Close

Interphex to feature strategies and solutions to maximize, innovative and accelerate

Note* - All images used are for editorial and illustrative purposes only and may not originate from the original news provider or associated company.

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...
- Advertisement -

International Pharmaceutical Expo (INTERPHEX), the premier event dedicated to pharmaceutical, biotechnology and device innovation, technology and knowledge from development through commercialization, and the Parenteral Drug Association (PDA), the leading industry provider of science, technology and regulatory information, annually attracts over 10,000 global industry professionals and more than 625 exhibitors to offer solutions to the most pressing development and manufacturing challenges.

Exhibitors representing the full product lifecycle, debut their new and existing equipment and technologies. Attendees are able to investigate the latest cutting-edge technologies they need, understand its functionalities, exchange knowledge and procure on the show floor. Find the solutions you need to develop and manufacture quality product at INTERPHEX, April 28-30, 2020 at the Javits Center in New York, New York.

New for INTERPHEX 2020
Chemspec USA to debut as a co-location at INTERPHEX 2020, providing manufacturers, suppliers, distributors and industry professionals with an opportunity to meet, connect and procure fine, custom and specialty chemicals. For its debut, Chemspec USA will focus on the verticals that have a natural crossover with INTERPHEX such as pharmaceuticals, biologics, agrochemicals and biocatalysts before expanding to the broader categories offered at the highly successful Chemspec Europe event in year two. This launch offers the opportunity to bring a very successful global event to the North America market.

Back by Popular Demand. INNOPHEX, located within the INTERPHEX show floor, is a dedicated space focused specifically on cell processing, gene therapy, stem cell research and Pharma 4.0 among other disruptive technologies. With the strength of the North American gene therapy market and the emergence of Pharma 4.0, INNOPHEX, in collaboration with IPS-Integrated Project Services, offers access to knowledge and solutions to reduce operational costs, increase flexibility and improve processes and productivity in new and innovative ways.

This year, we are pleased to announce the addition of the New Exhibitor Spotlight Zone, debuting to do exactly what its name denotes, highlight exhibitors who are new to INTERPHEX. As an event supported and rooted in innovation, attendees join us to source the latest in the industry. The New Exhibitor Spotlight Zone offers access to innovative manufacturers and equipment suppliers to meet and source.

As a premier industry event, we continually lead the way in showcasing advancements in pharma, bio and device development and manufacturing solutions to develop and manufacture quality product. See Full Exhibitor List here.

More State-of-the-Art Technologies
More industry-leading suppliers have selected INTERPHEX 2020 as the best place to launch state-of-the-art technologies, products and services. Launches offer engineers and key sourcing attendees access to innovation to reduce cost, increase productivity and maximize efficiency. Here is a sampling of leading suppliers launching new technologies, products or services at the show: Aptar #1734, CPC #3635, QURE #3538, CroPharm #2141, KORSCH America #2853, Nova Biomedical #3655, Rubitec AG #3171, Vitronic #3741, BOSCH #3305, Castus #2033, Dara #2353, Datwyler #1543, Dow/Dupont #3811, MG 2/MG America #2221, O’Hara Technologies #3021, Quadro #2741, Gibralter #1757 and LL Bohle #2054 to name a few. Over 150 exhibitors launched new technologies, products or services at INTERPHEX 2019.

More Networking
We value the importance INTERPHEX plays in enabling face to face connections. We are delighted to debut “Industry Insights Block Parties”, powered by INTERPHEX and IPS-Integrated Project Services. Launched last year, our Technology-based Networking Events achieved a 90% satisfaction rating from attendees. This year, we are expending and offering new opportunities to network and connect with colleagues and technical experts regarding specific topics and industry challenges in the form of Block Parties. Additional details coming soon.

