Latest / DDReg Knowledge Capsule / The Blueprint for Effective Pharmacovigilance SOPs

Transcript

The Blueprint for Effective Pharmacovigilance SOPs · DDReg Knowledge Capsule

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Welcome to DDRAG Knowledge Capsule. And you know, right now,
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: literally as we speak, there are just millions of safety
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: data points bouncing all across the globe.
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: Oh absolutely millions.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Right, like from a rural clinic in Tokyo straight to
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: some massive server farm in Frankfort. And I think what's
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: fascinating is that every single time you pop an aspirin
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: for a headache, or you know, you start a brand
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: new prescription, you are actually interacting with one of the
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: most intense, unforgiving administrative machines on planet Earth.
• 0:29
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it really is just an absolute juggernaut of a system.
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: I mean, I think most people assume that drug safety
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: sort of well, that it ends when the clinical trials
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: are over, you.
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Know, right, you get the FDA stamp of approval and everyone.
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: Just goes home exactly. But in reality, the exact moment
• 0:44
  Speaker 2: a drug hits the open market, an entirely new, incredibly
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: massive surveillance operation just boots right up.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: And today's deep dive is really getting into the blueprint
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: of that specific surveillance operation. We're looking at a pretty
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: comprehensive guide by d DRAG Pharma. It's called Writing Effective
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Pharmacovigilance Standard operating procedures.
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: Or pv SOPs as you'll hear them called constantly pvsops.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: Right, So our mission today is to unpack how these
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: and let's be honest, very dense, behind the scenes documents
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: actually encode heavy global legal obligations into the daily routines
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: of thousands of employees. We want to really understand how
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: the pharmaceutical industry manages this absolute river of data to
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: keep you the patient safe.
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: Because to really grasp the stakes here, you have to
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: look at pv SOPs as the literal backbone of a
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: pharmaceutical company's right to exist. I mean, they're licensed to operate.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: They aren't just like standard HR manuals about how to
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: request time off.
• 1:47
  Speaker 2: No, not at all. If a global health regulator, say
• 1:49
  Speaker 2: the European Medicines Agency, if they just walk into a
• 1:52
  Speaker 2: corporate office for a surprise inspection and they find that
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: the SOPs are vague or maybe they're just outdated, the
• 1:57
  Speaker 2: company doesn't just get a slap on the wrist of
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: a fine.
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: Oh wow, it's more severe than that, way more severe.
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: They can actually lose their authorization to sell the drug entirely.
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, without a well written SOP, you have no
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: traceability or have no operational consistency, and honestly, you have
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: absolutely zero defense.
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, so before we really get bogged down in the
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: heavy global regulations, let's just make sure we understand the
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: fundamental purpose of this specific tool good idea, because we
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: need to move from this sort of abstract idea of
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: safety to the physical document itself. Yeah, and you know,
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: the way I visualize a really effective pv SOP is
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: it's like a commercial airline pilot's emergency flight manual.
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: I like that analogy.
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: Right. Imagine you are at thirty thousand feet and suddenly
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: an engine warning light just starts flashing red.
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: Well, the pilot definitely doesn't pull out a blank piece
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: of paper to just, you know, brainstorm some creative solutions exactly.
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: That is really not the time to trust your gut.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: You want that pilot pulling out a heavily tested, rigorous,
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: step by step protocol. Right. And in pharmaco vigilance, when
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: a company suddenly detects, say, a huge spike in severe
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: adverse reactions to a drug, they need that exact same
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: level of mechanical precision, a protocol that just entirely eliminates guesswork.
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the flight manual analogy works perfectly, but I'd add
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: one major caveat to it. What's that a pilot is
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: usually flying one plane at a time, right, but a
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: pharmacovigilance department is effectively monitoring thousands of flights simultaneously.
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: Oh wow.
• 3:21
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and they're doing it in different weather conditions across
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: different continents. So that is why well written is just
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: the critical metric here. These documents have a monumental translation task.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: What do you mean by translation task like literally translating languages?
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: Well, sometimes yes, but mostly I mean translating massive, incredibly
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: dense legislation from governments all around the world. The SOP
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: has to distill all of that legal jargon down into
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: a very clear, actionable workflow for say, a data entry
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: clerk working on a Tuesday morning.
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: I see, because the person who's actually typing the patient's
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: symptoms into the database. Yeah, they aren't spending their weekend
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: reading parliamentary legislation from the EU.
