Critical analysis of several analytical method validation strategies in the framework of the fit for purpose concept.

in Journal of Chromatography. A (2010), 1217

Analytical method validation is a mandatory step at the end of the development in all analytical laboratories. It is a highly regulated step of the life cycle of a quantitative analytical method. However ... [more ▼]

Analytical method validation is a mandatory step at the end of the development in all analytical laboratories. It is a highly regulated step of the life cycle of a quantitative analytical method. However, even if some documents have been published there is a lack of clear guidance for the methodology to follow to adequately decide when a method can be considered as valid. This situation has led to the availability of several methodological approaches and it is therefore the responsibility of the analyst to choose the best one. The classical decision processes encountered during method validation evaluation are compared, namely the descriptive, difference and equivalence approaches. Furthermore a validation approach using accuracy profile computed by means of beta-expectation tolerance interval and total measurement error is also available. In the present paper all of these different validation approaches were applied to the validation of two analytical methods. The evaluation of the producer and consumer risks by Monte Carlo simulations were also made in order to compare the appropriateness of these various approaches. The classical methodologies give rise to inadequate and contradictory conclusions which do not allow them to answer adequately the objective of method validation, i.e. to give enough guarantees that each of the future results that will be generated by the method during routine use will be close enough to the true value. It is found that the validation methodology which gives the most guarantees with regards to the reliability or adequacy of the decision to consider a method as valid is the one based on the use of the accuracy profile. [less ▲]

Harmonization of strategies for the validation of quantitative analytical procedures - A SFSTP proposal - Part III

in Journal of Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Analysis (2007), 45(1), 82-96

In the first two documents [Ph. Hubert, J.J. Nguyen-Huu, B. Boulanger, E. Chapuzet, P. Chiap, N. Cohen, P.A. Compagnon, W. Dewe, M. Feinberg. M. Lallier, M. Laurentie, N. Mercier, G. Muzard, C. Nivet, L ... [more ▼]

In the first two documents [Ph. Hubert, J.J. Nguyen-Huu, B. Boulanger, E. Chapuzet, P. Chiap, N. Cohen, P.A. Compagnon, W. Dewe, M. Feinberg. M. Lallier, M. Laurentie, N. Mercier, G. Muzard, C. Nivet, L. Valat, J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 36 (2004) 579-586; Ph. Hubert, J.J. Nguyen-Huu. B. Boulanger, E. Chapuzet, P. Chiap, N. Cohen, P.A. Compagnon, W. Dewe, M. Feinberg, M. Lallier, M. Laurentie, N. Mercier, G. Muzard. C. Nivet, L. Valat, E. Rozet, J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal., in press], a recent SFSTP Commission on the validation of analytical procedure has introduced a harmonized approach for the validation of analytical procedures. In order to complete this guide, the statistical methodology allowing to correctly conclude about the validity of a procedure is proposed in this third part of the guide. Indeed all the steps to obtain the decision tool namely the accuracy profile are described and illustrated step by step by a numerical example. This tool, based on the concept of total error (bias + standard deviation) build with a P-expectation tolerance interval, allows to easily take the right decision and simultaneously minimizing the risk of the future use of the analytical procedure. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. [less ▲]

New strategy for the validation of chromatographic bioanalytical methods

in STP Pharma Pratiques (2000), 10(1), 21-38

The SFSTP guide on the validation of chromatographic methods for drug bioanalysis: from the Washington Conference to the laboratory

in Analytica Chimica Acta (1999), 391(2), 135-148

On the basis of the guidelines given in the Washington Conference report and the ICH (International Conference of Harmonisation) recommendations some suggestions about experimental design and data ... [more ▼]

On the basis of the guidelines given in the Washington Conference report and the ICH (International Conference of Harmonisation) recommendations some suggestions about experimental design and data evaluation are proposed by an SFSTP Commission dedicated to the validation of chromatographic methods in bioanalysis. In a series of meetings, members of this Commission have tried to elaborate a rational, practical and statistically reliable strategy to assure the quality of the analytical results generated. This strategy has been formalised in a guide and the main suggestions made by the Commission are summarised in the present paper. The SFSTP guide has been produced to help analysts from the pharmaceutical industry to validate their bioanalytical methods, It is the result of a consensus between professionals having expertise in bioanalytical and/or statistical fields. The suggestions presented in this paper should therefore help the analyst to design and perform the minimum number of validation experiments needed to obtain all the required information to establish and demonstrate the reliability of its analytical procedure. The SFSTP guide suggests a validation strategy in two steps: a pre-validation and the validation itself. An experimental design is described for each of these steps and the main aspects discussed in the paper are related to the selection of the most appropriate calibration model to fit experimental data and the most suitable way to determine the limit(s) of quantitation and subsequently the calibration range as well as the optimum number of experiments to be performed in the validation phase. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. [less ▲]

Méthodes chromatographiques de dosage dans les milieux biologiques : Stratégie de validation

Conference (1997)

SFSTP guide on validation of bioanalytical methods : a proposal

Conference (1996)