Compliance to Brazil GMP requirements

SGquality

Quite Involved in Discussions
#1
Can I get your thoughts on how to proceed for getting compliant to ANVISA Brazil GMP requirements?

We have a quality system complaint to ISO 13485:2016 and 21 CFR Part 820 so what needs to be done to show compliance to ANVISA requirements - being a contract manufacturer, do we just show compliance to the Brazilian Good Manufacturing Practices (RDC ANVISA 16/2013)?

Thank you!
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

AnaMariaVR2

Trusted Information Resource
#2
if your documented quality management system will do its job during an ANVISA audit, then clear
:agree: communication must be critical to its outcome to avoid unnecessary language barrier issues.
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#3
If you are a contract manufacturer, your contractor should be the ones requiring your compliance and clearly defining what you have to comply with.

But yes, you do need to show compliance with the ANVISA RDC 16/2013.

ISO 13485:2016 is much more in line with RDC 16/2013, but there's still some differences. You might USE the MDSAp audit model document to see which additional requirements you must fulfill.
 

Sam Lazzara

Trusted Information Resource
#4
I recently updated my quality system for Brazil compliance. Please keep in mind that my system addresses the comprehensive role played by legal device manufacturers.

High level steps were as follows:

1. Studied all Brazil medical device regulations, not just RDC 16/2013, to determine regulatory requirements applicable to the legal manufacturer role. The MDSAP G0002.1004 Companion Document and Emergo website are good resources for this step, in addition to the ANVISA website.

2. Wrote a Quality Plan that included a gap analysis (impact assessment) in which each Level 1 (Quality Manual) and Level 2 (SOP) document was assessed vs the Brazil requirements.

3. Implemented the Quality Plan. A summary of the changes is shown below.

Quality Manual
2.1 Applicable Documents, External Documents – Added Brazil regulations.
10.6 Brazil RDC 16 versus Quality System Documents – New cross-reference section added.

Quality System Glossary
Added Brazil regulations and associated terms.

Document Change Order (form)
Added “Brazil ANVISA” to RA Impact Analysis section.

Product Complaints SOP
Added section for Reporting of Post-Market Adverse Events to Brazil. Updated hyperlinks in Europe section.

Product Compaint Report (form)
Added Brazil Reporting Analysis section.

Post Market Surveillance SOP
Added Brazil to Regulatory Authority Reporting Requirements section (vis a vis recalls).

Regulatory Requirements and Compliance SOP
Added Brazil regulations and requirements.

There are only a few unique requirements in the Brazil RDC16 GMP as compared to ISO 13485 and FDA 21 CFR 820. Here are some notes I had handy - not sure this is a comprehensive listing.
- chemical waste disposal must be addressed
- purchase orders require signature approval
- analytical methods require validation
- nonconforming product documentation must include risk assessment to support product disposition
- CAPA, explicit mention of determining need for product recall and other field actions

BTW, as I recall, the RDC16 signature requirements are aligned with FDA 820 signature requirements. ISO 13485 does not require signatures. My system already addressed 820 requirements so other than the requirement for purchase order signatures I was fine. In general, I would say the the Brazil GMP is more aligned with FDA 820 than it is with 13485.
 
M

mare1

#5
Dear all,

in our company we had MDSAP audit. Auditor checked our special processes in production which are subjects of walidation. He checked Device history records and he realized that there is no parameters or reference to parameters of special processes. He was referencing to the ANVISA RESOLUTION - RDC No.16 OF MARCH 28, 2013 (please see below). According to this statement, it was a nonconformity.
Auditor claimed that the parameters (temperature, humidity, time,...) of special processes (gluing, welding,soldering, cleaning S,...) for each component shall be written OR referenced in the DHR.
What do you think about it? Do you understand this as a reference to the parameters in the validation for each proces, or do you understand this that each operator will have to record the parameters each time he performs an action and this record should be referenced in the DHR even if the process is validated and equipment is calibrated?

ANVISA RDC statement:
3.2.1. Each manufacturer shall maintain device history records. Each manufacturer shall establish and maintain procedures to ensure that the device history records are kept for each batch or series to demonstrate the products were manufactured according to the device master record and the requirements of this Technical Regulation. The device history record shall contain or make reference to the following information:
3.2.1.1. Manufacture Date;
3.2.1.2. Components used;
3.2.1.3. Quantity manufactured;
3.2.1.4. Results of tests and inspections;
3.2.1.5. Special processes parameters;
3.2.1.6. Quantity released for distribution;
3.2.1.7. Labeling;
3.2.1.8. Identification of serial number or batch of the device; and
3.2.1.9. final release of the device.

Thank you very much,

Best regards
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#6
Dear all,

in our company we had MDSAP audit. Auditor checked our special processes in production which are subjects of walidation. He checked Device history records and he realized that there is no parameters or reference to parameters of special processes. He was referencing to the ANVISA RESOLUTION - RDC No.16 OF MARCH 28, 2013 (please see below). According to this statement, it was a nonconformity.
Auditor claimed that the parameters (temperature, humidity, time,...) of special processes (gluing, welding,soldering, cleaning S,...) for each component shall be written OR referenced in the DHR.
What do you think about it? Do you understand this as a reference to the parameters in the validation for each proces, or do you understand this that each operator will have to record the parameters each time he performs an action and this record should be referenced in the DHR even if the process is validated and equipment is calibrated?

