Source Data Verification: A Case Study in Practical DI Challenges

Data integrity (DI) efforts culminate in source data verification, a process essential for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of your data. This step safeguards your submissions, maintains operational quality, and prevents critical errors. In this final article of our four-part series, we’ll explore a case study from an R&D lab and dive into the strategies used to overcome the challenges of source data verification.

Source Data vs. Raw Data: Understanding the Difference

Before delving into solutions, it’s critical to distinguish between source data and raw data. Source data refers to the original records or certified copies necessary for reconstructing and evaluating findings. Examples include signed case report forms or instrument outputs. Raw data, on the other hand, refers to unprocessed measurements or observations, such as the initial readings from laboratory instruments. The transition from raw to source data must be validated to ensure integrity.

Addressing Challenges in an R&D Environment

At our client, where dynamic R&D processes dominate, the need to preserve DI became apparent during an internal review. Instrument records, including outputs from pH meters and densitometers, were found to be inconsistently documented. Some printouts were unattached or missing essential details, such as test dates or signatures, complicating traceability.

To address this, the QA team:

  • Revised SOPs to clarify documentation requirements.
  • Retrained staff on best practices for handling and signing printouts, incorporating lessons learned from evaluating different types of glue for attaching printouts securely and updating SOPs to reflect these findings.
  • Introduced internal audits to ensure adherence to revised protocols.

These measures reduced documentation errors and improved traceability, laying the groundwork for eventual source data verification.

Securing Electronic Data

Another challenge at our client was the handling of electronic data. HPLC records, stored in validated systems, already met GMP standards. However, other instruments saved electronic data in unsecured files without audit trails. To mitigate this risk, the team implemented user access controls, introduced automatic backups, and created a disaster recovery SOP. These efforts ensured data was preserved and retrievable while maintaining integrity.

Risk-Based Verification

Not all data requires immediate verification, and this creates a strategic dilemma for startups. Regulatory compliance demands rigorous data verification, yet operational realities necessitate resource optimization. By adopting a risk-based approach, our client navigated this trade-off effectively, prioritizing high-impact data—such as critical test results—for early verification. This method allowed the team to allocate resources efficiently while maintaining compliance, balancing the need for regulatory adherence with the practical constraints of limited budgets and dynamic workflows.

Additionally, startups can implement Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) to identify risks systematically across processes. By mapping data vulnerabilities from entry to storage, businesses can prioritize resources and safeguard data through preemptive controls. Ensuring inspection readiness through periodic internal reviews can also strengthen compliance and mitigate risks before regulatory audits.

Lessons for Startups

For startups navigating source data verification, our client’s case study provides valuable insights:

  1. Plan Ahead: Map out your data sources early and identify gaps in compliance.
  2. Leverage Technology: Use data management systems, audit trails, and templates to streamline verification.
  3. Adopt a Phased Approach: Focus on critical data first and expand efforts as your processes mature.

All data submitted to regulatory bodies must be verified. This means that R&D records, while not necessarily verified in real time, need to be securely retained in a manner that ensures they are identifiable and retrievable for future verification if required. By investing in robust systems and fostering a culture of accountability, startups can navigate these challenges effectively, paving the way for successful regulatory submissions and sustained growth.

Moreover, companies engaged in CMC regulatory compliance must ensure that all data meets stringent regulatory requirements before submission. Partnering with biopharma regulatory consulting experts can further streamline compliance efforts, ensuring data integrity at every stage of the product lifecycle. Finally, integrating clinical quality assurance measures into verification processes can help align R&D practices with regulatory expectations, enhancing overall operational efficiency.

You are invited to watch the next YouTube video for more information on the topic

Go back to the Blog

Building a Data Integrity Culture in Your Startup

In July 2023, the FDA issued a warning letter to Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited, citing critical data integrity lapses. These included aborted chromatographic sequences, inadequate oversight of CGMP documents, and insufficient controls over computerized systems. The FDA found instances where laboratory staff aborted chromatographic runs without investigation, raising concerns about the reliability of analytical data. These oversights pointed to a lack of a robust data integrity culture.

