Cleaning Validation Acceptance Criterion

Are are fed up, tired of it all. Your boss has been harassing you to develop “a scientifically sound, logical, and rational basis for cleaning acceptance limits.” Should be simple enough, right? Yet, every time you ask someone about setting cleaning limits they look at you as if you have three, maybe four heads. Asking a consultant only makes things worse, leaving you more confused when they present you with more theoretical options than you ever imagined possible (but of course offering to help you solve the problem with a team of experts!) You’ve scoured the literature, yet haven’t found anything but theoretical discussions and vague references to the “Mullen and Fourman method.” Before kicking the cat or cursing your boss, let’s see what this is really all about.

Case Study

Let’s look at a case study. Let’s imagine that the situation deals with the removal of a biologically active protein from an equipment item cleaned with either CIP, COP, or manual techniques with a WFI final rinse. We are using rinse water as the means of detecting residue removal. Rinse water analysis is by nature an indirect measure of cleaning efficacy. The only direct measure of cleaning efficacy is surface analysis – typically performed by either visual or swab analysis. Rinse water analysis is however a common method used to verify cleaning efficacy, and when combined with surface analysis is often part of an effective cleaning validation program.

Maximum Acceptable Amount

So for this case, we want to determine the maximum acceptable amount of protein residue that can be carried over to the next batch of product produced in a specific piece of equipment. Let’s make a few assumptions and draw some conclusions from them.

  • Assume the equipment is a vessel with a 300 liter working volume.
  • Assume that the vessel’s nominal batch size ranges from 20 liters to 240 liters.
  • Assume the active protein has a therapeutic dose limit of 400 µg/ml.

Applying an industry standard safety factor of 1/1000 of a therapeutic dose, we can calculate the Maximum Allowable Carry-Over (MAC) to be:

MAC = (1/1000) x (400 µg/ml) = 0.4 µg/ml

8000 µg is the maximum amount of protein that can be carried over into the next batch (20l) of product and still meet the 1/1000th of a therapeutic dose criterion. This number can then be used to work backwards to calculate a rinse water acceptance limit.

To back-calculate the rinse water acceptance limit, we need to determine the amount of protein that if found in a rinse water sample, would result in 8000 µg of protein ending up in the next 20 liter batch of product. To determine this, we must again make several assumptions, but we will be conservative to provide for additional safety factors.

Let’s assume that we’ve performed our standard cleaning process on the vessel and are about to take a WFI rinse sample at the end of the rinse cycle. Let’s also assume that the cleaning process has left 8000 µg of protein on the surface of the vessel at the end of the cleaning cycle.

If we now rinse the vessel with 2.0 liters of WFI and all of the protein on the surface disassociates itself from the vessel and into the 2.0 liters of rinsate, then the concentration of protein in the rinse water would be:

(8000 µg)/2000ml = 4µg/ml

This value could be used as the rinse water acceptance limit as it relates back to the original goal of having less than or equal to 1/1000th of a therapeutic dose of the protein in the next batch of product.

Conclusion

Before concluding, let’s review a few of the assumptions that were made. To begin with, setting cleaning criteria for proteins can be difficult since the assumption that the protein remains active following the cleaning process is very conservative. Most proteins become denatured due to the high temperatures and the caustic nature of the detergents typically used.

Several other conservative assumptions also were applied in this case study. The first of these is the assumption that all of the protein that remains in the vessel after cleaning is going to disassociate during the production of the next production batch. While this is possible, it is most unlikely. We used the smallest batch size to calculate the limits to provide an additional safety factor. Similarly, the use of 2.0 liters for the rinsate volume is conservative. One could easily use a higher rinsate volume and derive a lower acceptance criterion; however, we have chosen this low rinsate volume to be intentionally conservative.

It should be noted that surface analysis via swabbing is typically used to corroborate and support the use of rinse water analysis. Similar techniques to those used to derive the rinse water analysis acceptance limits can be used for establishing swabbing acceptance limits.

This case study is intended to serve as an aid to those faced with the problems of establishing cleaning acceptance limits. Any number of approaches may be taken and for different cleaning scenarios, different approaches may be more or less appropriate. Regardless of the approach taken, document the rationale for the approach in the protocol or the master plan or both.

0
shares

  • Rajesh Singh Chauhan

    If Recovery not acheved the Target Value then what should be done.

  • Rajesh Singh Chauhan

    If Recovery not acheved the Target Value then what should be done.

