Regulatory Open Forum

 View Only
  • 1.  FDA 483

    Posted 17-May-2018 07:51

    Hi,

     

    If the inspector has finished the audit, issued the 483s , however requires additional non-conformities to be met through an email correspondence , does it imply it's a 483 and should be actioned accordingly with the other 483s or   should we respond to this requirement asap before the 483 responses to avoid one ?

     

    Thanks & Regards,

     

    Rashmi Pillay
    Regulatory Affairs Associate


    Ellex 

    3-4 Second Avenue

    Mawson Lakes SA, 5095

     

    T + 61 8 7074 8105
    rpillay@ellex.com

    W ellex.com

    .............................................................................
     
    One Powerful Vision.

    Confidentiality: This e-mail is from Ellex Medical Pty Ltd, ABN 35 008 276 060. The contents are confidential and intended only for the named recipient of this e-mail. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any use, reproduction, disclosure or distribution of the information contained in the e-mail is prohibited. Viruses: Any loss/damage incurred by using this material is not the sender's responsibility. No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus or other defect. Ellex Medical Pty Ltd entire liability will be limited to resupplying the material. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to us immediately and delete the document. 

     



     



  • 2.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 17-May-2018 14:10
    The inspector has already finished the audit/inspection so normally it's "too late" to "informally fix" anything they have already found. Anything fixed during the audit is usually included in the FDA inspection report as XX has been addressed during the audit.

    First of all, there should be a procedure on how to address audit non-conformities and how it leads to a CAPA. The FDA inspector would expect that the CAPA procedure and this audit procedure should be followed (inspector most likely read those procedures). If it is not, it could be construed as another non-conformity finding. Normally the proper course of action is to open up a corrective action report per whatever the non-conformity cited. Copies of the signed CAR, even if it's in process, is sent over with accompanying objective evidence attached to it.

    Hope that helps,

    ------------------------------
    Clarisa Tate
    VP, Product Development and Regulatory Affairs
    Medical Devices Professional, RA/QA/Engineering
    Bay Area, CA
    USA
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 18-May-2018 02:23
    Rashmi,

    I do not understand what you mean by: ' additional non-conformities to be met through an email correspondence ' - did you reply to the investigator via email responding to the FDA Form 483 or did the investigator send your organisation additional non-conformities via email after the audit?  I realise that both of these instances may be normal these days using technology and email, but both means are inappropriate.

    First, asking for clarification from the investigator via email on Form 483 observations is fine, but that should have all been done at the closing meeting before the investigator left.  You should formally respond to the Form 483 within 15 days to your local FDA office.  Second, only non-conformities on Form 483 are observations via "official record" for the FDA.  So if the investigator was sending additional information via email, this is a new one to me and is definitely not appropriate.  (If that is the case, I would definitely get clarification from the local FDA office.)

    ------------------------------
    Richard Vincins RAC
    Vice President Regulatory Affairs
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 18-May-2018 02:31
    Richard,
    ​Additional requirements from the inspector after the audit through email .

    ------------------------------
    RashmiAdelaideAustralia
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 18-May-2018 16:29
    This is something different from traditional inspection procedure. 

    FDA used to keep all the 483s in written records for companies to follow and can be pulled out for reference in future  inspection.

    You should definitely contact the person/inspector who e-mailed you for any specific deficiency/information and get clarification for responding time line and responding authority that where and when to submit the response they may have requested. Do this at your earliest to save time.

    ------------------------------
    Gaurang Bhavsar, MS, RAC
    Manager, R&D and RA
    Sunrise Pharmaceutical, Inc.
    Rahway, NJ 07065
    USA
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 20-May-2018 08:12
    Was this inspection done in Australia being a foreign establishment inspection or was at your facility in the United States?

    This is indeed something I have not heard before even for a foreign establishment inspection.  Also does not seem correct to me.  I would definitely contact the office in Washington D.C. (as a foreign establishment inspection) to gain clarification before submitting anything to the FDA investigator.  When they conclude an inspection, issuance of Form 483 is done at that time for observations, I find it highly un-orthodox (and maybe not legal) that an investigator is issuing non-conformities via email after the inspection is concluded.

    ------------------------------
    Richard Vincins RAC
    Vice President Regulatory Affairs
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: FDA 483

    Posted 21-May-2018 12:27
    Hi,

    You should ask to either amend the 483 or to prioritize the list. It is quite seldom for an inspector to add items after a 483 is issued. You should submit the response within the 10 - 15 days and you can always <g class="gr_ gr_8 gr-alert gr_gramm gr_inline_cards gr_disable_anim_appear Style multiReplace" id="8" data-gr-id="8">amend / send</g> additional responses. However, make sure that all observations have been recorded. Otherwise, you don't want a surprise where the agency could indicate lack of compliance because of amendments made but not recorded in the 483.

    ------------------------------
    [Robert] [Falcone]
    [Integris3Biosolutions]
    [Bedminster] [NJ]
    [US]
    ------------------------------