming to the sites, and at the same time would help in continuing the clinical trial in a smoothly manner and also there are chances to reduce the dropout rate in the studies as well. The implementation process of this feature might vary from country to country but once implemented, this can make the tracking and supply process easier.
IRT systems play a critical role in ensuring the right medication gets to the right patient at the right time. With the use of IRT it would be easier to track the shipments and arrange them on the basis of the kit status. Accompanying IRT with the digitalized supplies management systems would bring more sophisticated results in the implementation of this DtP which allows easy tracking of Supplies right from its package to the direct patients’ address to their acknowledgement of the supplies. The patient would be able to procure the kits and even return the unused or excess kits from their home on their next visit. Although IRT faces a number of challenges in the DtP supply process and these are related to cancellation of shipments, temperature adjustments necessary for the kits and even in the process of return and destruction of unused kits. Despite all these, IRT manages the entire procedure through the mitigation of these challenges.
The long term effects of COVID-19 might turn out to be severe and it might bring about many other changes in the pharmaceutical industry, clinical trial processes, and even in the management of supplies. Standing at this juncture, it is highly suggested that the implementation of such IRT systems with DtP enabled is prioritized. The individual technologies need to be re-evaluated to ensure that adopting this new design would be feasible. Now as the entire workforce is functioning remotely, adopting such advanced systems is a necessity to keep functioning amidst this situation.
FDA is committed to providing timely guidance to support response efforts to this pandemic situation of COVID-19. In this regard FDA has implemented few guidance documents immediately without prior public comment, because this is not feasible or appropriate at this pandemic time, but it remains subject to comment in accordance with the Agency's good guidance practices.
As recommended by FDA the devices submission would be required as per Quality System Regulation requirements (21 CFR Part 820 {21 CFR Subpart K - 820.120 Device labeling & 820.130 Device packaging Control}), Reports of Corrections and Removals requirements (21 CFR Part 806 {reporting information}), and Label to bear a unique device identifier (21 CFR Part 830 and 21 CFR 801.20) regulations as necessary.
The recommended guidance document contains proposed changes in both the device technical function and labeling context (including methods, standards, etc).
Below is one of the medical devices type as per new recommendations.
Modifications for Sterilizers, Disinfectant Devices, and Air Purifiers:
FDA has recommended standards (TABLE 1) and labeling modifications (TABLE 2) on sterilized or disinfected conditions to patients and healthcare providers for usage of sterilizers, disinfectant devices, and air purifiers during this public health emergency.
TABLE 1: Modifications/applied standards for Sterilizers, Disinfectant devices, and Air purifiers
Device Type | Product Code | Device Classification | FDA-Recommended standards for Sterilized or Disinfected Devices on Indication or functionality |
I. Sterilizers | |||
Endodontic dry heat sterilizer | KOK | III | • Steam Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI ST8:2013 Hospital Steam Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI ST55:2016 Table-Top Steam Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI ST79:2019 Comprehensive Guide to Steam Sterilization and Sterility Assurance in Health Care Facilities. • Dry Heat Sterilizers o AAMI ST50:2004 (R2018) Dry Heat (Heated Air) Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI ST40:2004m (R2018) Table-Top Dry Heat (Heated Air) Sterilization and Sterility Assurance in Health Care Facilities • Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI ST24:1999 (R2018) Automatic, General Purpose Ethylene Oxide Sterilizers and Ethylene Oxide Sterilant Sources Intended for Use in Health Care Facilities, 3ed. o ANSI/AAMI ST41:2008 (R2018) Ethylene Oxide Sterilization in Health Care Facilities: Safety and Effectiveness • Other Sterilizers o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14937 Sterilization of Health Care Products — General Requirements for Characterization of a Sterilizing Agent and the Development, Validation and Routine Control of a Sterilization Process for Medical Devices • Chemical Indicators o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11140 – 1 Sterilization of Health Care Products—Chemical Indicators—Part 1: General Requirements • Sterile Packaging o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-1 Packaging for Terminally Sterilized Medical Devices – Part 1: Requirements for Materials, Sterile Barrier Systems and Packaging Systems o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11607-2 Packaging for Terminally Sterilized Medical Devices • Rigid Sterilization Containers o ANSI/AAMI/ISO ST77:2013 Containment Devices for Reusable Medical Device Sterilization • Biological Indicators o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 11138 Sterilization of Health Care Products—Biological Indicators Series o ANSI/AAMI/ISO 14161 Sterilization of Health Care Products — Biological Indicators — Guidance for the Selection, Use and Interpretation of Results |
II. Disinfectant Devices | |||
1. Chemical/Physical Disinfectant Devices | |||
Cleaning accessories for endoscope | FEB | II | • AAMI ST58:2013 (R2018) Chemical Sterilization and High-Level Disinfection in Health Care Facilities • Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 6.3.05:2013 Official Method 966.04 Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants • AOAC 6.3.06:2012 Official Method 965.12 Tuberculocidal Activity of Disinfectants • AOAC 6.3.02:2006 Official Method 955.17 Fungicidal activity of Disinfectants Using Trichophyton Menta grophytes • AOAC 6.2.01:2013 Official Method 955.14, Testing Disinfectants Against Salmonella Choleraesuis, Use-Dilution Method • AOAC 6.2.04:2013 Official Method 955.15, Testing Disinfectants Against Staphylococcus Aureus, Use-Dilution Method • AOAC 6.2.06:2013 Official Method 964.02, Testing Disinfectants Against Pseudomonas Aeruginosa, Use-Dilution Method |
