Chen H, Liu S, Ji L, Wu T, Ji Y, Zhou Y, Zheng M, Zhang M, Xu W, Huang G
References Parke DV
Early and timely intervention is crucial to prevent retinal damage and vision impairment in individuals with diabetes
Purity Level: Require a Certificate of Analysis (CoA) confirming 99% purity
Zhou L et al (2017) Drying of Garlic slices (Allium sativum L.) and its effect on Thiosulfinates, total phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity during infrared drying
Non-Conformance 1: Failure to Adequately Investigate Deviations and Batch Failures Regulatory Citation: 21 CFR 211.192 Root Causes Absence of a structured, consistently applied investigation lifecycle Quality Unit oversight focused on batch disposition rather than process control Inadequate definition of the investigation scope, escalation criteria, and trend evaluation Lack of a formal process to assess CAPA effectiveness Insufficient management review of investigation quality and outcomes Expected Corrective and Preventive Actions (CAPA) Perform an independent assessment of: Deviation management Complaint handling OOS/OOT investigations CAPA governance Revise investigation procedures to clearly define: When investigations must be initiated How scope and impact assessments are performed Documentation and data requirements Establish mandatory CAPA effectiveness checks tied to recurrence prevention Implement retrospective review of: Customer complaints Rejected units Media fill terminations Strengthen Quality Unit authority and management oversight over investigations and batch release decisions Non-Conformance 2: Failure to Establish and Follow Adequate Aseptic and Contamination Control Procedures Regulatory Citation: 21 CFR 211.113(b) Root Causes Incomplete contamination control strategy across aseptic operations Insufficient evaluation of equipment design, accessibility, and decontamination coverage Lack of a comprehensive contamination hazards risk assessment Inadequate integration of supplier component risks into the aseptic control framework Absence of defined escalation and response criteria for recurring particulate contamination Expected Corrective and Preventive Actions (CAPA) Conduct a comprehensive, CCS-aligned contamination hazards risk assessment covering: Aseptic processes Equipment design and occluded surfaces Routine and non-routine interventions Material and component flows, including stoppers Revise aseptic procedures to: Eliminate or redesign high-risk interventions Improve decontamination effectiveness and coverage Replace contact plate sampling with swab sampling where appropriate Establish defect-specific trending and quality limits for visual inspection findings Implement representative, on-site incoming inspection protocols for all stopper suppliers Define and document re-inspection procedures for the finished product when extrinsic matter is detected Timeline for Implementation (FDA Expectations) Immediate Actions (03 Months) Engage independent CGMP experts to assess investigation systems and aseptic controls Discontinue use of pre-shipment samples for component quality decisions Implement interim containment measures for contamination risk reduction Short-Term Actions (36 Months) Complete retrospective reviews of: Complaints Media fill failures Contamination-related deviations Finalize and implement revised SOPs for: Investigations CAPA management Aseptic interventions Component inspection Generate data demonstrating CAPA effectiveness Long-Term Actions (612 Months) Implement design or procedural changes to reduce contamination risk Strengthen management review and Quality Unit oversight mechanisms Establish routine, data-driven trending and escalation processes Conclusion This warning letter does not describe isolated execution errors
