Understanding FDA Auditing Practices and the Top 10 Most Common Cited Drug GMP Deficiencies for 2015-2016
View: 114
Website http://bit.ly/2oBcWxj |
Edit Freely
Category cgmp manufacturing, cgmp training, cgmp webinar, fda cgmp compliance, fda gmp compliance, fda gmp training
Deadline: May 16, 2017 | Date: May 16, 2017
Venue/Country: NY, U.S.A
Updated: 2017-04-25 15:41:42 (GMT+9)
Call For Papers - CFP
Overview:The success of getting through any audit by federal regulators and third party auditors is not only dependent on a well prepared training of all staff and department employees, but also in knowing what the focus has been of recent inspections within the industry. Such information provides a template for companies to look closely at their own practices in helping to assure similar findings are adequately addressed. In addition, as the audit techniques of the FDA have changed over the years, knowing what to expect can help establish a focused training program as part of the preparation.This FDA GMP compliance webinar is considered to provide a basic level of information relative to FDA auditing practices and expectations. It will also help companies to understand the most common areas of deficiencies as they apply to drug manufacturers.Why Should You Attend:This webinar will look as changes in the FDA’s approach to audits and the current method used by the agency to determine audit frequencies by using a system of “risk assessments”. The top 10 most cited GMP deficiencies for drug manufacturers for the last year (2015-2016) will be reviewed along with the significant increase in the number of warning letters issued over the last 4 years. Knowing how best to address 483 observations is also part of successfully avoiding potential warning letters. Actual case examples will be used to highlight various points discussed and attendees will get a chance to ask questions throughout the presentation.Areas Covered in this Webinar:Changes in FDA audit approachesMost common cited GMP drug deficiencies for 2015-2016Increase in FDA enforcement actionsHow best to address FDA 483 observations when received.Learning Objectives:This webinar will provide the attendees with a better understanding of the current audit techniques used by the FDA and how they have changed over the years. In addition, areas of increased regulatory scrutiny will also be discussed such as data integrity issues and how best to address 483 observations given upon completion of an audit. Additionally, the webinar will provide an overview that companies can use to evaluate their own state of compliance by knowing what have been the most common cited drug manufacturing GMP deficiencies over the last several years.Who Will Benefit:Quality AssuranceQuality ControlManufacturingProductionRegulatoryLaboratory PersonnelManagementEquipment vendorsSpeaker Profile:Kenneth Christie has over 30 years of sterile manufacturing and regulatory GMP consulting experience in the areas of Quality Assurance and Validation Management in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. Mr. Christie is currently the Chief Operating Officer for VTS Consultants, Inc. located in Amherst, MA. Specifically, his responsibilities include quality system auditing, GMP training, and serving as a subject matter expert for aseptic manufacturing processes, equipment and utilities, medical devices, and solid dosage processes on a global basis. Mr. Christie also performs vendor audits, site pre-approval inspections and assists clients with addressing and correcting regulatory observations.For more detail please click on this below link:http://bit.ly/2oBcWxjEmail: referralscomplianceglobal.usToll Free: +1-844-746-4244Tel: +1-516-900-5515Fax: +1-516-900-5510
Keywords: Accepted papers list. Acceptance Rate. EI Compendex. Engineering Index. ISTP index. ISI index. Impact Factor.
Disclaimer: ourGlocal is an open academical resource system, which anyone can edit or update. Usually, journal information updated by us, journal managers or others. So the information is old or wrong now. Specially, impact factor is changing every year. Even it was correct when updated, it may have been changed now. So please go to Thomson Reuters to confirm latest value about Journal impact factor.