Medical devices sterilant | MED | II | |
Medical devices disinfectors | MEC | II (exempt from premarket review unless indicated for high level disinfection or for use on endoscopes and accessories) |
|
Medical devices cleaners | MDZ | II | |
High level disinfection reprocessing instrument for ultrasonic transducers, mist | OUJ | II | |
High level disinfection reprocessing instrument for ultrasonic transducers, liquid | PSW | II | |
II. Ultraviolet (UV) Disinfecting Devices | |||
UV radiation chamber disinfection devices, | OSZ | II | |
III. Air Purifiers | For the purposes of this guidance, FDA recommends that manufacturers of air purifiers evaluate or perform the following: | ||
Medical recirculation air cleaner | FRF | II | • Demonstration of a 4 log reduction (through a combination of capture or destruction) of claimed particulates. • If intended for use against bacteria, effectiveness against representative gram positive and gram negative species. • If intended for use related to SARS-CoV-2, effectiveness against a representative virus • If the device generates ozone, the maximum acceptable level of ozone per 21 CFR 801.415. If intended for use in areas that have a sterile field or controlled air flow, a risk assessment to address turbulent air flow and/or potential site contamination. |
Medical UV air purifier | FRA | II |
Table 2: Labeling Modifications for Sterilizers, Disinfectant Devices, and Air Purifiers:
FDA RECOMMENDED LABELING MODIFICATIONS | LABELING IMPACT (Yes/No)IFU | Art Work |
1. A clear description of the available data on the device’s new indications or functions related to SARS-CoV-2 or co-existing conditions, such as: a) Device performance; and b) Potential risks (e.g., risk of UV exposure) |
Yes | Yes (indication statement) |
2. -A clear distinction delineating FDA-cleared or FDA-approved indications from those that are not FDA-clared or FDA-approved. In addition, FDA recommends the labeling include a general statement about changes that have not been cleared by FDA. | Yes | Yes |
3. For all disinfectant devices, a clear statement of the level of disinfection. | Yes | Yes |
a) A caution that UV disinfection will reduce the number of pathogens on the device, but it will not eliminate them completely. | Yes | No |
b) A statement that the device is an adjunct to currently existing reprocessing practices and not a replacement or modification to such practices. | Yes | No |
c) A statement regarding the time, distance, and maximum area over which the device has been evaluated for effectiveness. | Yes | No |
d) An appropriate UV hazard warning label. | Yes | Yes |
e) Identification of the expected UV lamp operational life and instructions for procedures on replacement of the UV lamp when needed. | Yes | No |
f) Procedures to follow if the UV lamp malfunctions or fails. | Yes | No |
g) Description of the preparation of equipment or the room for disinfection | Yes | No |
h) A statement that the equipment intended to be disinfected is UV compatible. | Yes | No |
i) Identification of the UV dose. | Yes | No |
There are several suggestions, recommendations from different health authorities for sponsors to handle clinical trial aspects during this very challenging time of COVID. Most of them recommended not starting any new studies for time being. For the ongoing studies, below is the compilation from their documents pertaining to Clinical monitoring of ongoing studies:
MHRA
Remote monitoring for trials
We support remote monitoring where appropriate but consider the following:
Using phone calls instead of protocol-directed in-person study visits is acceptable where possible. This will not constitute a serious breach of the protocol. A substantial amendment to update the protocol will not be required. We would however expect that any protocol deviations are well documented internally.
EU
Changes to monitoring
Certain sponsor oversight responsibilities, such as monitoring and quality assurance activities need to be re-assessed and temporary, alternative proportionate mechanisms of oversight may be required. The extent of on-site monitoring, if it remains feasible, should take into account national and local restrictions, the urgency (e.g. source data verification can often be postponed) and the availability of site staff, and should only be performed as agreed with investigator sites. The burden of the introduction of any alternative measures for the site staff and facilities should also be considered in order to strike an acceptable balance between appropriate oversight and the capacity of and possibilities at the site.
Possible temporary, alternative measures could include:
It is essential that robust follow-up measures are planned and ready to be implemented when the situation is normalised. This should likely include increased on-site monitoring for a period that is sufficient to ensure that the impact of the reduced monitoring could be rectified and problems resolved or properly documented for reporting in the clinical study report.
So-called remote source data verification (e.g. providing sponsor with copies of medical records or remote access to electronic medical records) is currently not allowed in most member states as it might infringe trial participants’ rights. In addition, provision of redacted/ de-identified pdfs files will not be acceptable as it puts disproportionate burden on site staff.
Nevertheless, since the corona virus emergency situation and containment measures are likely to last for a prolonged period, several NCAs have started to look into possible, temporary solutions related to remote access and conditions for such, providing that methods can be used that restricts access to trial participant records, in line with the principles of necessity and proportionality. This should however also be clarified with other relevant authorities in this area (such as, without limitation, Ethics Committees and data protection agencies) and is consequently not allowed unless a member state has given specific guidance allowing this.
