Warning Letters

FDA Sent These 8 Warning Letters for Pharma Companies | September 2016

We took a snapshot of the 8 warning letters the FDA sent to pharmaceutical companies last month.  Drug manufacturing violations ranged from a product containing “hair and a black spider” to management failing to “document laboratory controls.”

From pharmaceuticals in Japan, Brazil, and more, here they are (starting with the most recent):
Continue reading

October: FDA cGMP Quality News Briefing

What industry news have you been reading this month? At FDAzilla, we’ve compiled the most noteworthy articles we’ve come across in the weeks since our last update. This month’s picks include information from two conferences, surprising warning letters abroad and in the US, an explanation QSIT protocol, and stories of both exemplary and reprehensible strategies from companies dealing with in-house deficiencies. Take a look:

Continue reading

Interval Between Inspection and Warning Letters Starts to Decrease

Interval Between Inspection and Warning Letters Starts to Decrease

by Barbara Unger, GMP Quality Expert and GMP Regulatory Intelligence Editor-in-Chief

 

A blog entry that evaluated FDA enforcement actions in the first half of FY2016 provided data to demonstrate that the interval between GMP drug inspections and warning letters almost doubled since FY2013.  The relevant table and graph is provided below.

Continue reading

Warning Letters

FDA Sent These 13 Warning Letters for Pharma Companies | August 2016

We took a snapshot of the 13 warning letters the FDA sent to pharmaceutical companies last month.  Drug manufacturing violations ranged from failing to “maintain written records” to failing to wear “clothing appropriate to protect drug product.”

From pharmaceuticals in Brazil, India, China, and 6 US states, here they are (starting with the most recent):
Continue reading

3 Key Learnings from the PDA/FDA Joint Conference

by Barbara Unger, FDAzilla GMP Quality Expert and Editor-in-Chief of GMP Regulatory Intelligence

OVERALL:  This is the 25th anniversary of the PDA/FDA conference and many of the presentations provided evidence of the significant progress made in research and medicine during this time.  It was fascinating to stand back for a few moments to see just how far we’ve come.  The overall conclusion I take from the two days of the conference that I attended are:

Continue reading

Sterility Assurance and Cross Contamination

by Barbara Unger, FDAzilla GMP Quality Expert and Editor-in-Chief of GMP Regulatory Intelligence

Forms 483 Addressing Sterility Assurance and Cross-Contamination 

Along with data integrity, deficiencies in sterility assurance and the potential for product or API contamination identified during FDA inspections often lead to warning letters. Also many product recalls are based on lack of sterility assurance or less frequently on potential cross contamination.  Here we take a look at six forms 483 that include observations associated with sterility assurance and potential cross contamination.  These are certainly not meant to provide an all-inclusive view of the topic, but rather represent recent inspection observations in these areas to demonstrate the broad scope of the topic.  FDA’s flurry of inspections and enforcement actions against compounding pharmacies and outsourcing facilities focuses heavily of requirements associated with expectations regarding aseptic manufacture of sterile drug products. These sites are often also cited for the potential for cross contamination. Lack of sterility assurance and the potential for cross contamination, particularly by high potency compounds or sensitizing agents both have potentially serious consequences for patient safety.   Many compounding pharmacies and outsourcing facilities have recalled large numbers of products due to concerns about sterility assurance.  We include one example of this type of facility in the collection presented below.  Failure to complete adequate cleaning validation for multi-product equipment is often another source of potential cross contamination even when products do not include high potency compounds or sensitizing agents.

Continue reading