This example underscores that data integrity isn’t merely about compliance checklists. It requires embedding a culture where every team member values accurate and reliable data. For startups, building this culture early is essential for long-term success and operational resilience.

Why Culture Matters

One of our client’s CDMOs failed to maintain proper source data for analytical method validation, leading to delays and costly rework during their regulatory submission. This wasn’t just a technology issue but a reflection of an organizational culture that didn’t prioritize DI. A robust DI culture acts as the glue that binds all compliance and operational activities. Without it, even the most advanced systems and processes can fail.

Startups, in particular, face challenges because they often lack dedicated compliance teams. Instead, DI responsibilities are distributed among employees who are more focused on scientific and operational goals. This dual responsibility makes it even more crucial to embed DI into daily activities.

Practical Steps to Build a DI Culture

  1. Leadership Commitment: Change starts at the top. When leadership prioritizes DI and visibly supports initiatives, employees are more likely to follow suit. Regularly communicate its importance and link it to the company’s mission.
  2. Comprehensive Training: DI training should go beyond explaining guidelines. Use real-world examples to illustrate the consequences of failures and successes. For example, during an audit for one of our clients at their facility, employees ignored critical system error messages instead of reporting them, potentially compromising data. Training emphasized the importance of addressing such errors to prevent similar risks.
  3. Empower Employees: Employees are often the first to identify potential DI issues. Create an environment where they feel empowered to raise concerns without fear of repercussions. Encourage feedback and suggestions on improving DI processes.
  4. Align Incentives: Avoid creating incentives that conflict with DI principles. For instance, a company that prioritized speed and success in tests over accuracy found employees bypassing controls to meet performance targets, jeopardizing data reliability.
  5. Integrate DI into KPIs: Measure and reward adherence to DI standards. KPIs can include audit compliance rates, training completion, and incident reporting.

The Role of Technology

While culture is the foundation, technology plays a supporting role. For example, one QC lab configured its systems to restrict access and monitor activities using audit trails, reinforcing DI principles. Another team reformatted invalid Excel sheets used in bioanalytical services, securing the source data and ensuring verification processes aligned with DI standards. However, these tools are only effective when paired with a workforce that understands and values their purpose.

Many startups seek mock inspection services to evaluate their compliance readiness before regulatory reviews. Additionally, ensuring chemistry manufacturing controls meet industry standards plays a vital role in maintaining data integrity.

Building a DI culture is an investment in your company’s future. It not only ensures compliance but also strengthens investor confidence and operational efficiency. By embedding DI into your organization’s ethos, you set the stage for sustainable growth and innovation.

You are invited to watch the next YouTube video for more information on the topic

Go back to the Blog

Unlocking the Mystery of 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance

One of the most common challenges for startups is navigating the labyrinth of regulatory requirements—particularly when it comes to computerized systems validation (CSV). Take, for example, a biotech company that invested in a lab system advertised as “21 CFR Part 11-compatible.” They rested assured, believing that the vendor’s certification guaranteed compliance. However, they later discovered that accessing the system’s audit trail required vendor intervention, a process that introduced delays and increased costs. This scenario highlights a critical misconception—compatibility does not equate to compliance, and relying solely on vendor assurances can leave companies vulnerable.

Understanding 21 CFR Part 11

Part 11 governs the use of electronic records and signatures to ensure they are as reliable as their paper counterparts. Its objectives include ensuring the authenticity, integrity, and traceability of electronic data.

Core requirements include:

  • System Validation: Ensuring systems perform reliably and consistently.
  • Audit Trails: Tracking all changes to records.
  • Access Controls: Restricting data access to authorized personnel.
  • Electronic Signatures: Linking signatures to their corresponding records.

Compliance vs. Compatibility

Using a Part 11-compatible system is a good starting point, but it’s not enough. Compatibility means the system has features that can support compliance, such as audit trails and user controls. Compliance, however, requires proper governance, processes, and training.