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: No, and they shouldn't have to. The SOP takes that
• 4:05
  Speaker 2: massive legal burden entirely off the everyday employee. And you know,
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: it's also the ultimate safety net for the heavy hitters
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: in the industry too. The dd RED guide talks extensively
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: about roles like the mah yeah, the marketing authorization holder,
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: which is essentially just the company that owns the drug,
• 4:22
  Speaker 2: and it also talks about the qppvs.
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: Let's pause on QPPV for a second for the listener,
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: who isn't you know, deep in the weeds of European
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: drug regulations, who exactly is that person?
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: So QPPVV stands for the qualified person for pharmacovigilance In
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: the European Union, the law actually requires every single pharmaceutical
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: company to have one specific human being who is personally
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: and legally responsible for the entire safety profile of all
• 4:50
  Speaker 2: the company's products one person.
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: That is a massive burden to put on one individual.
• 4:54
  Speaker 2: It's a huge burden. And you know, India has a
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: very similar concept in their recently updated twenty twenty four
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: PVPI guidelines. They call it a Pharmacovigilance Officer in Charge
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: or PVOI. And for these leaders writing an airtight sop,
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: it isn't just administrative busy work. It is literally their arbor.
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, So let's talk about pressure testing that armor then,
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: because the internal company documents they are entirely driven by
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: these external global watchdogs, and the source material actually outlines
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: the regulatory timelines these companies have to hit, and frankly,
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: looking at these numbers, it sounds like an absolute administrative nightmare.
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: Well, the timelines are definitely designed to be unforgiving, because
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: patient risks doesn't really wait for a convenient time to strike.
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: Let's actually walk through the numbers so people understand. For
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: the USFDA, a company has fifteen calendar days to report
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: a serious and unexpected adverse event, and then the EU
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: requires serious individual case safety reports or icsrs to be
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: submitted within fifteen calendar days as well, though they do
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: give ninety days for non serious events. But I really
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: have to push back on them. Cans of this here
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: before fifteen calendar days explicitly includes weekends and bank holidays.
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: It does so if a doctor emails a drug company
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: about some life threatening patient reaction at I don't know,
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: eleven pm on Christmas Eve, the clock is actually ticking
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: while the entire office is closed for the holidays. How
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: does a massive corporate bureaucracy process a complex medical event
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: in a few days without just descending into complete chaos?
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that specific scenario. The Christmas Eve email. That is
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: precisely why the concept of day zero is the beating
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: heart of any modern sop. Day zero, day zero because regulators,
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: they just do not care about your company holiday schedule.
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: Patient safety does not take weekends off, so your SOP
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: has to legally define the exact millisecond the clock starts.
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: Ah. So day zero is basically the starting gun.
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: Yes, it is the documented moment that anyone in the
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: company or even any third party vendor working for the company,
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: becomes aware of a minimum set of safety data.
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: Wait, so, even if it's not a medical professional.
• 6:58
  Speaker 2: Exactly farharmaceutical sales rep just casually hears about an adverse
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: reaction at a dinner party on a Saturday night, day
• 7:05
  Speaker 2: zero might start right then and there.
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 7:08
  Speaker 2: And if your SOP is even slightly vague about how
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: day zero is captured, routed, and recorded and inspector will
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: tear your entire system apart.
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: I can imagine.
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the emma's Good Pharmacovigilance Practices or GVP. They explicitly
• 7:21
  Speaker 2: demand a highly controlled, fully documented system just for case management.
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: And over in the US, the FDA mandates under regulations
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: like twenty one CFR three fourteen point eight zero that
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: these expedited reports have to hit their fares database sorry fares,
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: Oh right, the FDA Adverse Event Reporting system. The reports
• 7:40
  Speaker 2: have to hit fares within that tight window, and they
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: have to be formatted perfectly.
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: Okay, So because at fifteen day clock is ticking so relentlessly,
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: the documents governing the work just have to be flawless,
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: because I mean, a single ambiguity could cost a company
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: a day, which results in a late submission, which then
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: triggers a massive regulatory violation.
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: Exactly every hour count.
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: So if we move away from the airplane analogy for
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: a minute, I kind of visualize the structure of an
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: sop more like a high end Michelin star kitchen brigade.
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: Oh, a kitchen brigade. Let's explore that. How does that
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: map to a drug safety protocol?
