Purpose and Proper Development of Validation Reports
Introduction
In the pharmaceutical industry’s Computerized System Validation (CSV), validation reports are critically important documents. This article discusses common challenges observed through CSV document review work at various companies and explains the proper approach to creating validation reports.
Essential Differences Between Validation Protocols and Reports
Through numerous requests to review validation-related documents at various companies, one of the most frequently commented points concerns the writing of “Validation Reports.” A common problem observed across multiple companies is that the “Validation Protocol” and “Validation Report” contain nearly identical content.
This phenomenon often results from copying and pasting the protocol content and mechanically changing expressions like “will implement” to “implemented” to create the report. However, this approach has fundamental problems.
Why Perfect Alignment Between Plan and Results is Problematic
Perfect alignment between the plan and actual results is extremely rare in reality. Rather, such alignment may suggest the following concerns:
- Problems and changes that occurred during actual implementation are not properly recorded
- Reports are created formally and do not reflect reality
- Risk management may not be functioning appropriately
The True Purpose of Validation Reports
Documentation of Deviations from the Plan
The most important aspect when creating validation reports is to clearly document “deviations from the plan.” This is critically important for the following reasons:
Items Requiring Documentation
For items that could not be implemented as planned, detailed documentation including the following is mandatory:
- Specific content of the deviation
- Reasons for the deviation
- Impact assessment on product quality, data integrity, and patient safety
- Corrective actions or alternative measures implemented
- Scientific and technical justification for why the deviation is acceptable
Items Requiring Adjusted Level of Documentation
On the other hand, for items that were implemented as planned, detailed descriptions are not necessarily required. However, the following points should be briefly confirmed:
- Confirmation that key verification activities were completed as planned
- Record that all acceptance criteria were met
- Evidence that data integrity was maintained
Handling Failures and Changes During Validation Period
Summary of Failures and Impact Assessment
Failures that occurred during the validation implementation period must be comprehensively evaluated from the following perspectives:
Classification and Evaluation of Failures
Based on modern regulatory requirements, particularly FDA 21 CFR Part 11, EU GMP Annex 11, and GAMP 5 (Second Edition, published in 2022), failures should be evaluated from the following perspectives:
| Evaluation Item | Evaluation Content | Related Regulatory Requirements |
| Impact on Data Integrity | Compliance with ALCOA+ principles (Attributable, Legible, Contemporaneous, Original, Accurate, Complete, Consistent, Enduring, Available) | FDA 21 CFR Part 11, MHRA Data Integrity Guidance |
| Impact on Patient Safety | Direct and indirect impact of system failures on patient safety | ICH Q9 (Quality Risk Management) |
| Impact on GxP Requirements | Compliance status with applicable requirements such as GMP, GLP, GCP | EU GMP Annex 11, FDA 21 CFR Part 211 |
| Impact on System Validation Status | Maintainability of validation status | GAMP 5 Second Edition |
Application of Risk-Based Approach
The Computer Software Assurance (CSA) draft guidance issued by FDA in 2022 indicates a transition from traditional CSV to a more flexible and efficient approach. This emphasizes the following:
- Application of Critical Thinking
- Prioritization of verification activities based on risk
- Substantive quality assurance over excessive documentation
- Focus on patient safety and data integrity
Change Management and Its Documentation
Changes during the validation period must be systematically managed and documented from the following perspectives:
Planned Deviations
For pre-approved changes:
- Justification for the change
- Risk assessment results
- Quality Assurance department approval
- Post-implementation effectiveness evaluation
Unplanned Deviations
For unexpected changes:
- Immediate reporting and documentation
- Root Cause Analysis
- Implementation of Corrective and Preventive Actions (CAPA)
- Establishment of recurrence prevention measures
Important Considerations for Service-In Decision
Comprehensive Impact Assessment
In validation reports, to conclude that the system can be serviced even if there were failures or changes, comprehensive evaluation from the following perspectives is necessary:
Key Elements to Evaluate
- Ensuring Data Integrity
- Is compliance with ALCOA+ principles maintained?
