The pharmaceutical industry is increasingly embracing risk-based approaches such as the analytical procedure lifecycle approach to enhance analytical procedure management, as highlighted in recent guidelines such as USP <1220> and ICH Q14/Q2(R2). These guidelines emphasize the integration of Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) principles to ensure robust, reliable, and fit-for-purpose analytical procedures throughout the procedure lifecycle.
This course offers a comprehensive overview of the Analytical Procedure Lifecycle (APLC) framework, emphasizing best practices for procedure design, optimisation, and validation including the application of quality risk management principles in analytical procedure management. Key topics include defining Analytical Target Profile (ATP) performance requirements, utilizing enhanced approaches and risk assessment tools (e.g., Design of Experiments (DoE) and modelling tools) for procedure design, performing advanced robustness assessments, and using modelling to establish the Method Operable Design Region (MODR) and develop analytical procedure control strategies.
The course highlights practical approaches, supported by interactive workshops and case studies, to demonstrate the real-world implementation of these concepts for small and large molecules.
For Stage 2, Procedure Performance Qualification, practical interpretation and recommendations for demonstration of the suitability of analytical procedures is provided, including some neglected aspects in the ICH guideline Q2(R2), for example with respect to precision levels, replication strategy for the reportable result, and acceptance criteria, as discussed in the revision of the USP General Information Chapter <1225> “Validation of Analytical Procedures” (November 2025).
The suitability of an analytical procedure has to be ensured whenever applied, i.e. across the whole lifecycle. This is the aim of Stage 3, Ongoing Procedure Performance Verification, including an ongoing program for routine monitoring of analytical performance data (as discussed in the new draft USP-chapter <1221>), and the systematic evaluation of changes with the objective to evaluate regularly the need for continuous improvements. For an efficient systematic monitoring programme, it is important to identify performance-relevant parameters and information, and to understand how to apply monitoring tools (such as control charts) in a pragmatic way.