Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng por |
Título da fonte: | Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
Texto Completo: | https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259 |
Resumo: | Introduction: In addition to low reproducibility, in vivo potency tests used in the quality control of immunobiological products require too many animals, causing them significant pain and suffering. In the last decades, many studies have been conducted to validate alternative methods for quality control and batch release of products such as vaccines and other immunobiologicals, especially for potency tests. Objective: To discuss validation studies on alternative methods proposed for replacing the in vivo potency tests and the used statistical approach, as well as to propose harmonization of terminology and to design validation studies for alternative potency methods. Method: A review of scientific databases was carried out to compile the products, data on the validation procedures and to verify their inclusion in the pharmacopeias. Results: Four trials were incorporated into the pharmacopeias. Statistical approaches included mainly regression assessment, ANOVA and Chi-square test. Conclusions: It is a challenge to conduct appropriate validation studies that are widely accepted by regulatory authorities, especially where validation centers have not yet been established. A clear indicator of this difficulty was the low number of methods for biological products incorporated into the guidelines. |
id |
FIOCRUZ-9_ea3f97a98dbe4c929637032ff3d57e2d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1259 |
network_acronym_str |
FIOCRUZ-9 |
network_name_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approachAlternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approachMétodos AlternativosImunobiológicosTeste de PotênciaAbordagem de ValidaçãoAlternative MethodsImmunobiologicalsPotency TestValidation ApproachIntroduction: In addition to low reproducibility, in vivo potency tests used in the quality control of immunobiological products require too many animals, causing them significant pain and suffering. In the last decades, many studies have been conducted to validate alternative methods for quality control and batch release of products such as vaccines and other immunobiologicals, especially for potency tests. Objective: To discuss validation studies on alternative methods proposed for replacing the in vivo potency tests and the used statistical approach, as well as to propose harmonization of terminology and to design validation studies for alternative potency methods. Method: A review of scientific databases was carried out to compile the products, data on the validation procedures and to verify their inclusion in the pharmacopeias. Results: Four trials were incorporated into the pharmacopeias. Statistical approaches included mainly regression assessment, ANOVA and Chi-square test. Conclusions: It is a challenge to conduct appropriate validation studies that are widely accepted by regulatory authorities, especially where validation centers have not yet been established. A clear indicator of this difficulty was the low number of methods for biological products incorporated into the guidelines.TÍTULO PT: Testes de potência alternativos para controle de qualidade de imunobiológicos: revisão crítica da abordagem de validação Introdução: Os ensaios de potência in vivo utilizados no controle da qualidade de imunobiológicos requerem o uso de muitos animais, e além da baixa reprodutibilidade, causam dor e sofrimento significativos. Nas últimas décadas, muitos estudos foram desenvolvidos para validar métodos alternativos para o controle da qualidade e liberação de lotes de produtos como vacinas e outros imunobiológicos, especialmente para os testes de potência. Objetivo: Discutir os estudos de validação sobre métodos alternativos para substituir ensaios de potência in vivo, a abordagem estatística utilizada e propor a harmonização da terminologia e o desenho para os estudos de validação de métodos alternativos de potência. Método: Uma pesquisa de revisão foi realizada em bases de dados científicos para compilar os produtos e dados dos procedimentos de validação, verificando sua inclusão nas farmacopeias. Resultados: Quatro ensaios foram incorporados em farmacopeias. As abordagens estatísticas incluíram principalmente a avaliação da regressão, ANOVA e teste de Qui-quadrado. Conclusões: É um desafio realizar estudos de validação adequados que sejam amplamente aceitos pelas autoridades reguladoras, especialmente onde os centros de validação ainda não foram estabelecidos. Um indicador claro dessa dificuldade foi o baixo número de métodos para produtos biológicos incorporados nas diretrizes.Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde2020-02-27info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion"Peer-reviewed article""Artículo revisado por pares""Artigo avaliado pelos pares"application/pdfapplication/pdfhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/125910.22239/2317-269X.01259Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 8 No. 1 (2020): February; 48-61Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 8 Núm. 1 (2020): Febrero; 48-61Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 8 n. 1 (2020): Fevereiro; 48-612317-269Xreponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debateinstname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)instacron:FIOCRUZengporhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259/1128https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259/1205Copyright (c) 2020 Vigilância Sanitária em Debate: Sociedade, Ciência & Tecnologia (Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology) – Visa em Debatehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessMoreira, Wildeberg CalMachado, Nathalia de SouzaFreitas, Jéssica Ferreira de SouzaAlmeida, Antônio Eugênio Castro Cardoso deMoura, Wlamir Correa de2023-06-27T15:12:10Zoai:ojs.visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br:article/1259Revistahttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebatePUBhttps://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/oaiincqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br2317-269X2317-269Xopendoar:2023-06-27T15:12:10Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
title |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
spellingShingle |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach Moreira, Wildeberg Cal Métodos Alternativos Imunobiológicos Teste de Potência Abordagem de Validação Alternative Methods Immunobiologicals Potency Test Validation Approach |
title_short |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
title_full |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
title_fullStr |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
title_full_unstemmed |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
title_sort |
Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach |
author |
Moreira, Wildeberg Cal |
author_facet |
Moreira, Wildeberg Cal Machado, Nathalia de Souza Freitas, Jéssica Ferreira de Souza Almeida, Antônio Eugênio Castro Cardoso de Moura, Wlamir Correa de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Machado, Nathalia de Souza Freitas, Jéssica Ferreira de Souza Almeida, Antônio Eugênio Castro Cardoso de Moura, Wlamir Correa de |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Moreira, Wildeberg Cal Machado, Nathalia de Souza Freitas, Jéssica Ferreira de Souza Almeida, Antônio Eugênio Castro Cardoso de Moura, Wlamir Correa de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Métodos Alternativos Imunobiológicos Teste de Potência Abordagem de Validação Alternative Methods Immunobiologicals Potency Test Validation Approach |
topic |
Métodos Alternativos Imunobiológicos Teste de Potência Abordagem de Validação Alternative Methods Immunobiologicals Potency Test Validation Approach |
description |
Introduction: In addition to low reproducibility, in vivo potency tests used in the quality control of immunobiological products require too many animals, causing them significant pain and suffering. In the last decades, many studies have been conducted to validate alternative methods for quality control and batch release of products such as vaccines and other immunobiologicals, especially for potency tests. Objective: To discuss validation studies on alternative methods proposed for replacing the in vivo potency tests and the used statistical approach, as well as to propose harmonization of terminology and to design validation studies for alternative potency methods. Method: A review of scientific databases was carried out to compile the products, data on the validation procedures and to verify their inclusion in the pharmacopeias. Results: Four trials were incorporated into the pharmacopeias. Statistical approaches included mainly regression assessment, ANOVA and Chi-square test. Conclusions: It is a challenge to conduct appropriate validation studies that are widely accepted by regulatory authorities, especially where validation centers have not yet been established. A clear indicator of this difficulty was the low number of methods for biological products incorporated into the guidelines. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-02-27 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion "Peer-reviewed article" "Artículo revisado por pares" "Artigo avaliado pelos pares" |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259 10.22239/2317-269X.01259 |
url |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.22239/2317-269X.01259 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng por |
language |
eng por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259/1128 https://visaemdebate.incqs.fiocruz.br/index.php/visaemdebate/article/view/1259/1205 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto Nacional de Controle de Qualidade em Saúde |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Health Surveillance under Debate: Society, Science & Technology ; Vol. 8 No. 1 (2020): February; 48-61 Vigilancia en Salud en Debate: Sociedad, Ciencia y Tecnología; Vol. 8 Núm. 1 (2020): Febrero; 48-61 Vigil Sanit Debate, Rio de Janeiro; v. 8 n. 1 (2020): Fevereiro; 48-61 2317-269X reponame:Vigilância Sanitária em Debate instname:Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) instacron:FIOCRUZ |
instname_str |
Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
instacron_str |
FIOCRUZ |
institution |
FIOCRUZ |
reponame_str |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
collection |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Vigilância Sanitária em Debate - Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
incqs.visaemdebate@fiocruz.br || gisele.neves@fiocruz.br |
_version_ |
1797042045331701760 |