FDA
Since trial participants may not be able to come to the investigational site for protocol-specified visits, sponsors should evaluate whether alternative methods for safety assessments (e.g., phone contact, virtual visit, alternative location for assessment, including local labs or imaging centers) could be implemented when necessary and feasible, and would be sufficient to assure the safety of trial participants. Sponsors should determine if in-person visits are necessary to fully assure the safety of trial participants (for example to carry out procedures necessary to assess safety or the safe use of the investigational product appropriately); in making the decision to continue use or administration of the investigational product, the sponsor should consider whether the safety of trial participants can be assured with the implementation of the altered monitoring approach.
If planned on-site monitoring visits are no longer possible, sponsors should consider optimizing use of central and remote monitoring programs to maintain oversight of clinical sites.
TGA
Site monitoring visits
That’s 40 hours time saved per year. The more per day time saving, obviously means more time saved in addition.
Use this time that you’ll save for your strategic planning, process optimizations, improvement planning, or more coffee indulging breaks or relaxing yoga time
With saving time for labeling teams in mind, LABELai addresses content development or tracking challenges and processes in day-to-day labeling teams work. LABELai innovatively automates local content utilizing AI and NLP technologies augmented by built-in Regulatory requirements of several countries.
Benefits:
Higher Accuracy of local labeling content creation and maintenance
Less Oversight & time required form Head Quarters / central teams
Deep Cost savings
Finally, top-down label compliance achievement
In the process of implementation of QMS standard ISO 13485, many companies face common struggles; however their mistakes can be avoided when you look and analyze these things more closely. The more closer you look at the QMS requirements, you understand the more and can apply your own QMS processes in your organization according to these guidelines.
1. Treating the ISO 13485 Requirements as a "CHECKBOX" Activities
Business market is a series of interrelated processes and functions. Implementation should never be about checking a box; there are many chances to miss the potential benefits of the activities it actually involves.
Implementation of ISO 13485 should be a holistic approach, where the culture of "QUALITY" increases across the entire company by adopting quality-first mindset and doing a lot of value-add exercises and ensure these standards are met in all operations.
2. Limited CAPA Understanding ->Overload on CAPA ->Hide CAPAs ->cause Audit Failure
Due to company’s poor processes, CAPA can quickly be over loaded; unable to eliminate & prevent non-conformities which leads to overburdened with excess CAPA events. Generally as an initial step, auditors check the CAPA procedures to understand “how the root causes are identified& how efficient are the QMS processes”. The more you understand the CAPA, you can judge where CAPA required or not and can eliminate and prevent the cause(s).
3. Failure to Perform Internal Audits
If you don’t conduct internal audits, you’re missing out on the opportunity to stay at the pulse of what’s really happening and make improvements as you go. You are in a big trouble if do not conduct internal audits or follow checkbox activity in the internal audits. Ensure to perform frequent, effective and comprehensive internal audits to meet the compliance.
Other important avoidable mistakes from the medical device manufacturing companies:
Manufacturers can avoid common mistakes in implementing the ISO 13485 Quality Management System by dropping the checkbox activities and use a structured QMS to bring safe, effective medical devices to market. This is the overall essential purpose of the standard.
With EU MDR changing the plain field of med devices to a whole a new level, other countries are following similar path of increasing demands in product safety, traceability, performance areas.
Companies not organized on information management with a system will end up duplicating lot of activities leading to loss of productivity and increase risk of non-compliance.
There are 3 categories of Challenges grouped by:
Process Challenges:
Training must be required to simplify the complexity of multiple system & user interface. As a result, users work outside of the system using local file shares or email to collaborate. To check the work status and to create report most of the companies depends on separate reporting tool or manual spreadsheets.
System Challenges:
Medical device regulation is much versatile. Upgrading a system with updated integrations is challenging and expensive as well. Systems that lie behind corporate firewalls are difficult to outsource to business partners or service providers.
Compliance Challenges:
Users develop manual tracking spreadsheets when planning & tracking capabilities aren’t part of a content management system. Many times users share information and documents via email that cause inconsistent use of document template and it is much difficult to Re-import.
Importance of a RIM system
Medical device registrations differ from country to country, with the difference in FDA’s 510K (Class I and II devices) and Premarket Approval (Class III devices) processes from the EU's CE Marking process. The current regulatory environment in which the medical devices and diagnostics companies are competing is complex.
There is a higher demand for regulatory and compliance information required to support submissions 510 (k), PMA, De Novo and HDE.A cloud based RIM can effectively help management of product registration, commitments and regulatory submissions to medical device and diagnostics companies. This unified, single-source system provides a global user base with real-time information necessary to ensure the quality of the product and the registration.
Following capabilities should be present in an effective regulatory information management system
RIM in future:
With the versatile and novel reporting requirements set out by regulatory authorities, the plea to need Regulatory Information Management System (RIMS) is emerging brassier. The medical device market is progressively adopting regulations for UDI, eIFU, electronic submissions, others. Making these things happen without a proper RIM system is very challenging.
At the same time, Medical device companies themselves are now realizing the strategically important role that various forms of product data could play in the future; enhancing new productivity, efficiency and create competitive differentiation.
Drug development is becoming a complex process with each passing year. Expenses and time are not at per. Even success rates are dwindling over time and hence new drug development too loses the charm. To cater to such situations, adaptive designs are implemented. It allows modification to a trial even after initiation and modifications undertaken thereafter do not hamper the validity and reliability of that clinical trial. In 2004, the USFDA had strongly recommended usage of Adaptive Designs in Clinical Trials and this was later adopted by European Regulatory in 2006. The Regulatory Bodies cordially welcomed this idea considering attrited and stagnated growth of the pharmaceutical industry. As it is mainly targeted for flexibility of the Trial, it is also named as 'Flexible Designs'.