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: Well, think about it. In a high end kitchen that's
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: serving hundreds of people a night, chaos is totally fatal.
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: Every single person needs to know exactly what their station is.
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: The head chef doesn't wash the dishes, and the pastry
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: chef definitely doesn't cook the steak. And in an sop,
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: that is your roles and responsibility.
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: Section it's a great comparison.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: The guide specifically mentioned something called RCI assignments, defining exactly
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: who is responsible, accountable, consulted and informed for every single task,
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: because you really can't have two case processors just assuming
• 8:44
  Speaker 1: the other one is handling that Christmas Eve adverse event report.
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: No, you definitely can't. The classic oh I thought you
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: were doing an excuse really doesn't fly with a federal
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: health regulator. If the SOP doesn't explicitly state the exact
• 8:56
  Speaker 2: job title responsible for triage, the whole system fails, right,
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: But the structure actually goes much deeper than just assigning roles.
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: You also need a clearly defined scope like what specific
• 9:06
  Speaker 2: products in geographical regions does this document actually cover? And
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: you need the process flow, which is basically the step
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: by step chronological workflow mapping out all the decision trees and.
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: Crucially, going back to the kitchen. The chef doesn't just say, hey,
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: chop the vegetables. They say, use this specific Japanese knife
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: and cut them to exactly this millimeter.
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: Nice and in the.
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: SOP, those are the data standards. The guide talks a
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: lot about the need for precise controlled terminology. It brings
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: up terms like mid dry and E two BR three.
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: And here's where your kitchen analogy really shines. Imagine you
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: have a French chef asking for an aubergine and an
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: American sioux chef is just running around looking for an
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: egg plant. The whole kitchen just halts exactly. Now apply
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: that to global pharmacovigilance. You might have a doctor in
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: Japan reporting a rapid heartbeat and a doctor in Brazil
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: reporting techacardia.
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: Oh I see, they mean the same thing, but the words.
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: Are different exactly. That is where MANDERA comes in. It
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: stands for the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. It's essentially
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: the universal standardized language that ensures every single regulator and
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: data processor on Earth is talking about the exact same
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: medical concept.
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: That makes a ton of sense. It removes all the ambiguity.
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: And what about that other one E two BR three
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: E two b R three.
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that is essentially the universal digital envelope. Okay, it's
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: a highly specific data architecture standard used to electronically transmit
• 10:33
  Speaker 2: these safety reports between the pharma companies and the government regulators.
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: Your SOP must dictate exactly how the data is coded
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: into MedDRA and then mapped directly into that E TWOBR
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: three format.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: And if you don't use that format.
• 10:46
  Speaker 2: If you format the digital envelope wrong, the regulator's computer
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: system just automatically rejects it. It won't even go through.
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: Wow. And you know, the part of the SOP structure
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: that really caught my eye and the dd RED guide
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: wasn't actually the body of the text. It was the annexes.
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: Yes, the annexes are where the theory actually meets the
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: reality on the ground.
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: Right, because the main SOP provides the overarching rules of
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: the kitchen, but the annexes provide the actual physical tools
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: the worker uses at their station.
• 11:13
  Speaker 2: Precisely, we are talking about step by step checklists, email templates,
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: complex flow charts, and standardized case handling forms. Actually, including
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: a visual timeline table right there in the SOPNFS is
• 11:25
  Speaker 2: one of the most effective ways to boost operational clarity.
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: So, if this is our kitchen, what are the core recipes?
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: Because the guide mentions several mandatory SOP that every single
• 11:35
  Speaker 1: PV system is required to have in its cookbook.
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there is a very specific suite of core procedures.
• 11:41
  Speaker 2: The heaviest lift for most companies is usually ICSR.
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: Case management, and ICSR is the individual patient reports, correct.
• 11:48
  Speaker 2: It handles the daily intake, the triage, the narrative writing
• 11:51
  Speaker 2: of those individual patient adverse events. But then you also
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: have signal management.
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: Let's dig into signal management for a second, because just
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: from the name it sounds like looking for a needle
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: in a haystack.
