flurry of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning letters continued on Tuesday with the release of six new warning letters for pharmaceutical and medical device companies in China, India, Taiwan and Japan." />
Welcome to our new website! If this is the first time you are logging in on the new site, you will need to reset your password. Please contact us at raps@raps.org if you need assistance.
The regulatory function is vital in making safe and effective healthcare products available worldwide. Individuals who ensure regulatory compliance and prepare submissions, as well as those whose main job function is clinical affairs or quality assurance are all considered regulatory professionals.
One of our most valuable contributions to the profession is the Regulatory Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics provides regulatory professionals with core values that hold them to the highest standards of professional conduct.
Your membership opens the door to free learning resources on demand. Check out the Member Knowledge Center for free webcasts, publications and online courses.
Like all professions, regulatory is based on a shared set of competencies. The Regulatory Competency Framework describes the essential elements of what is required of regulatory professionals at four major career and professional levels.
Join the brightest minds in regulatory at the annual Regulatory Convergence. See the global regulatory community in action. Intensive workshops. Topical sessions. Meet ups with regulators. This is where it all comes together.
For 20 years, our flagship publication, Fundamentals of US Regulatory Affairs, has been giving regulatory professionals the insights and answers they need, right at their fingertips.
There are hundreds of RAC testing centers available worldwide. Any of the four RAC exams (US, EU, CAN or Global) may be taken at any location. Find an upcoming exam at a location near you.
The site navigation utilizes arrow, enter, escape, and space bar key commands. Left and right arrows move across top level links and expand / close menus in sub levels. Up and Down arrows will open main level menus and toggle through sub tier links. Enter and space open menus and escape closes them as well. Tab will move on to the next part of the site rather than go through menu items.
The RAPS store will be under maintenance Saturday, 7 December between 6 AM and 12 PM. Store functionality may be unavailable at times during this window. We apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.
Posted 14 February 2017 | By Zachary Brennan
The flurry of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warning letters continued on Tuesday with the release of six new warning letters for pharmaceutical and medical device companies in China, India, Taiwan and Japan.
The most recent letter, sent from FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) to Bangalore, India-based active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) manufacturer Resonance Laboratories on 3 February, following a four-day inspection last May, says investigators found that the company had failed to demonstrate that its water system is suitable for cleaning equipment.
“After obtaining failing cleaning verification results, you repeated cleaning until you obtained passing verification results,” the letter says. “Your firm failed to investigate recurring cleaning procedure ineffectiveness and did not remediate the deficient procedures.”
Another warning sent to Japan-based Sato Pharmaceutical on 2 February includes violations related to monitoring environmental conditions in the site’s aseptic processing areas, as well as its failure to perform smoke studies under “at rest” and “dynamic” conditions to evaluate air flow characteristics of its open Restricted Access Barrier System.
FDA recommends that Sato engage with a consultant to assist it in meeting CGMP requirements.
Another warning letter sent by CDER to China-based Zhejiang Bangli Medical Products Co. on 26 January included violations for failing to test incoming active pharmaceutical ingredients or other components used in manufacturing patches to determine their identity, purity and potency.
FDA laboratory analysis also showed that samples of the company’s product “were sub-potent for the labeled active ingredient, containing an average potency of 69.0% of the label claim.”
Similarly, China-based Ausmetics Daily Chemicals received a warning letter sent 31 January with violations including the fact that the firm only tested three batches released in 2015 for identity and strength, and two batches for microbiological quality.
Ausmetics also “accepted and used active raw materials in your drug products based only on their appearance and odor,” the letter says.
Taiwan-based blood glucose meter manufacturer Broadmaster Biotech received a Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) warning letter sent 4 October 2016 after investigators found that of 233 complaints received from January 2016 through April 2016, 86 were for issue codes that the firm does not routinely review and evaluate.
CDRH also sent a warning letter to China-based Hubei Hongkang Protective Products Co. on 15 September for failing to allow FDA to complete its inspection.
Hubei Hongkang Protective Products Co 9/15/16
BroadMaster Biotech Corp. 10/4/16
Zhejiang Bangli Medical Products Co., Ltd 1/26/17
Ausmetics Daily Chemicals (Guangzhou) Co., Ltd 1/31/17
Sato Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. 2/2/17
Resonance Laboratories Private Limited 2/3/17
Tags: warning letters, China drug manufacturing, India drug manufacturing
Regulatory Focus newsletters
All the biggest regulatory news and happenings.