DESIGN TYPES AND FUNCTIONS Adaptive Design clinical trials are dependent on the accommodating capability of the IRT System. Depending on need the following designs are present:
BENEFITS OF ADAPTIVE DESIGNS
CONCLUSION
Adopting adaptive designs in clinical trials turns out to be extremely rewarding. With its equal positive and negative predictions it can help in increasing efficiency of drugs and decreasing valueless treatments conducted in the earlier stages. The Regulatory agencies do have a positive outlook towards adaptive trials but it is necessary to be cautious as drastic changes made at Phase II and Phase III levels to achieve efficiency might be criticized. Moreover, adaptive designs cannot save every trial which has been planned poorly. Still, once these designs are adopted, they can save a considerable amount of time and money in the drug development process.
Several global regulatory and health agencies issued guidance with regards to the conduct of clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic. This swift action taken by the regulatory agencies was in direct response to global concerns around assuring the safety of clinical trial participants, maintaining compliance with GCP and minimizing risks to trial integrity during this unprecedented time.
ZERO Guidance or Regulations given by any agency for Labeling exceptions. That means whether your regional teams are disrupted because of Covid, teams cannot follow-up labeling changes on time or people doing WFH, or other changes, your labeling obligations remain SAME, if not increased more
Label compliance may not be high priority for your compliance teams or health authorities or some of you as there are other priorities. When dust settles, some of your Labeling gaps might pose major challenges and companies will have to incur extra costs to bring any label non-compliance to order. From studies in the past, for a business, the consequences are costly, with the average label change sitting at $350,000.
In addition, the risk of non-compliance is significant. From the potential regulatory fines and loss of brand reputation, temporary forced shutdown of a full production line and cost of re-mediating, not having a validated system and process in place could have a potentially catastrophic impact on business.
Labeling Digitization to Rescue
Digitization & Automation offers traceability that not only mitigates potential risks but also drastically improving labeling efficiency.
For existing labels, with the help of inbuilt translation engine, reverse translations can be done on existing regional/country labels and compared to either CCDS, USPI or SmPC. This will help identify existing gaps / violations faster without having to execute “special” compliance projects saving cost an reducing pain for the teams (as labeling teams don’t enjoy doing these tasks anyways)
For future labels, technology will help in achieving a comprehensive view of labeling operations and touch points in relation to the rest of the organization minimizing your attempts to resolve any issues in isolation. With Label Content digitization, changes and life cycle can be managed holistically, rather than managing with out-dated process of managing labels/documents following painful processes of maintaining versions, copies, track modes etc).
With the ever changing landscape of labeling technology, there are now solutions on offer fit for every type of organization at all budget ranges giving modular options. Yet, for many who get satisfied with an EDMS, the implementation of these newer tools/technologies is still accompanied with apprehension (for some lack of time and for others control issues). These automated solutions can end the recurring insanity of labeling challenges. Digitization & Automation will help future proofing operations within the overall labeling supply chain.
At the high-impact R&D end of life sciences, investment in technology is consciously linked to commercial priorities including innovation, efficiency and speed to market. There is an appreciation of the value of automation in administering and reporting on clinical trials, for instance. Here, smart use of technology to accelerate what would otherwise be labor intensive manual processes ensures that data representation (in form of documents/reports) is robust, bears close scrutiny, and doesn’t tie up more skilled resources than is absolutely necessary.
Writing (Medical, Regulatory, Safety, Scientific, CMC) is an art of science. Here comes the conflict of automation which is seen as “inhuman”. But as requirements are multiplying every day, how can companies manage the load without increasing resources or resorting to outsourcing or offshoring ?
All Writing teams want to spend time on “science” or “innovative projects” and not seen as a ‘cost center’. With these objectives and workload increasing, a case for technology enablement and automation is strong. So, what is holding companies back from investing in writing automation?
Below are three of the most common perceived barriers to technology-enabled writing automation, and how and why they should be addressed at the earliest.
1. A lack of "Writing" friendly enterprise solutions
Look at most other industries, especially those that are highly regulated, and use of IT systems tends to be highly evolved. That’s because organizations have long realized the inefficiency (in cost, time and resources) of using people to manually input data into core business systems, and then physically re-enter the information into adjacent systems in other departments.
In pharma, by contrast, "EDMS" and "Word" are the only and dominant tools provided to Authors. EDMS (whether on premise or cloud) may provide some help like versions, tracking, collaboration, but doesn't address the bulk of manual heavy lifting that needs in Authoring. Same with WORD in spite of adding some plugins and other macros.
Some companies tried (and realized it didn’t helped) is Structured Content Authoring or XML editors. These are pretty good solutions from Tech point of view, but they are not intuitive to Writing world. Authors cannot relate (or may even get irritated sometimes) to terms these tools use like fragments, rules, components, variables, inheritance and so on.