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: It absolutely is. A signal is essentially just a new
• 12:05
  Speaker 2: potential risk. So maybe a drug has been on the
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: market safely for five years, but suddenly the system detects
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: the subtle pattern of patients reporting, say, liver enzyme changes. Okay,
• 12:17
  Speaker 2: the signal management SOP, which by the way, has to
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: align with GVP Module IX in Europe. That document dictates
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: exactly how data analysts query the database, how they validate
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: whether this pattern is actually real or just a statistical anomaly,
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: and ultimately how they decide if they need to warn
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: the public.
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: Wow, So it's really the detective work of the whole operation,
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: it is. The guide also mentioned something called aggregate safety reporting.
• 12:40
  Speaker 2: What's that, Well, regulators don't just want those one off
• 12:44
  Speaker 2: emergency alerts. They want comprehensive periodic summaries of a drug's
• 12:49
  Speaker 2: entire safety profile, looking back over months or even years.
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: These are called pbr ears or p sears, and they're
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: guided by international standards like ICCHE two c R two.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: That is a lot of acronyms.
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: It is an alphabet soup, I know. But you also
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: absolutely need an SOP outlining your pharmacovigilance agreements or PVAs.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: In PVAs, those the contracts you have when you're working
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: with other partner companies.
• 13:14
  Speaker 2: Correct If two different pharmaceutical companies are co marketing a drug,
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: the PDA dictates exactly who processes the safety data and
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: who submits it to the government. You can't have both
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: doing it or neither, right.
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: That goes back to the RCI assignments exactly.
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: And finally, you have the crown jewel of the whole thing,
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: the SOP for compiling the PSMF or the pharmaco Vigilance
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: System Masterfile. The PSMF is literally the master blueprint of
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: your entire safety system. If a government inspector arrives at
• 13:45
  Speaker 2: your lobby, the PSMF is the very first document they
• 13:48
  Speaker 2: ask for.
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: Okay, So these core recipes and this highly standardized language,
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: I mean it makes perfect sense for traditional operations, but
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: this industry is moving incredibly.
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: Fast, at lightning speed.
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: So how do these rigid, highly structured SOPs handle massive
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: modern complexities. I'm thinking about things like global data privacy
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: laws or the sudden explosion of artificial intelligence. If our
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: kitchen is serving the whole world, how do they keep
• 14:14
  Speaker 1: up with entirely new ingredients.
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: Well, you've just hit on the ultimate challenge of modernizing
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: this machinery, because the static sop is actually a dangerous sop.
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: Today's procedures have to deeply fundamentally integrate global data privacy
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: like GDPR exactly. You have the GDPR in Europe, which
• 14:31
  Speaker 2: requires rigorous protocols just for masking personal data. A patient's
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: name or any direct identifiers absolutely cannot accidentally end up
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: in a narrative that gets submitted to a foreign government.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: And reading the source material on modernizing these systems, I
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: noticed a detail that really made me scratch my head.
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: What was it?
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: Well, we talked earlier about monitoring medical literature for adverse events, right,
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: the guide explicitly states that SOPs must document literature monitoring methods,
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: including tracking. And this is a quote zero result searches.
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: Ah, yes, zero result searches.
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: So I totally understand tracking bad reactions. If a medical
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: journal publishes a study saying a drug caused a severe rash,
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: obviously you log it. But why on earth would an
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: sop legally mandate that an analyst spend time documenting a
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: search that found absolutely nothing. Is that just pure administrative
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: busy work.
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: I can completely understand why it looks like dizzywork from
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: the outside, but this actually hits on a foundational philosophy
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: of pharmacovigilance. The absence of data is still data.
• 15:33
  Speaker 1: Wait, how can nothing be something.
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: Because it proves the surveillance system is actually running. Consider
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: this from the regulator's point of view. If an inspector
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: sits down and asks, hey, did you check the global
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: medical literature for new risks regarding this heart medication this
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: week and you just say yes, and we didn't find anything,
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: They're gonna want proof exactly. The regulator will immediately say,
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: show me the proof. So a documented zero result search
• 15:58
  Speaker 2: showing the exact are strings used in the database, the
• 16:02
  Speaker 2: exact date, and the analysts signature that proves that your
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: safety out was actually cast, your methodology was sound, and
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: it simply came back empty.
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: Oh wow.
• 16:10
  Speaker 2: If you don't document the zero results in the eyes
• 16:13
  Speaker 2: of the law. You didn't even look.
• 16:15
  Speaker 1: That is wild. If it isn't documented, it literally.
• 16:17
  Speaker 2: Didn't happen exactly.
