by
Anil Sawant, PhD, Merck/Merck Sharp & Dohme; Ronald Tetzlaff, PAREXEL, and Denyse Baker, PDA | Jan 02, 2018
How has PDA’s Elements of a Code of
Conduct for Data Integrity in the Pharmaceutical
Industry impacted the companies
of those who downloaded it?
The Code is a collection of recommended
best practices for employee and management
conduct related to data integrity,
presented in a ready-to-use format. It was
published on the PDA website in March
2016, available free for download. PDA’s Data
Integrity Task Force, under the leadership of
Anil Sawant, PhD, Vice President, Quality
Management Systems and External Affairs,
MSD, and Ronald Tetzlaff, Corporate
Vice President, PAREXEL, developed the
Code with the goal of sharing it with the
industry at large. It was written to apply to
employees, corporate officers, third-party
suppliers and others acting on behalf of, or
at the behest of, a company. This includes
individuals that develop, test, manufacture
or submit marketing authorizations for
pharmaceutical and biological products.
The Code was designed so that it could
be tailored for each individual company’s
needs. A company could implement the elements
within the Code in their entirety or
only certain elements identified as pertinent
for establishing their own customized policies,
standards, procedures, or other quality
system elements to define data integrity
requirements.
The task force aimed to distribute the
Code of Conduct as broadly as possible,
thinking it would be especially useful for
smaller manufacturing firms, or those
that supply raw materials, components
or testing services who may not yet have
taken this step toward quality system and
culture maturity. It was developed to be
used directly by smaller firms to shore
up existing quality systems. Additionally,
larger firms or contract givers could use elements
of the Code to assess their current
internal codes or use it to when drafting
or revising supply and quality agreements.
As of October 2017, more than 3800 copies
of the Code have been downloaded.
Most of the copies were downloaded in
North America, Western Europe and Japan,
which is consistent with PDA’s large
membership in these regions. Analysis of
website data shows the downloads have
also occurred in regions representing areas
of emerging pharmaceutical manufacturing
as Africa, Eastern Europe, India and
China (Figure 1). This is encouraging as
it supports one of the task force’s goals of
expanding education and tools to identify
and rectify data integrity gaps.
Figure 1 Number of Downloads by Region Outside of United States, Western Europe and Japan
One year after publication, PDA sent a
follow-up survey to those who had downloaded
the document to learn about the
outcomes of implementing the Code, collecting
a total of 95 anonymous responses.
Approximately 40% self-identified as
a quality leader or member of quality
staff and 20% as compliance leaders or
compliance staff. Another 30% identified
themselves as consultants. The remainder
self-identified as members of manufacturing
production, legal counsel, validation,
development and marketing.
There was an almost even distribution in
the size of the respondents’ companies as
shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 What is the Number of Employees in Your Company/Average in your Client’s Company?
Responses to the question regarding the
location of manufacturing sites indicated
survey respondents represent manufacturing
sites from all regions of the world
(Figure 3).
Figure 3 Where Does Your Company (or Client) Manufacture Products?
The survey also asked how the Code was
used after being downloaded. More than
half indicated they used the Code as a
guide on good data integrity practices,
while 33% used it as a benchmark to
evaluate internal practices and 14% used
the Code in developing agreements with
outsourcing partners or suppliers. Almost
20% of the respondents adopted the Code
in whole or in part into their internal
business processes and practice. More
than 90% of the survey respondents rated
the Code as useful. A quarter also found
it practical for their company or clients to
adopt or follow.
More than 90% of respondents also
indicated they believe it will help reinforce
a culture of quality and trust within the
pharmaceutical industry. This aligns with the original goal of the task force to raise
awareness and provide useful tools within
the pharmaceutical industry.
The survey included a question for openended
responses. Here are some of the positive
comments received about the Code:
- “I believe that your take on data
integrity was accurate, because it is
basically awareness of existing regulations.
What I fear (and what you have
thankfully not done) is over-engineering
what regulatory agencies have
already expected…similar to what
happened with the term ‘risk-based.’
I applaud your paper because it was
fundamental and basically summarized
what was already expected in
regs and guidances. I also liked that in
reality it didn’t require a CSV group to
create more templates (which I have already seen organizations do!) but
instead incorporate these concepts
into existing gxp processes (e.g., SOPs,
CSV UR templates).”
- “CoC helps a lot about thinking policy
in good GMP documentation practices.
Thanx for that. This kind of guidance
should be mandatory for equipment
vendors as well.”
Some respondents expressed concerns
about the structure of the document and
others noted perceived redundancies.
Additionally, there were suggestions to
include practical examples within the
document. Several respondents mentioned
that a code of conduct alone cannot
create data integrity; instead, there must
be a culture of integrity. PDA is already
moving to address many of the suggestions.
Another task force is focused on
culture within pharmaceutical manufacturing
and has previously published the
results of a survey (1). Building on these
initial results, this Quality Culture Task
Force has completed a pilot program to
measure quality culture at more than 40
participating companies and expects to
publish these results in 2018. The PDA
Data Integrity Task Force also expects to
publish technical reports on data integrity
in 2018, one for laboratory systems and
another for manufacturing systems.
Conclusion
Based on the positive results of this survey,
the PDA Data Integrity Task Force will
continue its work to develop additional
tools and resources for the pharmaceutical
industry. The Code of Conduct remains
available for download.
Reference
- Patel, P., et al. “Quality Culture Survey Report.”
PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology
69 (2015) 631–642.