  • IkbellmaN

    Hello

    my project of ending studies is about the validation of the glassware cleaning and i don’t have any method, can we use this method for the glassware ?

    please reply
    thanks in advance
    IkbellmaN

  • IkbellmaN

    Hello

    my project of ending studies is about the validation of the glassware cleaning and i don’t have any method, can we use this method for the glassware ?

    please reply
    thanks in advance
    IkbellmaN

  • PARUL

    we are working in finished product dept which are handling protin. i want to know the procedue for clening of accesory….

  • PARUL

    we are working in finished product dept which are handling protin. i want to know the procedue for clening of accesory….

  • Anuj Shah

    Hi,
    We are generally using swab technique for our cleaning validation , but there are some pieces of equipment were swabbing is not possible as the equipment is too large in size, so we are thinking to go for rinse sampling method, but we don’t know how to calculate the accpetance criteria as the rinsate for rinsing is an approximate volume, it could be more or less than that.

    Can you guide me on this.
    Thanks,
    Anuj

  • Anuj Shah

    Hi,
    We are generally using swab technique for our cleaning validation , but there are some pieces of equipment were swabbing is not possible as the equipment is too large in size, so we are thinking to go for rinse sampling method, but we don’t know how to calculate the accpetance criteria as the rinsate for rinsing is an approximate volume, it could be more or less than that.

    Can you guide me on this.
    Thanks,
    Anuj

  • hizbi_nzk@yahoo.com

    Hi,
    What happens if the limit is less than the analytical method’s LOD & LOQ as there are numerous compounds for which the acceptable carry over limit is very minute and don’t fall in the LOD and LOQ range.

  • hizbi_nzk@yahoo.com

    Hi,
    What happens if the limit is less than the analytical method’s LOD & LOQ as there are numerous compounds for which the acceptable carry over limit is very minute and don’t fall in the LOD and LOQ range.

Similar articles:

The Four Phases of Conducting a Laboratory Investigation [Video]

The process which will be described here is based on the process discussed in the MHRA’s guidance on Out of Specifications Investigation.

When an out of specification, atypical or suspect result is obtained, it is particularly important that all solutions and reagents associated with the test are retained, as this will greatly assist the investigation.

The MHRA advocate laboratory investigations should proceed in four phases as follows:

Phase I(a)

Phase I (a) consists of a preliminary review, by the analyst, to determine whether there has been a clear and obvious error or event that caused the OOS, atypical or suspect result.

Phase I(b)

Phase I (b) occurs after phase 1(a) has failed to identify a clear and obvious cause. This is a more detailed investigation by the analyst and supervisor to identify a laboratory assignable cause.

Phase II

Phase II occurs after the phase I investigation has failed to identify a laboratory assignable cause for the OOS, atypical or suspect result and are driven by written and approved instructions in order to test particular hypothesis.

Phase III

In Phase III all the information obtained during Phases I and II of the laboratory investigation, and any manufacturing investigation, is reviewed and assessed, and a decision is made on the disposition of the batch

Learn More About Laboratory Investigations

If you would like to learn more about laboratory investigations click here for an overview of this course.

0
shares

Similar articles:

New Feature Release: LMS Fully Mobile Responsive

September has been a big month for releases at Learnaboutgmp, with our new fully responsive user interface coming officially out of beta.

If you are a premium member of our platform, you will see first-hand how intuitive and smooth the new UI feels.

Fully Mobile Responsive

We are now fully mobile responsive, giving you flexibility and ensuring you have a great experience on any device, at any time

Tablet

Mobile

A Beautiful New Interface

If you have signed up for our company license (5 or more users) then you can avail of the brand new styling options from the admin panel including:

  1. Customizable Portal Logo
  2. Header Color
  3. Background Color
  4. Link/Active Tab Color
  5. Course Thumbnail Image
  6. Course Info Snapshot

Easy, Consistent Navigation

The primary navigation menu, secondary navigation and page actions are presented consistently throughout the portal, making it easy to find what you need:

  1. Primary Navigation Menu
  2. Page Actions

New Smart Search

Powerful new search capabilities allow you to search for courses, users, and groups.
Smart search saves you time by providing a menu of actions for common Administrator tasks, making updates quick and easy.

Intuitive Settings Menu

The reorganized settings menu groups together related Administrator tasks, e.g. around portal set up and branding, courses, and users, allowing Administrators to easily click through the options and complete their updates.

Online Demo

If you would like to see what our new interface looks like please click the button below to sign up for an online demo today.

DEMO SIGNUP

9
shares

TOP

Similar articles: