Product quality reviews

Technical interpretation

Product quality reviews

Document valid from: 07.11.2017

Document number: I-SMI.TI.14 Version no. 05

Classification: Public

Replaced document: I-SMI.TI.14_04 dated: 14.08.2014

Root QMI documents: -

Referenced QMI documents: -

Approval
Date: Signature:

Author: 01.11.2017 Roel op den Camp

Technical verification: 02.11.2017 Christian Schärer

VS-QMI:
(formal verification and release) 07.11.2017 Michelle Scheidegger

Index

1. Purpose and scope .................................................................................................... 3

2. Basis .......................................................................................................................... 3
3. Definitions and abbreviations ..................................................................................... 3
4. Interpretation .............................................................................................................. 3
4.1 Content of the PQR .................................................................................................... 3
4.2 Responsibilities for the PQR ...................................................................................... 4
4.2.1 Responsibility for establishing the PQR...................................................................... 4
4.2.2 Responsibility for evaluating the PQR ........................................................................ 5
4.3 Review period of the PQR .......................................................................................... 5

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 1/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17
 Product quality reviews
Technical interpretation

4.4 Timelines for establishing and evaluating the PQR .................................................... 5

4.5 Products in co-marketing ........................................................................................... 5
5. Changes to the previous version ................................................................................ 6
6. Appendixes ................................................................................................................ 6

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 2/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17
 Product quality reviews
Technical interpretation

1. Purpose and scope

The importance and requirements for performing annual Product Quality Reviews (PQRs) are
described and defined in the Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice for medicinal products, part
I and part II, PIC/S document PE 009 respectively Eudralex volume 4. The PQR is considered a
key document for verifying the consistency of the existing production process.
This technical interpretation describes the minimal expectations as well as recommendations for
establishing and evaluating a PQR, that inspectors of the competent regulatory authority can
have when assessing compliance with the guidance during an inspection of a manufacturer of
medicinal products, a manufacturer of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) for medicinal
products or a marketing authorisation holder, in order to assure a harmonized conduct of in-
spections.

2. Basis
 AMBV/OAMéd art. 7 para. 1a and 3a
 AMBV/OAMéd art. 10 para. 3b
 AMBV/OAMéd attachment 1 para. 1c and 1d
 Guide to GMP, PIC/S PE 009, part I chapter 1.10 and 1.11 (product quality review for fin-
ished products)
 Guide to GMP, PIC/S PE 009, part II chapter 2.6 (product quality review for Active Pharma-
ceutical Ingredients)

3. Definitions and abbreviations

API Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient
Product Quality Review (PQR) Documented regular periodic or rolling quality reviews of all
licensed medicinal products or APIs with the objective of ver-
ifying the consistency of the existing manufacturing process
to highlight any trends and to identify product and process
improvements or weaknesses. For licensed medicinal prod-
ucts the appropriateness of current specifications for both
starting materials and finished products is included

4. Interpretation
The PQR must be written in a defined language which can be understood by all involved parties
(manufacturer, marketing authorisation holder, competent regulatory authorities).

4.1 Content of the PQR

The Guide to GMP requires conducting PQRs for APIs and for all licensed medicinal products
(including export only products) and lists the topics, which need to be taken into account (for fin-
ished products in the Guide to GMP, part I and for APIs in the Guide to GMP, part II).

It is expected that all topics listed in the Guide to GMP are explicitly addressed in the PQR. The
extent (i.e. selection of the parameters to be reviewed, e.g. critical in-process controls) and
depth of data review for each of these topics should be defined in a risk based way and should
be suitable to highlight any trends in relevant quality characteristics and enable to identify the
necessity for product and/or process improvements. The justification for the chosen extent and

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 3/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17
 Product quality reviews
Technical interpretation

depth should be science based and documented. The justification can be described in a sepa-
rate document.

In general, the PQR has to cover all products and all the batches of a product produced during
the review period. Grouping of products is acceptable but a scientific justification for the group-
ing must be part of the PQR.

To be able to verify the consistency of the existing production process, the number of batches
produced should be as large as possible. Therefore, the PQR should include all the batches of
a product produced and not only the batches supplied to one customer. For example, if a cer-
tain product is registered in several countries or produced for multiple customers (this means
the products has multiple marketing authorisations), but the production process, the in process
controls and finished product specifications are the same, only one PQR covering all batches
should be established and made accessible to all customers.
If a product is registered in several countries (multiple marketing authorisations) or produced for
multiple customers, and the production process is essentially the same, with only minor varia-
tions in process controls and finished product specifications, only one PQR based on the most
stringent criteria may be established and made accessible to all customers.

Normally, the PQR should not contain endless lists with single data (raw data) but should con-
tain overviews, graphs or tables summarising the raw data. The PQR should contain a review
and interpretation of the raw data followed by a condensed summary including an assessment
and conclusion.

They PQR should consider conclusions and preventive and/or corrective actions from previous
reviews.