What to Do When Systems Are Not Compatible or Compliant

For startups using systems that fall short in compatibility or compliance, solutions exist. Addressing these issues proactively can save time and prevent costly setbacks:

  1. Assess System Gaps: Conduct a gap analysis to identify missing features or functionalities in your systems. Engage with the vendor to understand the limitations and determine if upgrades or additional configurations are possible.
  2. Implement Procedural Workarounds: If your system lacks certain compliance features, establish robust standard operating procedures (SOPs) to address these gaps. For instance, in one case, manual audit trail reviews became an interim solution while a company planned its long-term CSV strategy.
  3. Leverage Third-Party Tools: Consider integrating third-party software to enhance existing system capabilities. Tools that provide audit trail management or validation support can bridge gaps while maintaining compliance.
  4. Train Personnel Extensively: Equip your team with detailed training to handle non-compliant systems effectively. In one instance, an employee’s confusion about deleting results underscored the importance of well-defined SOPs and training.
  5. Plan for Future Investments: While short-term fixes can address immediate needs, long-term planning should focus on transitioning to compliant systems. One client’s hybrid approach, combining electronic and paper records, mitigated risks while paving the way for system upgrades.

Lessons from the Field

Failures in CSV can create vulnerabilities. For example, an HPLC system permitted uncontrolled data generation through its operation panel, highlighting risks such as the absence of audit trails to monitor changes or the lack of access restrictions to prevent unauthorized modifications. These gaps emphasize the importance of addressing unvalidated systems to mitigate operational risks effectively. By physically disabling this feature, a company ensured stricter controls and mitigated risks. Such proactive measures demonstrate the importance of combining technological fixes with operational safeguards.

Why Compliance Matters

Non-compliance can lead to severe consequences, from rejected submissions to tarnished reputations. More importantly, it’s about safeguarding the integrity of the data that underpins every decision in pharmaceutical development.

Many startups seek regulatory consulting to help navigate these compliance challenges and align their operations with regulatory expectations. Another critical aspect is quality assurance in clinical trials, ensuring that all procedures and documentation adhere to the highest industry standards.

By bridging the gap between technology and governance, startups can achieve not just compliance but also operational excellence. Startups aiming to navigate the complexities of 21 CFR Part 11 can gain actionable insights here to align their operations with regulatory expectations.

You are invited to watch the next YouTube video for more information on the topic

Go back to the Blog

Data Integrity in Pharmaceutical Development – The Pillar of Trust

In pharmaceutical startups, expertise often centers on the science and innovation needed to bring products to life, leaving peripheral but critical activities—like data integrity (DI)—underprioritized. While DI is widely acknowledged as essential, many founders and teams struggle to understand the expectations and tools available to meet them. Let’s break down why DI matters, its core principles, and how startups can integrate it seamlessly into their operations.

What is Data Integrity?

At its core, data integrity ensures “the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” This principle plays a pivotal role in distinguishing between original and raw data, as highlighted in the webinars. Original data refers to the certified copies or initial records necessary for reconstructing findings, such as signed case report forms or instrument outputs. On the other hand, raw data includes unprocessed readings or observations directly from laboratory instruments. For example, in one instance shared during the series, raw data from a laboratory’s pH meter had to be meticulously validated and preserved as source data to ensure its reliability for future analysis and regulatory submissions. It signifies the extent to which your data can be trusted. Reliable data must be complete, consistent, and accurate at every stage—from generation and processing to storage and eventual archiving.

Regulatory bodies like the FDA, EMA, and MHRA mandate adherence to DI principles. Their guidelines emphasize robust data management systems, good documentation practices, and cultivating a culture where employees value DI. Many startups turn to biopharma regulatory consulting to help them navigate these complex requirements and ensure compliance from the outset.

Why is Data Integrity Critical?

Data is the lifeblood of pharmaceutical development. Consider these critical aspects:

  1. Regulatory Submissions: Data integrity is foundational for regulatory approvals. A single error could result in rejections or costly delays.
  2. Investor Confidence: Startups thrive on investment, and reliable data builds trust with investors who assess risk based on your records.
  3. Operational Efficiency: Solid data practices prevent errors, reduce redundancies, and save valuable time and resources.