- Is the reliability of electronic records and electronic signatures ensured?
- Is the Audit Trail functioning appropriately?
- System Qualification
- Compliance with User Requirements Specification (URS)
- Validity of Design Qualification (DQ)
- Completeness of Installation Qualification (IQ)
- Appropriateness of Operational Qualification (OQ)
- Achievement of Performance Qualification (PQ)
- Appropriateness of Risk Management
- Are identified risks within acceptable levels?
- Are controls for residual risks appropriate?
- Is the risk-based approach appropriately applied?
- Compliance with Regulatory Requirements
- Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements (FDA, EMA, PMDA, etc.)
- Adherence to industry standards (GAMP 5, ISO 13485, etc.)
- Response to data integrity guidance
Clarification of Items to Avoid
The report should clarify the following points:
Operational Constraints
- Procedures to be followed when using the system
- Restrictions on use of specific functions (if applicable)
- Need for periodic review or revalidation
Continuous Monitoring Requirements
- Methods and frequency of performance monitoring
- Implementation of deviation trend analysis
- Periodic system review plans
- Application of change management processes
Alignment with Latest Regulatory Trends
Computer Software Assurance (CSA) Concept
Since 2022, the pharmaceutical industry has been focusing on FDA’s CSA draft guidance. This complements the traditional CSV approach and emphasizes the following:
- Patient-centered risk-based approach
- Application of critical thinking
- Efficient and effective verification activities
- Focus on substantive quality assurance
Validation reports should also reflect this concept, focusing on substantive quality and risk management rather than formal documentation.
GAMP 5 Second Edition (2022) Requirements
GAMP 5 Second Edition further emphasizes the following points:
- Thorough lifecycle approach
- Effective collaboration with suppliers
- Integrated consideration of data integrity
- Importance of critical thinking
These elements should be appropriately reflected in validation reports.
Evolution of Data Integrity (ALCOA++)
The concept of data integrity has evolved from ALCOA+ further, and in some literature, the following elements are added as ALCOA++:
- Traceable: Clear audit trail
- Integrity: Certainty of data protection
- Robustness: System reliability
- Transparency: Process visibility
- Accountability: Clear accountability structure
- Reliability: Validated system
Practical Approach
Steps for Effective Report Creation
- Collection of Validation Activity Records
- Implementation records of all verification activities
- Deviation reports and investigation records
- Change management records
- Risk assessment documents
- Analysis of Differences from Plan
- List of items implemented as planned
- Detailed analysis of items where deviations occurred
- Impact assessment of each deviation
- Effectiveness evaluation of implemented countermeasures
- Implementation of Comprehensive Evaluation
- Overall risk assessment considering all deviations
- Confirmation of data integrity maintenance status
- Judgment of system fitness for intended use
- Acceptability evaluation of residual risks
- Creation of Conclusions and Recommendations
- Clear decision on service-in approval
- Specification of operational constraints
- Definition of continuous monitoring requirements
- Identification of future improvement opportunities
Conclusion
A validation report is not merely a “past tense version” of the protocol. It is an important quality document that records the insights gained through actual validation activities, the challenges faced, responses to them, and comprehensive evaluation.
Effective validation reports have the following characteristics:
- Transparency: All deviations and problems are honestly recorded
- Scientific Basis: All decisions are based on appropriate evidence
- Risk-Based: Appropriate level of evaluation and response according to risk
- Practicality: Contains useful information that operational personnel can actually use
- Regulatory Compliance: Complies with the latest regulatory requirements and guidance
By thoroughly evaluating the summary of failures and changes during the validation period and their impact (risk), service-in is possible even if there were failures or changes, provided there is appropriate risk management and justification. What is important is to document these with transparency and clarify items to avoid, thereby ensuring patient safety and product quality.
Based on the latest regulatory trends, particularly the CSA approach and ALCOA++ principles, let us move away from formal document creation and focus on creating validation reports that emphasize substantive quality assurance and risk management.
Comment