4.2 Responsibilities for the PQR

4.2.1 Responsibility for establishing the PQR
Where several companies are involved in the manufacture or analysis and where the marketing
authorisation holder is different from the manufacturer, it is expected that one overall PQR is es-
tablished. If the overall PQR refers to PQRs, which are covering parts of the manufacturing ac-
tivities, the conclusions from these partial PQRs should be included in the overall PQR.

There should be one overall responsible person/organisation for establishing the PQR. This can
be either the manufacturer technically releasing the API and/or finished products (and being re-
sponsible for final batch certification) or, in case of finished products, the marketing authorisa-
tion holder releasing the finished product for the (Swiss) market. Technical agreements should
be established between all parties involved, defining who will take the overall responsibility for
establishing the PQR and the way, the extent and the responsibility for providing data for the
PQR. Such agreements must comply with chapter 7 of the Guide to GMP part I or chapter 16 of
the Guide to GMP part II.

It is expected that the overall responsible person/organisation as well as all involved manufac-
turers establish procedures (SOPs) for establishing the relevant part of the PQR. These proce-
dures should ensure that the content of the PQR is appropriate and that the necessary conclu-
sions are drawn out of the reviewed data and documented in the PQR.

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 4/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17
 Product quality reviews
Technical interpretation

4.2.2 Responsibility for evaluating the PQR

Both, the manufacturer, and in case of finished products, the marketing authorisation holder,
should evaluate the results of the PQR and both should make an assessment of whether cor-
rective and preventative action or any revalidation should be undertaken. The evaluation should
involve the upper management and the responsible person of the companies involved.

The marketing authorisation holder should verify whether the product consistently fulfils the re-
quirements as specified in the marketing authorisation. The process for the evaluation of the
PQR and for the follow up of defined actions should be described in a SOP. The SOP of the
marketing authorisation holder should include at least the following aspects:
a) a verification, that the reviews as defined in the Guide to GMP have been conducted
b) an evaluation of the conclusions drawn in the PQR, including a review of the trendings
c) a verification of being in compliance with the marketing authorisation
d) review of country-specific aspects like recalls, returns, complaints, quality defects, devia-
tions or marketing authorisation variations
e) review and follow up of previously defined actions.
Documented evidence for having evaluated the PQR should be available.

4.3 Review period of the PQR

The PQR should be established at least annually. The yearly periods may be set independently
from the calendar year, i.e. not necessarily from January to December.

Where only 1 batch or very few batches were produced during the year, the review period might
be longer than 1 year. The chosen review period for such cases should include at least 5
batches or should be performed after 5 years if at least 3 batches have been produced. If after 5
years less than 3 batches have been produced, a PQR should be established as soon as 3
batches have been produced. For products with very few batches produced during a review pe-
riod, a reasonable grouping with other products might be considered.
In case of recalls, quality-related returns or a relative high number of complaints the establish-
ment of a PQR, even if only few batches have been produced, is recommended.

4.4 Timelines for establishing and evaluating the PQR

The PQR should be established in a timely manner. “Timely” is considered as within 6 months
after the end of the review period.
An evaluation of the results and an assessment of potential actions should be performed within
3 months after the establishment of the PQR. The evaluation and assessment of the PQR
should be completed at the latest before the end of the next review period or at the latest 12
months after the end of the reviewed period (e.g. in case of a discontinued production).

4.5 Products in co-marketing

The marketing authorisation holder of a product in co-marketing (VAZV/OASMéd art. 34 - art.
38), in principle, has the same responsibilities as a marketing authorisation holder of a basic
product. However, the co-marketing authorisation holder is not able to verify whether the prod-
uct consistently fulfils the requirements as specified in the marketing authorisation because he
does not have access to the marketing authorisation. Therefore, different requirements to the
PQR are applicable.

The co-marketing authorisation holder should secure or at least verify that the marketing author-
isation holder of the basic product establishes a PQR. Co-marketing-product specific aspects

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 5/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17
 Product quality reviews
Technical interpretation

like recalls, returns, complaints, quality defects or deviations must be integrated in the PQR of
the basic product and must, therefore, be made available by the co-marketing authorisation
holder to the marketing authorisation holder.

If the marketing authorisation holder does not establish a PQR, including co-marketing product
specific aspects, the co-marketing holder is obliged to establish an adapted PQR (in line with
this technical interpretation), which contains all the activities as defined in the Guide to GMP,
part I, for which the co-marketing holder is responsible (e.g. primary and/or secondary packag-
ing, changes, recalls, returns, complaints, quality defects, deviations or contractual arrange-
ments).

The exchange of information between the marketing authorisation holder and the co-marketing
authorisation holder (e.g. complaint data) should be defined in a technical agreement.

5. Changes to the previous version

 Chapter 2, 4.1 and 4.5: correction of the referenced chapters in the GMP Guidelines
 Chapter 4.2.2: correction of a typing error

6. Appendixes
 None

SMI-Ident: I-SMI.TI.14e / V05 / ocr / scg / smi / 07.11.2017 6/6

Ausgedruckt am 07.11.17