This focus on DI must extend beyond internal systems to include external partners. In one case, a CDMO’s failure to maintain proper source data caused delays during a client’s regulatory submission. The regulatory burden is shared, and startups must ensure all collaborators meet the same high standards.

One key aspect of preparedness is inspection readiness. Regulatory agencies may conduct audits at any time, and companies must be equipped to demonstrate compliance. This requires proactive planning, robust documentation, and continuous training to ensure data integrity is maintained across all operations.

The ALCOA+ Principles

To ensure reliable data, startups must adhere to the ALCOA+ principles:

  • Attributable: Know who generated the data.
  • Legible: Ensure data is easy to read and understand.
  • Contemporaneous: Record data at the time of its generation.
  • Original: Preserve the initial data or its verified true copies.
  • Accurate: Data must reflect reality without distortion.

The “plus” expands these principles to include completeness, consistency, enduring accessibility, and availability on demand.

Embedding DI into Your Operations

Here’s how startups can prioritize DI:

  • Train Your Team: Ensure all staff understand their role in maintaining DI. Insufficient training often leads to compliance gaps, such as employees unintentionally bypassing controls. During a recent audit, untrained staff ignored system alerts, emphasizing the need for structured DI training.
  • Validate Systems: Confirm all computerized systems adhere to regulatory requirements. A client’s use of a hybrid approach combining paper and electronic systems highlights the importance of defining interim solutions while planning long-term upgrades. One startup implemented a Windows-based workaround for an outdated system, leveraging built-in access controls and logs as an interim compliance measure.
  • Audit Regularly: Conduct internal and external audits to identify and address gaps.
  • Document Thoroughly: Maintain detailed records that demonstrate adherence to DI principles.

In today’s highly regulated pharmaceutical landscape, data integrity is non-negotiable. It’s not just about compliance; it’s about building a foundation of trust that supports innovation, growth, and, ultimately, better patient outcomes. This article is the first in a four-part series designed to help startups navigate the complexities of data integrity, ensuring they meet regulatory demands while building robust operational frameworks.

You are invited to watch the next YouTube video for more information on the topic

Go back to the Blog

The Crucial Role of Strict Adherence to aseptic processing in Pharmaceutical Manufacturing

In the highly regulated pharmaceutical and biotech industries, the quality and safety of products are paramount. Particularly in the production of injectable drugs, strict adherence to aseptic operations is not just best practice—it’s a necessity. Operators in these facilities are tasked with the vital role of ensuring that every phase of the manufacturing process is executed flawlessly to prevent contamination and ensure patient safety. This article highlights the essential practices that operators must follow and outlines the potential risks of non-compliance.

Following Strict Hygiene Practices

Hygiene is the cornerstone of preventing contamination in pharmaceutical manufacturing. Operators are required to engage in stringent hygiene practices, including:

  • Thorough handwashing: Ensuring hands are meticulously cleaned reduces the risk of introducing microbial contaminants.
  • Wearing sterile clothing: Sterile gowns, gloves, and masks must be worn at all times to create a barrier against potential contaminants.
  • Frequent disinfection of gloves and changing them when contamination risks are detected helps maintain a sterile environment.

Failure to adhere to these hygiene practices can lead to microbial contamination, which may compromise the safety and effectiveness of the pharmaceutical products.

Maintaining a Clean Work Environment

A clean and organized work environment is crucial for minimizing the introduction of contaminants. Operators must ensure:

  • No accumulation of substances, such as drips during pipetting, which can become a source of contamination.
  • Workspaces like Laminar Air Flow (LAF) stations are not overcrowded, as cramped conditions can hinder proper aseptic techniques.

Ignoring these guidelines can lead to environmental contamination, putting entire production batches at risk.

Handling Materials Properly

Proper handling of materials and equipment is essential to maintain aseptic conditions:

  • Using sterilized tools and ensuring that all raw materials are stored appropriately prevents the introduction of contaminants into the manufacturing process.
  • Careful handling of sensitive materials avoids accidental exposure to potential contaminants.

Mistakes in material handling can result in contamination, leading to significant losses in both time and resources, and in severe cases, product recall.

