Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36972010›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic innovation & regulatory science2023

Quality Tolerance Limits' Place in the Quality Management System and Link to the Statistical Trial Design: Case Studies and Recommendations from Early Adopters.

Marion Wolfs, Łukasz Bojarski, Steve Young, Lynne Cesario, Marcin Makowski, Linda B Sullivan

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marion WolfsIntegrated Data Analytics and Reporting, Janssen Research and Development, Graaf Engelbertlaan 75, 4837DS, Breda, Netherlands. Mwolfs1@its.jnj.com.ORCID 0000-0002-9114-7782
Łukasz BojarskiDevelopment Operations, AstraZeneca R&D BioPharmaceuticals, ul. Postepu 14, 02-675, Warsaw, Poland.
Steve YoungCluePoints Inc, King of Prussia, PA, USA.
Lynne CesarioPfizer R&D, New York, NY, USA.
Marcin MakowskiData Strategy and Management, GlaxoSmithKline GmbH & Co. KG, Prinzregentenpl. 9, 81675, Munich, Germany.
Linda B SullivanMetrics & Performance Management, WCG, Indianapolis, IN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the release of ICH E6(R2), multiple efforts have been made to interpret the requirements and suggest ways of implementing quality tolerance limits (QTLs) alongside existing risk-based quality management methodologies. While these efforts have contributed positively to developing a common understanding of QTLs, some uncertainty remains regarding implementable approaches. In this article, we review the approaches taken by some leading biopharmaceutical companies, offering recommendations for how to make QTLs most effective, what makes them ineffective, and several case studies to illustrate these concepts. This includes how best to choose QTL parameters and thresholds for a given study, how to differentiate QTLs from key risk indicators, and how QTLs relate to critical-to-quality factors and the statistical design of the trials.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsQuantitative Trait LociRisk ManagementBiological ProductsCase studiesKey risk indicatorsQuality tolerance limitsRisk based quality managementStatistical designThreshold

Identifiers

PMID36972010
PMCPMC10276776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.