Don Singer- Senior Global Microbiology Consultant, New Beginnings Microbiology; Professor Tim Sandle, PhD- Head of QA Compliance, Quality Risk Management & Sterility Assurance, Kedrion Biopharma; Meg Provenzano- Endotoxin Product Manager, Veolia; Jeanne Moldenhauer- Chief Science Officer, Excellent Pharma Consulting; Hayden Skalski- Product Application Specialist, Veolia
How can organizations reconcile the holistic Contamination Control Strategy (CCS) requirements of EU GMP Annex 1 with legacy quality systems, particularly in balancing rapid microbial method adoption (e.g., UV-LIF, ATP bioluminescence) against validation complexities and cost constraints?
Don Singer, Senior Global Microbiology Consultant, New Beginnings Microbiology: It has been almost two decades since quality systems have been designed, implemente,d and been on a continuous improvement pa,th while technology and validation in microbiolohavehas taken a slightly different and more constrained pathfit-for-purposepose contamination control strategy has a good alignment with current quality systems by defining the ‘control’ aspects of a holistic quality approach for the prevention of microbial contaminants and ensuring there is a means to measure these ‘controls’. Many organizations are transitioning to rapid methods by initially using a balanced mix of rapid and legacy methods, where determined to be both efficient and cost-effective, with the intent to possibly change to solely rapid methods once the new QC culture develops competency and confidence. Initial capital cost or costs per test can always be a constraint, yet when efficiencies are evaluated and determined to be improved, this reduces the hesitancy of possible higher costs. Patient access to pharmaceutical products is usually a priority. Supporting the ongoing transition to rapid methods has been a significant background of validation guidance from the European Pharmacopeia (EP) and additional improvements in guidance from PDA and USP. The EP has progressed over time to improve and clarify what steps are needed to adequately validate a rapid microbial method, reducing the ‘complex’ considerations originating across industry. Validation is no longer a barrier to adoption due to the collaborative work of rapid method suppliers and pharma QC laboratories.
Professor Tim Sandle, PhD, Head of QA Compliance, Quality Risk Management & Sterility Assurance, Kedrion Biopharma: I think this is correct, to a degree. However, the holistic approach to the CCS can be achieved with conventional methods. The approach requires an understanding of bioburden transfer through the facility and the different control points in place to prevent transmission in product or between environments. Risk methodologies like Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP) can prove to be invaluable in this regard.
The availability of rapid methods does help. They improve the accuracy and availability of data, and they provide results more speedily, enabling faster decisions to be made (something particularly useful when additional samples are taken).
To ease the use of rapid methods, the USP chapter offers a clear way forward. However, to make the validation more straightforward, we hope to see more methods transferred into existing USP chapters. Where the chapters are numbered below 1000, this enables the method qualification approach to veer towards method verification rather than full validation.
Meg Provenzano - Endotoxin Product Manager – Veolia: Organizations should perform a risk assessment and gap analysis when looking at a holistic approach to Contamination Control Strategies using rapid microbial methods (RMMs). When performing the risk assessment and gap analysis, it’s important to consider microbial organisms that are common to your facility to ensure that the rapid microbial method can detect those organisms. The organization should also assess the Primary Validation Package from the vendor to determine whether further testing should be performed during the assessment.
Jeanne Moldenhauer, Chief Science Officer, Excellent Pharma Consulting: I don’t see this as a major issue, since these types of changes need to be planned out and implemented. Hopefully, by 2026, we will be able to budget appropriately for implementation.
As CRISPR-based detection and AI-driven predictive contamination models gain traction, what collaborative frameworks are needed between regulators and industry to streamline validation while maintaining compliance with evolving USP / and ICH Q9/Q10 standards?
Sandle: AI-driven predictive contamination models are exciting and possess considerable potential. So far, these are generally confined to environmental sciences, although there is nothing to stop the transfer of the technology into pharma. Such approaches utilize machine learning and deep learning to enable the analysis of vast datasets and to use the processing to forecast potential contamination events in various areas.
In the pharma context, the likely areas to begin with are production to water quality, ty and air pollution. These models leverage data from diverse sources, including environmental sensors, IoT devices, and historical records, to identify patterns and predict risks, enabling proactive measures and improved decision-making.
In introducing such models, we do need to acknowledge the limitations of AI – AI works on analyzing data sets, but it isn’t “intelligent” in terms of reasoning; it is only as good as the data inputted. Therefore, we need rules around it and to understand its limitations. Interestingly, the European Union GMP is to soon have an AI guideline, considering how AI interacts with the GxP system.