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: Now. The guide also brings up data integrity frameworks. Its
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: specifically mentioned something called l CoA plus principles. And I
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: have to stop you there because LCA just sounds like
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: I don't know, a giant aluminum manufacturing company. What does
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: l CoA plus mean for a data processor?
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it does sound like a factory. But licaplus is
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: actually a gold standard acronym for a data integrity in
• 16:42
  Speaker 2: this space. It means data must be attributable to the
• 16:46
  Speaker 2: person who created it, legible, contemporaneous meaning it was recorded
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: at the exact time it happened, Original, and accurate.
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: Okay, what about the plus?
• 16:56
  Speaker 2: The plus stands for complete, consistent, enduring and available.
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: Got it?
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: And here is where it ties back to your question
• 17:03
  Speaker 2: about new technology. If a company is using modern tools
• 17:07
  Speaker 2: like machine learning or AI to sort through thousands of
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: literature articles automatically, the SOP has to govern exactly how
• 17:14
  Speaker 2: that AI aligns with LAOAA plus SEV. You have to
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: scientifically prove the algorithm isn't hallucinating data or silently dropping cases.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: But governing AI sounds incredibly difficult when every single country
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: has completely different roles. How do you write an sop
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: for that?
• 17:29
  Speaker 2: It is really tough, which is why DDRE highlights this
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: brilliant best practice of using regional annexes.
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: How does that work?
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: You basically maintain one core global sop, the Master recipe,
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: if you will, but you attach regional annexes to it.
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: So if India's CDSO requires a highly specific local reporting
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: form that literally no one else uses, you just put
• 17:51
  Speaker 2: that in the India annex. You don't rewrite the global
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: core document and confuse the rest of the.
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: World, Which brings us to the final hurdle here right,
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: Because it is one thing to sit in the corporate
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: board draft this flawless master recipe with perfect regional annexes
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: and account for AI governance, it is entirely another thing
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: to prove to a government inspector that your thousands of
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: global employees actually follow the manual. The source material refers
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: to PV audits in a really poetic way. Actually, it
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: calls them the quiet guardians of drug safety.
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: I love that phrasing. They really are the quiet guardians.
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: I mean, audits don't grab the front page headlines like
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: a breakthrough clinical trial or a massive new FDA approval,
• 18:28
  Speaker 2: But these rigorous internal stress tests, they are the invisible
• 18:32
  Speaker 2: shield that keeps medicines on the market.
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: And regulators don't just read your sop, pat you on
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: the back, is a hey, good job. They want to
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: see hard, cold metrics proving the machine is actually under control.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: What kind of numbers are they looking for?
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: Well, for starters, regulators expect to see a minimum of
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: ninety eight percent compliance on timely expedited reporting.
• 18:53
  Speaker 1: Okay, I have to interject here because ninety eight percent
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: sounds like an A plus on a high school math test.
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: It does, but in this context we really have to
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: ground that number in the human stakes. That missing two
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: percent isn't just some harmless rounding error. That two percent
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: could represent a severe allergic reaction that slipped through the
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: cracks and wasn't reported to the government in time.
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: Exactly the paperwork is directly tied to human lives, right,
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: which is exactly why anything less than ninety eight percent
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: is an immediate, massive red flag that triggers an investigation.
• 19:24
  Speaker 2: Regulators also look for very low E two B R
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: three rejection rates. They measure the medical accuracy of your
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: meddary coding, and crucially, they look really closely at your
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: kPa effectiveness.
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: CAPA being corrective and preventive actions, which basically means when
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: a process inevitably breaks down, did you actually fix the
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: root cause so it never happens again?
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Let's say a technical glitch caused three adverse event
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: emails to get stuck in a server, and you missed
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: the fifteen day reporting window. Okay, A kPa isn't just
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: saying oh well, we submitted them late.
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: Sorry.
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: A here requires you to investigate the server completely, fix
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: the IT architecture, train your entire staff on a new
• 20:06
  Speaker 2: backup protocol, and then audit the system a month later
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: just to prove the fix. Actually.
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: Hell, that is rigorous. And the guide actually makes a
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: very important point about vendor oversight and all of this
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: because a massive portion of pharmaceutical companies just outsource this
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: routine data entry in literature monitoring to specialized vendors. They do,
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: it's very common, but the MAH, the marketing authorization holder,
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: they remain ultimately responsible for all regulatory outcomes. Basically, you
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: can outsource the labor, but you absolutely cannot outsource the
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: legal liability.