More Solutions to Cost Effectively Develop and Manufacture Quality Product
Solutions come in many forms. The INTERPHEX Technical Conference will feature a three-day comprehensive program with noted experts sharing knowledge and insight on key industry themes. This year’s Conference title is “Enabling Companies to Break Down Barriers for New Drug Entities and Facilitate Rapid Market Entry”. Sessions include Car-T Cell, Emerging Delivery Systems, Biosimilars, Terminal Sterilization, Personalized Medicine, Tableting, Continuous Bioprocessing, Cell Processing, Gene Therapy and much more. Separate stages offer dedicated sessions focused on Contract Services, Disruptive Technologies and Formulation and Stability. We are always looking to present new ideas on basic material and look for experts who are pushing the envelope. See Full Schedule here.

We are pleased to announce the debut of ATS Automation Forum #2922, featuring Building Automation and Process Automation Systems in-booth demonstrations. Subject Matter Experts will offer unique perspectives, discussion and sessions covering innovation and challenges with automation, including strategies for life cycle management, process efficiencies and enterprise integrity.

Watch for additional information regarding the highly successful, MG2/MG AMERICA Processing & Packaging Summit, #2221, returning with a new program covering innovation in processing and packaging technologies. Multiple pieces of equipment will be launched at the Show.

Register for INTERPHEX and Chemspec USA today and save by clicking here.

INTERPHEX, taking place April 28-30, 2020 at the Javits Center in New York, New York, has transformed into the premier industry event where more and more manufacturers bringing more equipment, including Bosch Packaging, Cozzoli Machine Company, GE Healthcare, MilliporeSigma, NJM Packaging, O’Hara Technologies, Inc., Optel Group, Optima Pharma GmbH, Quadro Engineering Corp., SKAN US, SMI-Specialty Measurements Inc., and SP Scientific-Virtis/PennTech/Hull/Hotpack.

About INTERPHEX
For 41 years, INTERPHEX has been, and continues to be, the premier pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and device development and manufacturing event where you can “Experience Science through Commercialization.” Sponsored by the Parenteral Drug Association (PDA), the event is based in New York and brings over 10,000 global industry professionals and 625+ industry leading suppliers together to “Learn it, Experience it, Procure it” through a unique combination of exhibits, demonstrations, partnering opportunities, networking and no cost technical conference to leverage quality, efficiency and cost effectiveness in today’s ever-changing global market. INTERPHEX offers annual domestic and international industry events and educational opportunities around the world. INTERPHEX and INNOPHEX together, offer the very latest intelligence, cutting-edge technologies and state-of-the-art innovation throughout the product development life cycle. Follow INTERPHEX on Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, and Twitter. IPX Blog continues the learning beyond the show floor. For more information, visit www.INTERPHEX.com.

 

 

Never miss a pharmaceutical headline

The pharmaceutical industry moves fast – stay on top of it with our must - read briefings.

  • The top pharma and life sciences stories, straight to your inbox
  • The biggest news, features, interviews, and analysis
  • Dedicated coverage of the key developments driving the global pharmaceutical sector

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access the Media Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Latest stories

Related stories

Billerud Introduces New Pharmaceutical Packaging Option

Billerud has officially introduced PharmaKraft, a specialized fibre-based packaging...

AstraZeneca Advances AI Drug Discovery Deal with insitro

AstraZeneca has inked a billion-dollar AI drug discovery partnership...

Managing Quality and Regulatory Risks in Pharmaceutical Technology Transfer

Technology transfer moves more than manufacturing instructions. It moves process knowledge, supplier dependencies, labeling requirements, packaging specifications, and the evidence needed to demonstrate control. For medical device manufacturers, including those supporting drug-device combination products, these interfaces can become recurring sources of compliance gaps during site transitions, acquisitions, and remediation. The central problem is often not a missing procedure. It is a quality system that allows connected activities to change independently. A label revision may be approved while packaging artwork, supplier instructions, or production-system data still reflect an obsolete version. Staying inspection-ready requires manufacturers to manage these dependencies as one controlled system. Why Compliance Gaps Keep Recurring Findings are treated as documentation defects Revising a procedure can resolve an immediate discrepancy without changing the behavior that caused it. If unclear decision rights, weak escalation, or ineffective training remain, the same failure may surface elsewhere. Corrective and preventive action should distinguish the observed finding from its underlying cause and establish how effectiveness will be demonstrated. Ownership is divided across connected functions Quality, Regulatory Affairs, labeling, packaging engineering, operations, suppliers, and digital-system owners often maintain separate workflows. Each team may complete its assigned task while an interface remains uncontrolled. For example, changing an instruction for use can affect packaging configuration, translations, technical documentation, inventory disposition, and release controls. Transitions expose unresolved weaknesses Acquisitions and site transfers can introduce conflicting procedures, incomplete knowledge transfer, or different assumptions about validated processes. Regulatory changes add further demands. When these events coincide with CAPA or change-control backlogs, teams may prioritize administrative closure over risk reduction. Without a coordinated impact assessment, local fixes can create new gaps downstream. Establish the Regulatory Baseline Inspection readiness starts with knowing which requirements apply to the product, activity, and market. Pharmaceutical, device, and combination-product obligations are not interchangeable; transfer planning should identify the applicable requirements rather than assume one quality framework covers every operation. According to FDA’s Quality Management System Regulation overview and FAQs, the QMSR became effective on February 2, 2026, incorporates ISO 13485:2016 by reference, and introduced the updated device inspection process under Compliance Program 7382.850. ISO 13485 certification does not exempt a manufacturer from FDA inspection or guarantee compliance with FDA requirements. For devices marketed in the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2017/745, Annex I, Section 23, provides the primary requirements for information supplied with devices, including labels and instructions for use. Teams should assess the applicable provisions alongside relevant language, product-specific, and market requirements. A labeling review should therefore evaluate required content and consistency with the device’s intended purpose and supporting documentation—not merely artwork accuracy. How to Identify the Real Gaps Begin with a cross-functional assessment that follows actual product and information flows. Select representative transfers, label changes, supplier changes, and CAPAs, then trace each from initiation through implementation and effectiveness review. Map dependencies: Identify affected specifications, suppliers, packaging components, systems, validation activities, and training. Compare records with practice: Check whether approved procedures match what operators and reviewers actually do. Test traceability: Follow a requirement through technical documentation, labeling, production instructions, and release evidence. Examine recurrence: Look for repeated deviations, reopened actions, overdue changes, and findings shared across sites. Assess capacity: Determine whether qualified owners have enough time and authority to complete corrective work. Prioritize gaps by potential patient or user harm, regulatory impact, likelihood of recurrence, and detectability. Document the rationale; an old overdue item is not automatically more important than a newly identified high-risk weakness. Align Quality, Labeling, Packaging, and Change Control Create a coordinated remediation plan with one accountable owner for each action, named contributors, acceptance criteria, and required evidence. Separate immediate containment from systemic correction. Containment might prevent obsolete labels from being issued; correction might redesign approval and implementation controls so obsolete versions cannot return. Use change control as the integration point. Before approval, evaluate effects on regulatory submissions or notifications, technical documentation, supplier controls, packaging performance, validation, electronic master data, inventory, and training. Record both identified impacts and justified decisions that particular activities are unaffected. During technology transfer, define readiness gates before production or release responsibilities move. These should address the transfer of process knowledge, acceptance criteria, receiving-site capability, required qualification or validation, approved documents, and personnel competence. The appropriate evidence depends on the product and process; a generic checklist cannot replace a documented assessment. Finally, verify implementation where the work happens. Confirm that current instructions are available, suppliers received approved requirements, systems contain correct versions, and affected personnel can perform their tasks. A signed approval is not evidence that every downstream change took effect. Mistakes That Undermine Inspection Readiness Closing CAPAs on task completion alone: Effectiveness checks should test whether the underlying failure has been controlled. Updating labels in isolation: Assess packaging, supplier, system, documentation, and inventory consequences. Counting closures instead of evidence: Dashboards need defensible records behind their status indicators. ...

State of API & Peptide CDMO Capacity

Pharmaceutical companies planning peptide or complex small-molecule launches are...

Subscribe

- Never miss a story with notifications

- Gain full access to our premium content

- Browse free from any location or device.

Media Packs

Expand Your Reach With Our Customized Solutions Empowering Your Campaigns To Maximize Your Reach & Drive Real Results!

– Access theMedia Pack Now

– Book a Conference Call

– Leave Message for Us to Get Back

Translate »