Executing Procedures with Precision

Operators are expected to follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) with precision:

  • Accurate execution of each step in the manufacturing process ensures consistency and quality.
  • Regular monitoring of equipment for cleanliness and functionality helps identify and address potential issues before they affect the product.

Deviations from SOPs can cause inconsistencies in product quality and may lead to regulatory violations.

Reporting Anomalies

Prompt reporting of any deviations from standard procedures or unexpected observations is critical:

  • This allows for immediate corrective actions and helps maintain the integrity of the manufacturing process.
  • Operate without adequate training: Operators should never perform tasks without the necessary training, as this increases the risk of errors.

Not reporting issues can result in unnoticed contaminations, affecting entire batches and potentially harming patients.

Prioritizing Safety

Safety must always be a priority:

  • Operators must adhere to all safety protocols, wear appropriate protective gear, and correctly use equipment.
  • Ignoring safety precautions not only endangers the operator but can also lead to accidents and contamination incidents.

Failure to maintain safety standards can lead to injuries and compromises in the plant’s aseptic operations, resulting in downtime and financial loss.

Training and Continuous Improvement

Operators who feel they need to improve their understanding of these critical aspects can benefit from specialized training courses. These courses provide hands-on experience and step-by-step guidance on crucial practices, such as gowning, material handling, and procedural execution, which are fundamental to maintaining aseptic conditions in pharmaceutical manufacturing.

For those interested in enhancing their skills in quality assurance in healthcare and pharmaceutical projects, more information can be found at https://adres.bio/lp-scinai-course/

Operators who feel they need to improve their understanding of these critical aspects can benefit from pharma regulatory consulting. EMA and FDA regulatory consulting can guide you in all relevant requirements and provide training. Contact us for more information.

Your gateway to mastering aseptic operations: An exclusive hands-on course for pharmaceutical and biotech professionals.

Master the critical aspects of aseptic operations, with theory and practical sessions led by pharma industry experts in Scinai’s state-of-the-art facility.

This course is led by Scinai and ADRES and includes lectures by Ministry of Health officials.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to reach out to us at https://adres.bio/contact-us.

Go back to the Blog

Biosimilars: Regulatory, Quality, and Manufacturing Excellence

At ADRES, we specialize quality assurance in healthcare and guiding companies through the intricate journey of biosimilar development.

Our expertise in Regulatory Affairs (RA), Quality Assurance (QA), and Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CMC) positions us uniquely to support biosimilar projects.

Regulatory Affairs: 

Navigating the complex regulatory landscape is crucial for biosimilar development success. 
We provide strategic regulatory planning, dossier preparation, and liaise with regulatory bodies, ensuring compliance with the stringent standards for biosimilars.

Quality Assurance: 

Biosimilars development require meticulous QA processes. Our team ensures the highest quality standards are met, from development to market. 
We implement robust quality systems, conduct audits, and ensure continuous quality improvement, aligning with global regulatory requirements.

Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls: 

The manufacturing of biosimilars demands precision. We assist in developing and optimizing manufacturing processes, ensuring scalability and cost-effectiveness. 
Our CMC expertise covers process development, validation, and technology transfer, ensuring consistent and high-quality biosimilar production.

For biosimilar developers, partnering with ADRES International means gaining a trusted ally, committed to excellence and success in bringing your biosimilar products to market.

Connect us, Let’s innovate together for a healthier future.


Go back to the Blog

Unlocking Biotech Valuation: Orphan Drug Impact & Regulatory Compliance

By: Lital Israeli Yagev

Nurexone has recently been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA for their groundbreaking treatment in Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) and is now seeking the same designation in the European Union.

💡 Why does this matter? 

Orphan Drug Designation is more than just a regulatory affairs consulting milestone. It’s a gateway to valuable incentives including tax credits, waived fees, and most importantly, exclusive marketing rights for a significant period upon approval. This not only accelerates the path to market but also enhances the commercial potential of innovative treatments.

📈 Reflecting the market’s confidence, 

Nurexone’s stock surged an impressive 78%, underscoring the positive impact of Orphan Drug Designation on biotech firms. This trend aligns with recent studies, showing that such designations can lead to substantial increases in company valuations, driven by the promising outlook of their pipeline.