Provenzano: Regulators are essential partners in ensuring patient safety, offering guidance for adopting new technologies. Proactive engagement with them before formal submission saves time and money by addressing concerns early and ensuring compliance. For groundbreaking technologies, early and consistent regulatory involvement is crucial. As therapeutics evolve, industry and regulators must collaborate to safely and efficiently bring novel treatments to market, benefiting the public.
Moldenhauer: If we can get USP/EP on board, this guidance would be invaluable.
With 85% of biopharma executives prioritizing AI/ digital investments by 2025, should microbiologists prioritize cross-training in bioinformatics, Pharma 4.0™ systems, or QRM-driven crisis management, and how can academia adapt curricula to bridge this skills gap?
Singer: There definitely is a demand for industry QC microbiologists to have a background that is integrated with digital knowledge and use with pharmaceutical process design, data management, and QC analytical skills. Also, due to the increase in emphasis on contamination control strategy development and understanding, every action a QC microbiologist performs includes risk-based thinking following a quality risk management (QRM) approach. The latter includes developing controlled systems, evaluating in-process improvements, and building knowledge to adequately and efficiently respond to excursions or atypical microbiological results. If funded well by industry, academia can develop and teach relevant skills and knowledge in bioinformatics to bridge the current gap and build competence in current and future pharmaceutical microbiologists. Programs can be, and some are already, part of life sciences curriculum in colleges (although most often in graduate programs); some high school curricula have basic bioinformatics learning along with standard digital skills learning. Internal training of scientists across disciplines at pharmaceutical companies using AI would help increase awareness and enhance discussion about other uses and parameters for the robust oversight that AI needs to build integrity and confidence.
Sandle: Cross-training in areas like bioinformatics would be advantageous, especially given the rate of data accumulation within the microbiology laboratory. This is especially so with microbial identification and understanding origins, growth rates, required nutrients, likely survival patterns, and so on.
In terms of drug discovery, the field of bioinformatics also plays a crucial role in understanding microbial genomes, gene functions, and evolutionary relationships. For example, identifying microbial proteins that can be targeted by drugs to treat infections and analyzing the genetic material from microbial communities (like those in the gut or soil) to understand their composition and function in the quest for new antimicrobials.
Academia is making headway in adopting many modern technologies, although pharmaceutical sciences tend to play ‘catch-up’ when compared with other areas of the science curricula. Those that tap into the Pharma 4.0™ system are especially powerful when they draw on real-time data to help with the understanding of the product and process, particularly about contamination control.
Less satisfactory progress is made with quality risk management. Few degree courses teach risk management as part of chemistry or biology programs, and where it is done, this is not with the rigor and formality contained within ICH Q9. I think here there is an opportunity for industry to link with academia to provide support in terms of tools and case studies.
Provenzano: As AI and digital technologies advance, continuous learning and critical evaluation are essential. Students and pharmaceutical professionals alike must understand these evolving technologies, recognizing that AI learns from human input and requires careful assessment of its information. Staying current with digitization efforts is crucial for all.
Hayden Skalski - Product Application Specialist – Veolia: Being up to date with current trends and future digital innovations is crucial for not only microbiologists, but also pharmaceutical professionals because that’s where the industry is headed. Having the tools to understand how data can connect across your organization will help you better understand the processes that are put in place to ensure that data-driven decisions are focused on patient safety. Pharma 4.0 is not a new trend and has been around for some years now, so there are numerous resources available to help organizations understand its concepts and implementation. Microbiologists can access online training modules, webinars, and industry publications to learn how data can help organizations make informed decisions and how digital transformation can optimize their pharmaceutical manufacturing processes.
Given the dual pressures of retiring experts and automation displacing routine tasks, could hybrid models combining micro-credentialing for niche areas (e.g., microbiome analytics) with AI-augmented mentorship programs improve retention in high-pressure QC environments?
Singer: This model can indeed become an upcoming mitigation to not only the loss of experts but also to the decreasing number of academically educated microbiologists recruited with pharmaceutical QC ambition. Even during career transition phases, pre-retiring experts can broaden their reach and effectiveness to train multiple mentees across geographically separated sites of one company with the support of a well-developed AI-augmented training program. Also, digital or automated analytical systems within the microbiology analytics framework are well-aligned for AI-augmented training. Since the initiation of growth in the cell therapy segment, along with more than a decade of biopharmaceutical growth, microbiologists have been recruited from the cell biology and genetics academic backgrounds rather than the legacy clinical microbiology field. The modern background for QC microbiologists is very well aligned for micro-credentialing as part of newer internal training programs. An important aspect of this approach, though, is to ensure a specific skills focus doesn’t dilute much-needed broad QC microbiology perspective that should complement micro-credentialing. Retention of microbiologists due to improved skill development must target areas of investigation or skills that generate increased passion and motivation, which can lead to better retention.