In some cases, the issue is that Writing departments (whether medical or clinical or CMC) lack access to relevant technology expertise and knowledge, so they don’t have a picture of what’s available or what’s possible – including the scope for sourcing solutions and optimized business processes via cloud-based platforms and relationships with technology vendors. Meanwhile, larger companies which do have sufficient internal resources often believe that they need to build any tools themselves, something they may never get round to – especially if they haven’t tied down a proper business case & ROI
Given that some very intuitive and easy-to-integrate writing tools do exist out in the external market, with the precise purpose of assisting in improving writing efficiency, it seems surprising that sponsors do not make more use of them – especially as the time and cost savings associated with digital solutions are shown to exceed 60 per cent when compared with processes that rely on manual writing alone.
2. Cost
For reasons mentioned earlier, writing does not tend to attract big budgets. This means that any investment in Writing management IT needs to be tightly targeted, and seen to deliver improved results with greater efficiency. If companies choose not to invest in transforming Writing activity, they risk spending more than they need to, and consuming too much time of busy people who have other more critical tasks to be getting on with.
While large companies, may question the cost/benefit trade-off of creating new automation aids, their internal development is not the only option. Taking advantage of a pre-existing pre-tested tool that’s ready to go today and accessible on demand via a software-as-a-service delivery model, changes the economics considerably – especially if there is no associated support burden, because the vendor takes care of everything.
3. Usability issues
Companies’ inertia when it comes to trying new technology often also comes down to an aversion to change, of having to behave in different ways which may require resource retraining. Tools’ intuitive ease of use is paramount in overcoming this very real barrier.
In Writing, it follows that tools need to be easy and intuitive. If users were able to author, verify all data needed at one place, cross-check source data, content impact, simple work-flow– this could be transformational in itself. For writing departments, this improved user engagement ought to result in more complete and more reliable documents, captured in a timely fashion and reducing the burden on authors to chase up right data or information or any lack of clarity.
Why wait?
Looking for discrete tools which are very easy to adopt and use, and which alleviate a substantial manual administrative burden – are a good way for companies to test the potential of writing automation and amass some experience.
Embracing greater automation is going to be essential as writing/reporting requirements continue to multiply and grow, placing an ever greater strain on resources. Automation offers a way to cope with rising demand, and to simplify demanding routine tasks, as companies expand their product mix and market coverage, while maintaining regulatory compliance.
Yet, to take full advantage of the opportunities, companies need to overcome their historical barriers to technology adoption – and there is no time like the present.
Management of clinical supplies in clinical trials has become a major hurdle in this new era of clinical research. With the complex challenges that clinical trials shoot in terms of the design or the study population or the subgroup categorization has put the supply chain managers in a critical pose.
IRT shall ease the work of the Supply Chain Managers by taking prior measures of a few main factors that hamper the management of the clinical supplies at sites. The new designs in the clinical study conduction involve the multi-centers that are in National and International locality.
A few of the main factors to be considered to take appropriate measures are:
• Maintaining an adequate quantity of supplies at site by the time the site is activated and the enrollment process is initiated.
• Taking appropriate measures to ship the supplies to multi-sites located nationally & internationally.
• Maintaining and shipping the supplies that are safe and not meeting the expiry in near future.
• Shipping the supplies by meeting the regulatory guidelines and standards.
IRT measures to overcome the Low Stock Supplies at Sites:
• As many of the studies are designed as multi-centric sites that cover various geo-locations, IRT shall capture the proper Leads days required to deliver the right ancillaries to right site at right time.
• To maintain adequate stock of supplies at sites by the time the enrollment process is initiated at particular sites, IRT shall initiate an advance shipment of required supplies to the site when the site is activated or the first subject is screened.
• As the duration of the study is long there is always a chance of shortfall of the supplies and they reach the expiry. To overcome this hurdle of the supplies reaching the Expiry leading to a shortfall of the supplies for the study, IRT shall plan in advance to notify the shortfall of the supplies and also regarding the expiry of the supplies which enables the supply chain managers/sponsor to plan their activities well in advance.
• As the charges of the shipment of supplies are going beyond the budget of the actual project, IRT shall take proper measures to meet the budget of the project by planning the shipment in such an organized manner where unnecessary shipments are avoided using its settings of check range, restock range, trigger value and resupply value.
• There is always a chance for regulatory to raise a query regarding the shipment of the IMP’s which shall delay the supplies restock at the site, IRT shall ship only those IMP’s from a particular lot’s for which the country submissions are provided as per the Regulatory bodies and which shall not delay the process of shipment.
• The site can reach to low stock at any level of the study that shall hamper the process of study continuation.To meet this clause IRT has come up with some new settings of auto orders. This will generate automatic shipments in advance once the site reaches the set level of the supplies at site that shall not allow the site to reach out of stock.
• As communication is the main bridge for any trial between the sponsors and stakeholders, considering that IRT has been designed with a separate functionality of Alerts & Notifications which shall communicate every user regarding the activities of the study and also alerts sponsors and Supply chain managers regarding the low stock levels at site, expiry of the supplies and shipment details.
Any challenge related to supplies in clinical trials can be faced with proper planning, assuming the risks & challenges in advance and, also maintaining continuous communication with the study team and sponsors.
What is UDI?
Unique Device Identification (UDI) intended to assign a unique identifier to medical devices within the United States, it marks and identifies individual medical devices throughout their distribution and product life-cycle. Initially, the UDI system was created, developed, and maintained by the device manufacturer based on global device identification standards. Today, it also helps with procurement and reimbursement.