At ADRES, we understand the intricacies and the immense value of Orphan Drug Designations.

Our expert regulatory consulting team has a proven track record in navigating this complex landscape, offering strategic guidance and comprehensive support to secure these designations in the US and EU. Whether it’s crafting compelling applications or articulating a strong scientific rationale, we’re here to turn challenges into opportunities.

Looking to explore how Orphan Drug Designation can transform your biotech venture? Connect us, Let’s innovate together for a healthier future.

Go back to the Blog

ניווט במבוך הרגולטורי: מדוע סטארט-אפים ביוטכנולוגיים בוחרים במומחיות חיצונית

בתעשיית הביוטק המתפתחת במהירות, חברות סטרטאפ ניצבות בפני אתגרים רבים, החל מהמורכבות של פיתוח מוצרים ועד לניווט במבוך של דרישות רגולטוריות.

בכל הקשור לאתגר הרגולטורי, הדרך סלולה בצמתים, מכשולים והתלבטויות. וכל מפנה מוטעה יכול להוביל לעיכובים משמעותיים בלוחות הזמנים והוצאת תקציבים גדולים יותר מהמתוכנן.

בלא מעט מקרים, ייעוץ רגולטורי לא רק יכול לסלול את הדרך לתהליכי אישור חלקים יותר, אלא גם להבטיח עמידה בתקנים גלובליים, ובסופו של דבר חוסכות זמן ומשאבים.

בכתבה זו נכיר את האתגרים המרכזיים עימם מתמודדים סטארטפים בתחום הביוטק ונתמקד בערך שטמון בייעוץ רגולטורי ממוקדד כפתרון שמייעל, חוסך משאבים ומקצר תהליכים עבור אותן חברות.

האתגרים שעומדים בפני חברות סטארט-אפ ביוטכנולוגיות

חברות סטארט-אפ ביוטכנולוגיות יוצאות למסע מלא פוטנציאל אך גם עמוס מכשולים.

אחד האתגרים הראשונים שהן נתקלות בהם הוא היכולת להפוך קונספט טיפולי למוצר בר-קיימא. טרנספורמציה זו דורשת הבנה מעמיקה לא רק של הרקע המדעי העומד מאחורי הטכנולוגיה אלא גם שליטה בנבכי הרגולציה. הנתיב ממחקרים פרה-קליניים לניסויים קליניים ולבסוף לאישור שיווק ומכירה הוא מורכב ומלא בתקנים רגולטוריים מחמירים שמטרתם להבטיח את בטיחות המוצר ויעילותו ויכולים להיות סבוכים מאד.

יתר על כן, חברות סטארט-אפ מתמודדות לעתים קרובות עם משאבים מוגבלים, הן מבחינת מימון והן מבחינת מומחיות. העלויות הגבוהות הכרוכות במחקר, פיתוח וביצוע התאמות רגולטורית יכולות למתוח את התקציבים עד קצה גבול היכולת. בנוסף, הצורך להישאר מעודכנים בדרישות רגולטוריות המשתנות כל הזמן במדינות שונות מוסיף שכבה נוספת של מורכבות. אתגרים אלה מדגישים את החשיבות של תכנון אסטרטגי, שילוב ייעוץ רגולטורי בשלבים מוקדמים וניהול משאבים כדי לשמור על תהליך הפיתוח על המסלול מבלי להתפשר על התוצאה הסופית.

אז מה היתרון בבחירת ייעוץ רגולטורי?

באילו מצבים רצוי לתעדף ייעוץ רגולטורי חיצוני ומה היתרונות של ייעוץ כזה ?

