Alternative potency tests for quality control of immunobiologicals: a critical review of the validation approach

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Moreira, Wildeberg Cal
Data de Publicação: 2020
Outros Autores: Machado, Nathalia de Souza, Freitas, Jéssica Ferreira de Souza, Almeida, Antônio Eugênio Castro Cardoso de, Moura, Wlamir Correa de
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