With certain exceptions, every medical device label needs to have a UDI mark and be composed of two parts:
• Device Identifier (DI) - a mandatory, fixed portion of a UDI that identifies the specific version or model of a device.
• Production Identifier(s) (PI) – a conditional, variable portion of a UDI that identifies one or more of the following when included on the label of a device. This will be dependent upon the manufacturer’s internal quality system.
• lot or batch number within which a device was manufactured
• serial number of a specific device
• expiration date of a specific device.
• date a specific device was manufactured Therefore, UDI = DI + PI.
UDI History
In 2007, the U.S. FDA developed a labeling system that would uniquely identify every single medical device (MD) on the market. The Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) soon recognized the global relevance of such a system and adopted respective guidance that was last released in 2013 by the International Medical Device Regulators Forum (IMDRF), international cooperation of regulators made up of industry stakeholders and GHTF successors. (Interestingly, Medical device manufacturers experienced in the U.S. market have quickly recognized the similarity of the EU regulation as compared to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) UDI guidelines.
Following the global trend in handling the trace ability of medical devices, the EU Commission has clearly defined the requirements for the implementation of a Unique Device Identification (UDI) System in the final text of the new EU Medical Device Regulation (MDR) 2017/745.
The EU UDI System, like the U.S. UDI requirements, will be implemented in phases, starting with the highest risk classes first, and lowest risk classes last.
Key Differences between US GUDID and EU EUDAMED elements
EUDAMED will be an information system for exchanging legal information related to the application of European Union Directives on medical devices between the European Commission's Enterprise and Industry Directorate General and the Competent Authorities in the European Union Member States. Its legal basis is laid down in Directives 90/385/EEC, 93/42/EEC, 98/79/EC, and 2000/70/EC.
Under these Directives, Member States need to ensure that medical devices that are placed on the market and put into service comply with all provisions of the Directives, including the ‘essential requirements’, and that no obstacles are encountered for the free movement of approved devices. The Directives also require that data be stored in a database in a standardized format. The EUDAMED project aims to address the effective implementation of this provision of the Directives.
Following are the common elements between GUDID and EUDAMED but they likely need to be translated into 24 official languages of the EU:
• Name or Trade name
• Additional product description
• Clinical size
• Storage and handling conditions
• Additional trade names of the device
• Critical warning or contraindications
Deadlines for UDI implementation
Unlike GUDID, EUDAMED is adopting a risk-based approach for UDI submissions.
• Below are the UDI implementation dates according to the class:
• Class I: 26 May 2025
• Class IIa and IIb: 26 May 2023
• Class III: 26 May 2021
• Implantable devices: 26 May 2021• For IVDs, the implementation will also be risk-based but delays in the implementation of the IVDR timeline will be different.
• Class D devices should be compliant by 2023
• Class C & B devices by 2025
• Class A devices by 2027
*These compliance deadlines are subject to change as the fulfillment of the requirements is dependent on the progress of the EUDAMED implementation and its availability
IRT has created its footprint in the field of clinical research and has evolved drastically in such a way that it has bought a major difference in perspective of clinical trials over the decades. It faceted itself into the streams from only randomizing the subject and assigning them to a treatment group to managing the overall supplies required throughout the study through supply management.
Multiple factors fall in line to manage the supplies throughout the study, where few of them are the number of subjects expected to be enrolled in each site, the number of days the shipments reached the site physically, etc. These factors help the system to develop algorithms that will monitor the supplies existing at site, supplies required at site within a month, and many more. These algorithms are more essential for an IRT system to function in such a way that there is no low stock of supplies at site. Few main facets that enable the IRT to function effectively are discussed below.
• Initial ordering of Supplies: This is one of the main facets that enable the function of supply management. This facet functions through various factors like site activation, subject screening settings. The supplies shall be distributed to sites based on the predefined parameter settings given to the system. To perform the activities of a subject, there requires a sufficient quantity of supplies. Those requirements are fulfilled by the initial shipment settings. Based on a few factors initial shipment to sites shall be raised either when the site is activated or when the first subject is screened at site, which shall prepare the site to perform the further activities of subjects screened flawlessly.
• Auto Ordering of Supplies: This is one of the most important facets for managing the stock of supplies at sites. The auto orders shall be raised as on when required to meet the predictive needs and non-predictive needs of the supplies at site. These settings shall be site-specific and designed based on the parameters like recruitment rate of the site, trigger value, resupply value, check range, and the restock range. The predictive needs of the site are fulfilled through predictive settings given to the system.The System shall check the values given and raise the shipment accordingly with the required quantity of kits with kit types from the lots. The non-predictive needs of the site are fulfilled with the buffer settings given to the system. System shall raise the shipment according to the values provided. This way the IRT functions effectively to maintain the supplies at each site.
• Safety Settings: These settings play a vital role at supply level and site level. These settings are designed in such a way that the expired supplies are not reaching the subject in any way. Maintaining the expired supplies and shipping them is a waste of resource, time, and cost too. Each shipment is very important and it shall be planned in such a way that the budget of the project does not affect in any way. These safety settings and auto-order settings shall add value to the tool in customizing the shipments as per the requirements and unnecessary shipments are not raised. The shipment or dispensing of the expired supplies is halted with parameters like DND (Do Not Dispense), DNS (Do Not Ship) & DNC (Do Not Consider) which are core terms in IRT.