  1. עלות מול יעילות: שכירת יועץ רגולטורי במשרה מלאה עשוי להיות מהלך יקר, במיוחד עבור סטארטאפים עם תקציב מוגבל. יועצים חיצוניים יכולים להיות חסכוניים יותר, מכיוון שהם נשכרים בדרך כלל על בסיס פרויקט.
  2. מומחיות מותאמת לצרכים: ליועצי רגולציה יש לרוב ידע מיוחד בתחומי רגולציה ספציפיים. סטארטאפים יכולים לבחור יועצים בעלי מומחיות התואמת את הצרכים הספציפיים שלהם, במקום להעסיק עובד במשרה מלאה שאולי אין לו את אותה רמת מומחיות.
  3. גמישות: יועץ חיצוני יכול להצטרף לתקופות הרלוונטיות לפי הצורך, דבר המאפשר לחברה להסתגל לדרישות הרגולטוריות המשתנות ללא התחייבות של עובד במשרה מלאה.
  4. רשת ומשאבים: ליועצים מנוסים יש בדרך כלל רשת של אנשי קשר ומשאבים שיכולים להועיל לסטארט-אפים המנווטים בנוף הרגולטורי ולחסוך לא מעט כאב ראש.

בעוד שהעסקת מומחה רגולטורי במשרה מלאה עשויה להתאים לחברות סטארט-אפ מסוימות, ייעוץ חיצוני יכול להציע פתרון גמיש יותר, חסכוני ומיוחד יותר עבור חברות ביוטק רבות בשלב מוקדם.

ADRES מלווה חברות ביוטק משלב הרעיון ועד ליציאה לשוק

ADRES חברה העוסקת בייעוץ רגולטורי לחברות ביוטכנולוגיות, הוקמה על ידי רבקה זייבל, יועצת רגולטורית עם יותר מ-35 שנות נסיון בתחום. על ידי מתן שירותי ייעוץ מקיפים המכסים כל שלב במחזור הפיתוח, ADRES מבטיחה שחברות סטארט-אפ יקבלו את ההדרכה והמומחיות הדרושות כדי לעבור בהצלחה מהרעיון לשוק. תמיכה זו כוללת התאמות רגולטורית, הבטחת איכות, ניהול תוכנית קלינית ואף ייעוץ לתהליכי ייצור.

בשלבים המוקדמים של הפיתוח, ADRES עוזרת לחברות סטארט-אפ לזהות ולארגן לפי סדר עדיפויות את השלבים הקריטיים כדי להפוך את החזון שלהן למציאות. זה כולל תכנון מחקרים טרום-קליניים שמבטיחים תנאי בטיחות רלוונטיים ועומדים בציפיות הרגולטוריות הגלובליות.

ככל שהמוצרים מתקדמים לעבר ניסויים קליניים, המומחיות של ADRES הופכת לחיונית יותר ויותר. זה כולל ניהול אינטראקציות עם רשויות רגולטוריות גלובליות, הכנת תיעוד להוכחת יעילות ובטיחות של מוצר, והבטחה שכל הנתונים והידע שנצברו תומכים באישור המוצר.

תפקידה של ADRES הוא הרבה מעבר לניווט בדרישות משפטיות ורגולטוריות בלבד; הוא כולל הגנה על חברות מפני עיכובים תוך עמידה בתכנון התקציב. בזכות הנסיון והמומחיות הרבה בתחום, ADRES יוצרת מערכת תמיכה ייעוצית שעוזרת לחברות סטארט-אפ לקצר משמעותית תהליכים רגולטורים סבוכים ומגדילה את הסבירות שחברות סטארט-אפ בתחום הביוטק יגיעו למטרה הסופית שלהן: הבאת מוצרים חדשניים לשוק.

יש לכם שאלה? רוצים להתייעץ? צרו קשר ונחזור אליכם.

Go back to the Blog

Regulatory Consultation for Global Biotech Expansion

Expanding your biotech venture globally is an exciting journey. However, it comes with its own set of challenges, especially when it comes to navigating international regulations. This is where regulatory consultation becomes crucial. Let’s explore how it can facilitate your global expansion.

Navigating International Biotech Regulations

Each country has its own regulatory landscape, making international expansion a complex process. Understanding these diverse regulations is key to a successful global presence. Biopharma regulatory consulting can provide the expertise needed to navigate these complexities. They help ensure that your products meet the standards of each market you enter.