• 20:38
  Speaker 2: That is a foundational rule of pharmacal vigilance. If you're
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: a third party vendor fails the audit, your company loses
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: the license, no exceptions. And this is exactly where partners
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: like d d REG come into play. How So, they
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: partner directly with pharma and biotech companies to build these
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: inspection ready systems from the ground up. They conduct the
• 20:58
  Speaker 2: GAP analyzes, the AFT to the core SOPs and the
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: regional annexes we talked about, and they provide global PV
• 21:05
  Speaker 2: operations support.
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the guide details some really impressive technological platforms they
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: offer for this. There's Vitalic, which manages product registrations and submissions,
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: and then there's Regentel.
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: Right. Regentell is fascinating.
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: It's an AI powered regulatory intelligence platform that literally tracks
• 21:22
  Speaker 1: changing legislation across more than one hundred and twenty global agencies, which, honestly,
• 21:27
  Speaker 1: trying to manually track the daily legislative changes of one
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: hundred and twenty different countries sounds mathematically impossible for a
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: human team.
• 21:34
  Speaker 2: It is impossible. You absolutely need technology to scale compliance
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: at that level, and dd REGs capabilities they aren't just
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: theoretical frameworks. The source text actually includes this massive case
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: study of a large US based pharmaceutical company.
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: Tell them about that.
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: So this company had a huge global footprint, multiple manufacturing sites,
• 21:53
  Speaker 2: and over thirty marketed products with incredibly high consumer demand.
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: Managing the incoming safety data for thirty as active products
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: globally is just a staggering volume of information.
• 22:03
  Speaker 2: It is, and DDREG stepped in and managed a QPPV
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: deployment across eleven different countries simultaneously.
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: Yeah, they bit the local literature monitoring systems, they harmonized
• 22:14
  Speaker 2: all the SOPs, and they ensured local PV compliance across
• 22:18
  Speaker 2: wildly varying regulatory environments. That is just the sheer scale
• 22:22
  Speaker 2: of the operation required to keep a major drug portfolio
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: compliant and most importantly, to ensure the safety net actually
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: holds for the patients taking those thirty products.
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: So what does this all mean for us, the people
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: actually taking the medication? Today, we've taken a deep dive
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: into the hidden, highly structured world of drug safety. We
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: started by realizing that taking a simple pill actually requires
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: a massive flight manual of protocols just to monitor its effects.
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: We looked at the unforgiving ticking clock of global regulations,
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: where day zero is the starting gun. We broke down
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: the kitchen Brigade, anatomy of a PERF SOP translating really
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: complex data into universal languages like meddare.
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: A, and we explored how metrics zero result searches, LCOA
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: plus data integrity and modern tools keep this incredibly complex
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: system running smoothly, all.
• 23:15
  Speaker 1: Guarded quietly by rigorous audits.
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: It really is a massive invisible infrastructure. Thousands of professionals
• 23:21
  Speaker 2: are working globally every single day just to protect public health.
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: It is truly remarkable. But before we wrap up, I
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: want to leave you, our listener with a specific sort
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: of provocative thought to mollover or explore on your own.
• 23:31
  Speaker 1: Let's hear it well, we talked about how pharmaceutical companies
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: are increasingly being forced to write AI and machine learning
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: governance into their modern pharmacovigilance SOPs.
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: Right because of all the new tools.
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: So imagine this near future scenario if an automated algorithm
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: is given the primary responsibility for validating adverse events and
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: that AI just hallucinates, or maybe it fails to detect
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: a really critical safety signal hidden in the data. Who
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: is ultimately held with reponsible by the regulators. Oh that's a
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: tough one, right, Is it the third party software vendor
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: who actually built the AI? Is the AI itself somehow
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: or does the full crushing weight of the law fall
• 24:12
  Speaker 1: squarely on the pharmaceutical company that signed the sop.
• 24:15
  Speaker 2: That is the multimillion dollar question that the global industry
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: is going to have to answer very very soon.
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: It really makes you think differently about all the automated
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: systems running behind the scenes. Well, thank you for joining
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: us on this deep dive. The next time you open
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: a medicine cabinet, remember that you are not just trusting
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: the chemistry in the bottle, You are trusting the flight manual.
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: Keep questioning those hidden systems that keep our world safe.