Sandle: Advancements in technology can aid decision-making through accuracy and throughout. They can also help with retention by making QC a more interesting environment to work in. Too often, the lure of R&D draws leading graduate scientists away from the quality control environment. With more advanced technologies coming into the microbiology laboratory, analysts and technicians have more opportunities to work with more sophisticated technologies and broaden their skill sets.
Such technologies can also aid retention through automation and reduce the drudgery of conducting routine assays, thereby enabling laboratory personnel to spend more time interpreting data and following up on outcomes.
However, the matter of retiring experts is still an issue. We are seeing a knowledge drain at a rate faster than it is being replaced, and no advance in technology can, as yet, replace expert interpretation; hence, companies need to maximize efforts in retaining staff so that their knowledge, skills, and competencies can be enhanced.
Provenzano: Definitely. Automation can significantly reduce human error, yet the irreplaceable expertise of microbiologists will always be crucial. As an industry, we are progressively adopting advanced tools and technologies designed to minimize the potential for error. However, it’s vital to acknowledge that while automation streamlines processes and enhances consistency, the nuanced interpretation, critical thinking, and problem-solving capabilities of expert microbiologists remain indispensable. Offering mentorship programs with an emphasis on niche areas and AI will help with retention, while emphasizing the need for micro-experts.
Moldenhauer: One thing that is not considered with the implementation of AI systems is the substantial energy usage increase with the implementation. While this could be a good thing, we need to be sure that we understand the associated energy usages and can support them.
How can contamination frameworks for inhalers, topical creams, and liquid suspensions integrate real-time biofilm sensors and microbiome stability data to preempt risks highlighted by recent Burkholderia outbreaks, without overburdening lean microbiology teams?
Sandle: Developments like real-time biofilm sensors are exciting. These are devices that can be used to continuously monitor the formation and growth of biofilms – the microbial communities encased in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances. Where biofilms are found on surfaces, such as inside a medical device like an inhaler, this poses a serious patient risk.
By deploying sensors incorporated into devices we have offer a non[1]invasive way to track biofilm development and warn the clinician or the patient. We can also use such sensors in the pharmaceutical manufacturing process, such as the often complex inter-array of pipes, valves, and instrumentation. As part of the contamination control program, this can enable timely intervention and prevention of the issues caused by biofilms, such as biofouling, corrosion, and infections.
Infections with aqueous-based devices are especially vulnerable to organisms belonging to the Burkholderia cepacia complex (Bcc). To advance detection, various techniques can be deployed, such as electrochemical, optical, and mechanical methods, tuned to detect the biomarkers produced by these organisms. For water systems, which are the primary source of Bcc, electrochemical biofilm sensors appear to have the most to offer. These sensors are adept at assessing changes in electrical properties (impedance) caused by biofilm formation. This means they can be used to monitor biofilm growth and dispersal under flow conditions.
Microbiome stability data can assist with this process, although the cost of the analysis needs to be offset by the criticality of the system. That said, understanding the consistency of the microbial community within a specific environment and tracking changes can help to provide an early warning system.
Skalski: Contamination frameworks should include or consider including the implementation of a rapid micro method. Rapid micro methods, like high-throughput flow cytometry or ATP bioluminescence, deliver same-day detection of biofilms and contaminants, enabling fast intervention. In particular, viability-based flow cytometry as an RMM can provide ultra-sensitive testing that has a strong correlation to culture-based methods. This allows organizations to make faster, confident decisions to preempt risk and manage processes. By automating data collection, validating methods for specific products, or implementing a rapid micro method for process control focusing on high-risk areas, these frameworks can ensure product safety and regulatory compliance while minimizing workload through efficient, targeted monitoring.
Moldenhauer: This can be aided by some of the rapid methods for pathogen detection and real-time bioburden counters.
Subscribe to our e-Newsletters.
Stay up to date with the latest news, articles, and events. Plus, get special
offers from American Pharmaceutical Review delivered to your inbox!
Sign up now!