Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Confirmatory reanalysis of incurred bioanalytical samples

  • Published:
The AAPS Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Bioanalytical methods used to support the drug development process are validated to ensure that they function in the manner in which they are intended. “Incurred” or study samples can vary in their composition when compared with the standards and quality control samples used to validate the method and analyze these samples. During the 3rd American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists(AAPS)/Food and Drug Administration(FDA) Bioanalytical Workshop, it was suggested that the reproducibility in the analysis of incurred samples be evaluated in addition to the usual prestudy validation activities performed. This manuscript provides recommendations concerning the number and types of samples that should be analyzed in such an evaluation, as well as the manner in which the resultant data should be analyzed. Suggestions as to follow-up activities and data reporting are also discussed. This approach is at best a beginning and is offered as a platform for future discussion, comments, and revision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Shah DD, Midha KK, Dighe SV, et al. Analytical methods validation bioavailability, bioequivalence, and pharmacokinetic studies. J. Pharm Sci. 1992; 81: 309–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Shah VP. The history of bioanalytical method validation and regulation: evolution of a guidance document on bioanalytical methods validation. AAPS J. 2007; 9: E43-E47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Viswanathan CT, Bansal S, Booth B, et al. Workshop/conference report—quantitative bioanalytical methods validation and implementation: best practices for chromatographic and ligand binding assays. AAPS J. 2007; 9: E30-E42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Findlay JWA, Smith WC, Lee JW, et al. Validation of immunoassays for bioanalysis: a pharmaceutical industry perspective. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2000; 21: 1249–1273.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. FDA/CDER. Guidance for the Industry: Bioanalytical Method Validation. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services FDA (CDER) and (CVM); May 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  6. DeSilva B, Smith W, Weiner R, et al. Recommendations for the bioanalytical method validation of ligand-binding assays to support pharmacokinetic assessments of macromolecules. Pharm Res. 2003; 20: 1885–1900.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bansal SB. AAPS Bioanalytical Survey. Paper presented at the AAPS 3rd Bioanalytical Workshop: Quantitative Bioanalytical Methods Validation and Implementation—Best Practices for Chromatographic and Ligand Binding Assays; May 1–3, 2006; Washington, DC.

  8. Canadian Health Ministry. Guidance for Industry. Conduct and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies—Part A: Oral Dosage Formulations Used for Systemic Effects. 1992; Available at: http://he-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide-ld/bio/bio-a_e.html. Accessed September 27, 2007.

  9. Canadian Health Ministry. Guidance for Industry. Conduct and Analysis of Bioavailability and Bioequivalence Studies—Part B: Oral Modified Release Formulations Used for Systemic Effects. 1996; Available at: http://hc-se.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide-ld/bio/bio-b_e.html. Accessed September 27, 2007.

  10. Canadian Health Ministry. Notice to Industry—Removal of Requirement for 15% Random Replicate Samples. 2003; Available at: http://he-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide-lb/bio/15rep_e.html. Accessed September 27, 2007.

  11. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;i:307–310.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bland JM, Altman DG. A note on the use of intraclass correlation coefficient in the evaluation of agreement between two methods of measurement. Comput Biol Med. 1990; 20: 337–340.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Eastwood BJ, Farmen MW, Iversen PW, et al. The minimum significant ratio: a statistical parameter to characterize the reproducibility of potency estimates from concentration-response assays and estimation by replicate-experiment studies. J Biomol Screen 2006; 11: 253–261.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Eli Lilly and Company and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Chemical Genomics Center (NCGC). Transfer of validated assays, 2005. Available at: http://www.nege.nih.gov/guidance/section2.html#analysis-potency. Accessed September 27, 2007.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Bioanalytical Sciences and Product Development, Prevalere Life Sciences Inc., 8282 Halsey Road, 13492, Whitesboro, NY

    Mario L. Rocci, David B. Haughey & Paula Jardieu

  2. Global Statistics & Data Management, Abbott Laboratories, Parsippany, NJ

    Viswanath Devanarayan

Authors
  1. Mario L. Rocci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Viswanath Devanarayan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David B. Haughey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paula Jardieu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario L. Rocci.

Additional information

Published: October 5, 2007

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rocci, M.L., Devanarayan, V., Haughey, D.B. et al. Confirmatory reanalysis of incurred bioanalytical samples. AAPS J 9, 40 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1208/aapsj0903040

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1208/aapsj0903040

Keywords

Search

Navigation