ANVISA RDC statement:
3.2.1. Each manufacturer shall maintain device history records. Each manufacturer shall establish and maintain procedures to ensure that the device history records are kept for each batch or series to demonstrate the products were manufactured according to the device master record and the requirements of this Technical Regulation. The device history record shall contain or make reference to the following information:
3.2.1.1. Manufacture Date;
3.2.1.2. Components used;
3.2.1.3. Quantity manufactured;
3.2.1.4. Results of tests and inspections;
3.2.1.5. Special processes parameters;
3.2.1.6. Quantity released for distribution;
3.2.1.7. Labeling;
3.2.1.8. Identification of serial number or batch of the device; and
3.2.1.9. final release of the device.

Thank you very much,

Best regards
You need to record and reference the parameters in the DHR, even if the process is validated (otherwise, there would be no need to mention the special processes in the DHF requirement, as special processes already need validation).
 
M

mare1

#7
Thank you for your prompt feedback.

For example - in gluing process, there are two parameters that need to be recorded - temperature and time of drying.

What about for hand soldering? Is it only a temperature of soldering iron (the temperature which is stated on the machine)?
 

Marcelo

Inactive Registered Visitor
#8
What about for hand soldering? Is it only a temperature of soldering iron (the temperature which is stated on the machine)?
I have no ideia, because it depends on what you performed during validation. For each validated process, you should have defined parameters. These are the ones to be recorded.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
E Test report to certify compliance with IEC 62304 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 3
E Accredited vs. non-accredited labs for 60601 compliance in the US IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 2
E Accredited vs. non-accredited labs for 60601 compliance in the US Other Medical Device Related Standards 0
M Class II type machine , and its compliance with 60601-1 IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 14
C ISO 14001:2015 6.1.3 Compliance Obligations - Legal requirements monitoring ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 0
H Automotive wires - Compliance with USCAR21-4 & USCAR38-1 Various Other Specifications, Standards, and related Requirements 0
M FULFILMENT of compliance obligation versus COMPLY with compliance obligations ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 2
K ISO 13485 and compliance of electronic signature ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
L Medical device HIPAA compliance in encryption Medical Information Technology, Medical Software and Health Informatics 1
J Strategy for MDR Regulatory Compliance Procedure ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
G Adopting old product - compliance with IEC 62304 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 9
M Advice needed for SEH Compliance Software and ISNETWord Compatabiliy Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 2
D HIPAA, HITECH and Interoperability compliance route Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
A Environmental Compliance obligations and risks (ISO 14001:2015 6.1.3) ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 3
M Tracking Expiration dates on compliance certifications REACH and RoHS Conversations 2
T Training recommendations? Bringing our RoHS and REACH compliance efforts in-house REACH and RoHS Conversations 2
optomist1 Informational Training IMDS - Management of Product Chemical Regulatory Compliance RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 2
G ISO 14001 - 6.1.3 Compliance Obligations ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 1
Ed Panek Compliance with Standards? When a standard is updated/revised CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 3
K IEC 62304 compliance - Code reviews as part of verification strategy IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 5
N Which EN ISO 17664 version compliance to EU MDR? Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 3
N Audit non-compliance API Q1 - Use of External Documents 4.4.4 in Product Realization Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 8
C Compliance with ISO 17025 requirement 8.4.2 - Controls - Records recovery ISO 17025 related Discussions 4
J Management Representative and PRRC (Person Responsible for Regulatory Compliance) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
N Audit non-compliance - API Spec Q1 9th Ed 5.6.1.2 b Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 10
J Interesting Discussion Compliance with regulations in exceptional circumstances EU Medical Device Regulations 5
L Wearables 21 CFR Part 11 compliance Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 1
V Preparing the IFU in compliance with MDR 745, Chapter III EU Medical Device Regulations 2
L AS9146 Implementation and Compliance AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
P MDR PRRC (person responsible for regulatory compliance) and personal liability EU Medical Device Regulations 3
R Foam mattresses used in hospitals - compliance with MDR requirements? EU Medical Device Regulations 6
E Machines in Europe not in compliance with the EC directive CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 0
N EUDAMED postponement and compliance with Article 120 (3) MDR for Legacy Devices EU Medical Device Regulations 8
R Role of quality compliance in SAP Software Quality Assurance 2
E Part 11 Compliance, Excel living documents (i.e. document master list, equipment list, approved supplier list) Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 3
M MDR Legacy Medical Device Labeling compliance timeline EU Medical Device Regulations 3
D Required Checklist Showing Compliance to IEC 62304 IEC 62304 - Medical Device Software Life Cycle Processes 11
D What is the best software used for the pharma compliance management? Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 0
T Rumours that class 1 NS, NM, NR devices will have a new deadline for MDR compliance EU Medical Device Regulations 3
M Informational From RAPS: Danish Regulators Seek to Help Smaller Companies With EU MDR Compliance Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
G ISO 9001 Legal Compliance and Legal Register Requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
Ed Panek Do Cloud services require 21 CFR Part 11 compliance? Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 7
R Certificate of compliance to RoHS/REACH/WEEE - any such animal? REACH and RoHS Conversations 18
Sidney Vianna Interesting Discussion Legal compliance as part of ISO 45001 accredited certification. Major OSHA penalties in the USA. Occupational Health & Safety Management Standards 15
D Control chart applicable? Percentage of compliance with a standard Statistical Analysis Tools, Techniques and SPC 2
J Business Intelligence and 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 1
M Informational US FDA issued the first warning letter for UDI violations to help ensure compliance Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 0
D USFDA vs NRTL/IEC 17025 Differences - Compliance testing lab ISO 17025 related Discussions 0
D USFDA vs NRTL/IEC 17025 Differences - Compliance testing lab US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
I CAP/CLIA Environment - Part 11 Compliance Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom