Close

Nucleome Unveils South Asia’s Largest and Most Advanced Genomics Research Centre; To Sequence 5000 COVID Genomes

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

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...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...
- Advertisement -

In a move that will mark the beginning of a new era in India’s genomics capability, Nucleome Informatics today unveiled South Asia’s largest and most advanced genomics facility, NKC Centre for Genomics Research in Hyderabad. The laboratory will carry out the latest third-generation sequencing and play a critical role in fighting the pandemic by sequencing 5000 COVID genomes and 500 human genomes. The laboratory, established in the memory of the late 6-time Member of the Parliament from Khandwa, Shri Nand Kumar Singh Chauhan, will also play a role in upping India’s potential in agriculture, animal husbandry, and personalised / precision medicine, among others.

Hon’ble Minister of Defence, Shri Rajnath Singh along with Hon’ble Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Shri Shivraj Chauhan today inaugurated the state-of-the-art laboratory at a formal ceremony held at Le Meridien in the presence of Shri Dushyant Singh Baghel, MD and CEO, Nucleome Informatics. Hon’ble Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, Prof K Vijay Raghavan also attended the event.

“We are celebrating 75 years of independence and Information technology in the 90s took us to great heights. I believe genomics is the sunrise sector of the 21st century which will play an important role. Next generation sequencing can bring revolution in biological sciences and unprecedented progress to society. In view of climate change and COVID’s impact on people, genome sequencing can increase productivity and help healthcare – COVID genome sequencing is trying to find out that part of the virus’s DNA that does not change, which will contribute to vaccine development. I have been informed that the centre will sequence 5000 COVID genomes and 500 human genomes for healthcare,” said Hon’ble Minister of Defence, Shri Rajnath Singh.

“India is committed to doubling farmer’s income which will require an increase in productivity, reducing input cost and loss of crop, and right price of the crop. Agrigenomics can help in increasing productivity, reducing input cost, and increasing resistance to disease. I am sure that agrigenomics will become important and useful for addressing challenges of Indian agriculture and doubling farmers’ income,” said Hon’ble Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Shri Shivraj Chauhan.

“The laboratory is an extraordinary feat and I congratulate Nucleome for this ambitious effort even while remaining connected to the root. This is a remarkable achievement of science and technology and these problem-solving approaches should be done at scale. I am impressed with the technology put in place and will look forward to its implementation,” said Hon’ble Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India, Prof K Vijay Raghavan.

“Since inception, Nucleome has contributed to the fields of agrigenomics, animal husbandry and wildlife conservation. The Nand Kumar Chauhan Centre for Genomics Research is our tribute to the late Khandwa MP’s relentless service to the people. It was his continuous support and morale-boosting that motivated us to abandon the idea of moving the venture to San Diego, the US and to continue in India. The next NKC Centre for Genomics will be at Indore. With the addition of NovaSeq 6000 (the world’s largest short-read sequencing) and GeneTitan platforms, the laboratory will play a critical role in expanding the scope of our in-house services and allow seamless cross-platform services. We will soon begin to provide our in-house DrSeq suite of predictive genomics products in healthcare to analyse the data of RNA sequencing – we expect this will improve the understanding and uptake of personalized / precision medicine in India,” said Shri Dushyant Singh Baghel, MD and CEO, Nucleome Informatics.

Other Guests of Honour at the inauguration were National General Secretary, Bharatiya Janata Party, Shri Kailash Vijayvargiya, Rajya Sabha MPs Shri Rajendra Gehlot and Shri Ajay Pratap Singh as well as Hon’ble Secretary, Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Dr Renu Swarup, Hon’ble Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying, Shri Atul Chaturvedi, and Shri Jayesh Ranjan, Hon’ble Principal Secretary of Departments of the Industries & Commerce (I&C) and Information Technology (IT), Government of Telangana.

In 2020, Nucleome was the first laboratory in South Asia to procure the third-generation long-read sequencing platform Sequel II from PacBio. Nucleome became the first Indian organization to partner in the prestigious multinational Vertebrate Genome Project of the G10K Consortium.

About Nucleome:

Nucleome started its journey as a genomics research service provider in 2013 and became India’s Top ten Life science solution provider and Asia’s top 20 biotechnology laboratory based in Hyderabad by 2016. It offers genomics and bioinformatics research services to the government and private research institutions. Every year since its inception has been a milestone year for Nucleome Informatics Pvt. Ltd.

ucleome’s operations that started in Hyderabad in 2013 received its ISO certification in 2014. Since it became an MSME in 2015, Nucleome was rated one of India’s 20 Most Promising Pharma & Life Science Technology Solution Provider Companies 2016 (CIO Review), ranked one among the 10 Most Recommended Pharma & Life Sciences Solution providers in 2018 (Insight success), awarded the Knowledge partner of Research and Innovation Circle of Hyderabad in 2018, recognized as The Noteworthy Biotech and Pharma company (Business APAC) in 2019.

Thanks to more than 150 satisfied clients, this laboratory has finished >1000 projects, >100 species sequenced, and >750Tb data analyzed in less than a decade. True to its mission to serve our clients with the best possible solution, we offer various services across technology platforms. Nucleome has completed several large genomes of Cow, buffalo, Mithun, tiger, swamp buffalo, snow leopard, Indian wild dog, insects and plants.

Nucleome was the chosen service provider for the World Bank-funded WGS project to sequence 200 bovine animals. The lab, along with the wildlife institute of India, sequenced the genome of Great Indian Bustard and helping the scientist in genomics conservation of this critically endangered bird. Nucleome is currently conducting an Indo-Korean joint project under GITA of the Government of India to research and develop disease-specific markers for Inherited Retinal Disorders. The project is jointly funded by the department of science and technology, India and the Ministry of Science, South Korea.

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

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...

What Goes Into Synthetic Urine? The Chemistry Behind Replicating a Biological Fluid

Synthetic urine sounds simple until you look closely at...

Danaher Prepares to Introduce Advanced AI-Powered Laboratory

In a significant step for pharmaceutical research, Danaher has...

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 »