• Site Activation: This one of the core steps to be performed, as all sites, shall not be activated at a time. As per the regulatory and the success of SIV a site shall be activated. This action requires authentication as there shall be an initiation of supply to the site once it is activated. Once the site is activated, the site shall be enabled for the screening activities, randomization activities, and supply-related activities. The Site needs to be configured with all the data as per the protocol before activating. Once the site is activated, the system shall raise the initial shipment as per the settings provided, the request of the shipment would include the number of kits from the defined lot, expiry date, site details so that the supply manager shall record all the data and ship the required kits physically. Supply activities of the site include the acknowledgment of shipment once received at site.
• Tracking of the supplies: Tracking of supplies is one of the main focus points of IRT. Even though it does not track the live movement of the supplies, there is a passive way of tracking which shall deal with the change in the status of the supplies as when required. The System shall have a different status for the orders and the kits. These statuses shall be permission-based and only the desired personal shall change the status so that it is recorded and tracked in the system.
• Multiple depots and sites shipments: The distribution of supplies in a clinical trial is not only defined for a single site or depot, it involves many sites and depots. It can be both depot to depots, depot to sites. Each site shall be assigned to a depot for supply-related activities. The supplies for that particular site shall be maintained by that depot which shall be easy for tracking and resolving any issues related to supplies. The depots shall be maintained with sufficient quantity of IP’s throughout the study to meet the requirements at the site. A line of authorization is built in while shipping the supplies to sites as not all sites require the supplies as generated by the settings provided for the system. This line authorization shall check and cross verify the requirements with site and approve the shipment. This level shall not allow the overflow of supplies to sites when there is no such requirement. There shall always exist the physical shipment of supplies from the sites with overstock to the site having low stock. This physical shipment shall be tracked in the system with a functionality called ‘Return to Depot’ where the sites with overstock shall return the supplies to Depot and the shipment shall be generated from the site with low stock. This feature helps to manage the supplies without any further demand in the production.
• An Eagle Eye – Audit Trail: It is mandatory for a trial personal to know each and every aspect of the study regarding the activities of site, depot, kit, users. This will always help the administration team to view the status of the study and monitor the pros and cons during the study conduction. The audit trail is designed in such a way that an administration team can filter and know the activities by user wise, site-wise, depot wise, and the status and history of kits as well.
• Data Visualization through Dashboards and Reports: There shall be many factors to be focused on throughout the conduction of the study. These parameters shall be monitored easily when their status is displayed on the dashboard and the data is projected in the form of reports. The pending visits of a subject can enable the administrator to plan the resource and check the supplies at site. The summary of orders on dashboard also helps the trial team to track the supplies. The reports should be developed in such a way that it gives the complete overview of the study in terms of the sites, depots, kits, visits, etc. It should be easily accessible and user-readable. The events and alerts shall be shared with the desired team as on when required in the form of notifications and are one of the other best ways to inform the status of the study being conducted. IRT is recognized as the realistic data provider so that it can be integrated with other tools like EDC and CTMS as a source data provider. The evolution of IRT is not defined to a certain point, as the designs of the studies increase the evolution and the facets of IRT also increases.
Drug labelling has changed over time because of evolving regulations and has increased in content and length, with a standard format to guide the safe and effective use of the drug. Product labels (drug or devices) contain comprehensive information enriched with product details, such as disease indications, target populations, drug-drug interactions, and ADRs. The labels and labelling documents prepared by manufacturers and approved by the Health Authorities, in its final form, reflect the collective input from regulators, drug manufacturers, and scientific experts. Drug-labelling data is an important resource for diverse applications, including support for policy development.
The global labelling management process continues to be a burden on the life sciences industry and is multiplying at a pace that is already becoming increasingly difficult to manage. Firms’ R&D ambitions are growing, businesses are expanding into multiple markets, and regulators are steadily strengthening safety requirements to protect patients and public health. The pharmaceutical industry operates on a global scale, and regulatory compliance across multiple geographies is fundamental to ensuring that the supply chain remains safe and secure.
As part of the dossier registration, all manufacturers must submit labelling support documents (USPI, SmPC, PIL, IFU, etc.) to HAs to grant marketing approval. Each time the benefit and risk profile or safety factors change, or as regional or local regulatory agencies update their standards, international biopharmaceutical firms must react swiftly with accurate, compliant labelling for all affected markets. This is a real-time and hectic process for multinational companies as there are major content interdependencies. Moreover, managing the local label changes (CCDS vs USPI, SmPC & other local labels) with company core safety information i.e. how a change anywhere along the safety-regulatory-manufacturing-supply chain continuum will affect all label content, from the global core datasheet, to patient-facing product information in each marketed country.
Though the manufacturers shall update and distribute the final updated labels where the products are being marketed. Where submissions are bundled and/or split at the country level to comply with local regulations or company’s internal needs and strategies, there are further considerations as companies try to maintain trace ability especially as changes trickle down to dependent countries. The traditional way of managing all of this has been via a combination of specific systems and manual processes. Typically, tracking of label status and changes are done in Excel spreadsheets internally, and content has been updated on a country-by-country basis using dedicated, often standalone labelling tools.