Strategies for Entering New Markets

Entering new markets requires a well-thought-out strategy. Start by researching the regulatory requirements of your target markets. Then, develop a plan that aligns with these regulations while considering cultural and market differences. Regulatory consultants can offer valuable insights into local regulations and help you tailor your approach accordingly.

Case Studies: Successful Global Expansions

Many biotech companies have successfully expanded globally with the help of regulatory consultation. For example, a biotech firm looking to enter the European market might partner with a consultancy like ADRES. With their expertise, the company can navigate the EU’s regulatory landscape, ensuring a smooth market entry and compliance with local standards.

Tips for Working with International Regulatory Bodies

Working with international regulatory bodies can be daunting. Here are some tips to make the process smoother:

  • Understand the Local Regulatory Framework: Each country has its own set of rules. Make sure you have a clear understanding of these regulations.
  • Build Relationships: Establishing a good rapport with regulatory bodies can facilitate smoother interactions and negotiations.
  • Stay Informed: Regulations can change. Keep yourself updated on any changes in the regulatory landscape.
  • Seek Expert Guidance: Regulatory consultants can provide invaluable support in navigating international regulations and liaising with regulatory bodies.

In conclusion, regulatory consultation is a vital component of global biotech expansion. It provides the expertise needed to navigate the complex landscape of international regulations, ensuring that your venture can successfully enter new markets and thrive on a global scale. By following these tips and leveraging the knowledge of regulatory consultants, you can set your biotech company up for international success.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to reach out to us at https://adres.bio/contact-us.

Go back to the Blog

𝐇𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐃𝐀’𝐬 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐅𝐚𝐬𝐭-𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐁𝐢𝐨𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 – (Biopharma Regulatory Consulting)

Authored by Lital Israeli Yagev

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has always been pivotal in drug and biopharmaceutical development. With the enactment of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) VII for the period 2023-2027, the FDA has introduced innovative measures that promise to revolutionize the way biopharmaceutical developers communicate with the agency, potentially fast-tracking the development process.

One of the main introductions under PDUFA VII is the expansion of the INTERACT meeting program. Originally, this program was designed to offer early advice on various aspects such as toxicology, proof-of-concept, biodistribution study design, Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (more on CMC regulatory affairs) issues, and first-in-human trials, primarily in collaboration with the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). Now, this program has extended its reach to include similar engagements with the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). This expansion is a significant boon for developers of complex pharmaceuticals, particularly at stages where clear guideline documents may not be readily available. By engaging with the FDA in these early stages, developers can gain invaluable insights and guidance, smoothing the path for their innovative products and the opportunity for another biopharma regulatory consulting free consultation with the FDA, as part of the Pre-IND meeting for a later stage.

Adres operates as a regulatory affairs consulting specializing in regulatory affairs, Medical QA and CMC. Navigating the intricate crossroads of innovation and regulation can be daunting, and securing professional advice is not merely advantageous—it is imperative.
We encourage you to seek assistance without reservation. We are here for you incase you have questions. Come pick our brains!

In addition to the INTERACT meetings, the FDA has introduced a new Type D meeting. This meeting format is designed to accelerate feedback from the agency on a narrow set of issues, limited to two focused topics. The unique aspect of this meeting type is its efficiency and specificity, involving only a few associated questions and the participation of no more than three disciplines within the FDA. What makes Type D meetings particularly appealing is the FDA’s  commitment to providing response to meeting request within 14 days and written response within 50 calendar days. This rapid turnaround  enables developers to receive timely feedback and make quicker decisions in their development process.

These new communication routes under PDUFA VII represent a significant step forward in the FDA’s approach to supporting drug and biopharmaceutical development. By offering more structured and timely interactions, the FDA acknowledges the complexities of modern pharmaceutical development and actively works to facilitate and expedite these processes.


The FDA’s new communication measures under PDUFA VII mark a pivotal shift in the landscape of biopharmaceutical development. By embracing these opportunities, developers can navigate the regulatory process more efficiently, bringing their groundbreaking treatments to the market faster than ever before.

Don’t hesitate to reach out for support. Remember, in this journey, you’re not alone. Feel free to contact us and pick our minds.

Go back to the Blog
Skip to content