Triggers for labelling changes can occur at different points during product life cycle. Changes to the benefit/risk profile of a drug that require revised labelling requirements from the company's global core data sheet or local regulatory changes to specific countries can drive the need for a two-way amendment in the supply chain.. As a result, central labelling teams have not found it easy to build up a clear, accurate, and comprehensive picture of all labelling activities. Nor are they able to manage these systematically, end to end, irrespective of where the trigger for a change to the content might come from. In other words, it is difficult for them to efficiently map country/label interdependencies so that changes can be rolled out promptly and reliably wherever the new requirements apply.
In addition to the risk of non-compliance, all of this adds up to a laborious and cost-laden workload for life sciences organisations, as they try to keep track of the latest implemented labels in all of their markets and roll out each new set of changes, as applicable, within the required timeframe. To keep up with the ever-changing emerging safety regulations, companies must upgrade their approach to labelling management with some urgency now.
A modern label management system manages the entire label lifecycle, offers complete transparency throughout the label production process, and facilitates quality control procedures during its distribution. The best modern label management systems now allow business users to design, review, track, and control label data from a document management system. This increases traceability and eliminates scope for errors in the labelling documents for compliance procedures.
Many bio-pharma companies are now looking to ensure compliance, minimize the need for relabeling, and reduce the number of label templates, and transition from paper-based catalogues to digital document management systems. It makes sense to ensure labelling technology is a priority so it can address inconsistencies in processes, mitigate human errors. Timely tracking thus improves business agility for companies to produce compliant, high-quality labels in a cost and time-efficient manner.
Pharma companies, especially those operating from a particular geographical source, will need to rearrange and upgrade their existing labelling processes and compliance structures to conform to the constantly evolving regulatory guidelines. Since details vary from region to region, companies must facilitate tracking units across the supply chain.
LABELai: A Complete Labelling Solution
Automation reduces human intervention and ensures the development of high-quality deliverables that significantly reduce overall operational costs and improve the time-to-market across regions. Some organizations have developed and streamlined the labelling process to minimize the errors, but they often lack the automation required to build a robust and error-free process.
LABELai uses advanced technology to offer end-to-end product labelling by leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) for 90% of the activities. LABELai has been developed with the intention of meeting regulatory requirements in labelling documents, as well as clients’ prospects during the product life cycle management. Our Labelling tool can do the effective process (tracking) for multiple versions of the same document. LABELai has a provision to track the status of labelling documents from production to final distribution and its life cycle management. By using the LABELai tool you can know the label status at any time during drafting, review, approval, and distribution. Corresponding changes to labels along with justifications for changes can also be tracked using this system.
Support Portal can be best viewed in Chrome, IE, and Firefox.
To contact the support desk, please find the below details:
877- 975-9873 (USA toll free) |
ms.helpdesk@ddismart.com |
In the login page click on the option “forgot password” and enter your email address and click on submit, you will receive the password to your registered email address.
In order to change the existing password, please follow the below steps:
1. Once you login into the support portal, towards the right corner of the page you will find an option "Preferences".
2. Once you click on this option, you will find another option "Change Password"
3. Under this option, you have to provide the "current password" , "new password" , "verify password" and click on the option "Update" to change the password
To unlock the account, you can send an email to support email address or call to helpline numbers mentioned above.
Please contact to the support helpline number, support desk will authenticate and provide you with the necessary details.
All the personal information collected while registering will be kept confidential and will be solely used for company purpose.
Reluctance of Regulatory teams embracing AI
Read>>
Label Tracking: An Important Aspect In Production Distribution
Read>>
Importance of DSCM in Managing Clinical Supplies during COVID
Read>>
Challenges with Labeling Content, QC & Tracking - The Way Out
Read>>
Ensuring Drug Accountability Compliance with IRT
Read>>
Future LABELING: Data Digitization, Structure and Automation
Read>>
Data Integrity in Clinical Trial through IRT
Read>>
Future Clinical Technologies - Automation & Analytics
Read>>
Start Small & Smart with Regulatory Automation
Read>>
Clinical Trials through ‘Direct To Patient’ in COVID-19
Read>>
Medical Device Labeling Regulation Changes by FDA for COVID 19 period
Read>>
FDA/EU/MHRA/TGA Clin monitoring suggestions COVID
Read>>
For Labeling Teams, What Does 10 Minutes Saving Per Day Means?
Read>>
Most Common and Avoidable Mistakes While Adopting ISO 13485
Read>>
Regulatory Data and Info Management for Med Device Success
Read>>
Effectiveness and Flexibility of Adaptive Designs in Clinical Trials
Read>>
Labeling Regulations/Exceptions during Covid!
Read>>
3 Barriers to Writing Automation & some Solutions
Read>>
Measures to Overcome Low Stock Supplies in Clinical Trials Using IRT
Read>>
UDI & EUDAMED Explained under EU MDR
Read>>
Main Factors that Unify IRT in Clinical Supplies
Read>>
Label Tracking: An Important Aspect In Production Distribution
Read>>
What browsers are supported when accessing the DDi support portal website?
Read>>
How to contact DDi support service center?
Read>>
I am not able to login into support portal, I forgot my password, and how can I re-set it?
Read>>
How can I change my current password in the support portal?
Read>>
My account got locked, and how to unlock my account?
Read>>
I forgot my email ID to login in support portal. What do I do now?
Read>>
Is my personal information like (e-mail address, phone numbers and the requests raised) are safe and confidential?
Read>>