Tradeline, Inc. | Leading-edge resources for facilities planning and management www.tradelineinc.com

Successful Design Strategies for GMP-Compliant Core Labs

Overcoming the Technical Challenges of Designing Process-Driven GMP Facilities

Published November 2007

Designing GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) laboratories for product scale-up and/or small-volume manufacturing is a complex, often expensive facility undertaking. GMP-compliant labs are becoming increasingly common as more organizations want to improve patient safety even for innovative products and treatments that are still under development. Building even a small GMP facility involves meeting strict international regulatory standards, resolving numerous technical issues, and absorbing inevitably higher costs. Extensive pre-planning, cost analysis, and specialized consulting are necessary to mitigate these challenges.

“Designing a GMP facility requires changing the way you think. The goal in a research facility is to make as many “errors” as quickly as possible in order to narrow the focus of the research. With manufacturing, the goal is to create an error-free, repeatable, traceable, and highly documented methodology. It also means going from a design that is flexible and adaptable to something that is much more fixed and restrictive,” says Alan Orton, a principal with NFOE Architects in Montreal and NXL Architects in Toronto.

GMP regulatory requirements are enforced by governing bodies around the world—including Canada, Europe, and the U.S.—to ensure that manufacturing labs produce products with pre-established quality and safety standards. Academic labs that are GMP compliant are used for a number of applications, including improving the safety of pharmaceutical products already being delivered to patients; supporting translational research projects; participating in clinical trials; and ramping up to product commercialization. Any lab involved in commercializing a product or doing clinical trials must be GMP compliant. In most cases, facilities used for private-sector contracts must also be compliant depending on whether they are doing pre-clinical or clinical work.

The decision to be GMP compliant can add considerable expense to a project and should be carefully considered. Process engineering is one aspect that frequently has unexpected higher costs, especially in an institutional setting. Increased requirements for specialized consulting, validation, detailed documentation, and process engineering can increase capital expenses as much as 25 to 30 percent.

“Building these facilities is not cheap. The cost of validation experts, compliance experts, and process engineers, along with the usual expenses for architects, engineers, and project managers, can be quite a significant step up,” says Orton.

In the case of the Connell O’Reilly Cell Manipulation Core Facility at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, officials wanted to increase the facility’s compliance in support of clinical care and research. The 3,990-sf lab included a Class 10,000 cleanroom, dedicated HVAC and building automation systems, terminal HEPA filtration, and high purity gasses. The QA/QC programs were already in place when construction was completed in 2004 and the facility was validated four months after it opened. Consultancy fees for architecture, engineering, and validation constituted 31 percent of the project’s $5 million budget.

“Whatever you think your initial budget and schedule is, it is very likely going to cost more and take longer,” says Orton.

Planning and Procedures

Extensive pre-planning is critical to GMP compliance. The increased amount of time and money involved demand a clear business strategy from the outset.

“It’s important to prepare the business case in advance to justify the cost. This is not a case of just finding the financing and building the project. You have to invest in the up-front process definition and the preparation of a compliance plan, as well as plan for the ongoing burdens of maintaining a compliant operation,” says Orton.

A number of issues must be considered before starting planning and design. The manufacturing process needs to be clearly defined in order to map space allocation, work flow, procedural documentation, equipment requirements, and utility loads.

“Success depends on working with professional consultants who have done this type of work before. Regardless of who you engage, it’s critical that you have your own operations, validation, and quality control staff on board early to assist those professionals in doing their job,” says Orton.

The ability to overcome technical design challenges depends on knowing what level and type of cleanroom environment and biosafety/chemical containment are required. Designers must anticipate complex, dedicated HVAC systems and provide easy access for maintenance and calibration. Involving officials from the relevant regulatory body during the programming process can be a critical component to success.

“It really helps to get the regulatory authorities with jurisdiction over your project involved right away—be it the FDA, the Public Health Agency of Canada, or the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medical Products (EMEA)—so you have a clear understanding of  what the specific requirements are going to be,” says Orton.

It is easy to underestimate the amount of documentation required for adequate compliance. Consequently, Orton emphasizes the importance of pre-qualifying critical contract bidders.

“You typically have to push contractors very hard to get the kind of documentation needed for validation,” he says.

Documentation is Everything

Documentation of every aspect of the process, procedures, equipment, training, and operations, is a significant part of achieving compliance.

“The GMP compliance process of a facility begins as soon as the project starts. As the regulatory agencies say: ‘In God we trust. For everything else, we want documentation,’” says Julie-Léa Lipszyc, a compliance and regulatory affairs expert with SNC Lavalin Pharma in Montreal.

A key part of GMP requirements is validation: a methodology for establishing documented evidence that a specific procedure, process, equipment, material, activity, or system will consistently produce a product meeting pre-determined specifications in compliance with GMP expectations.

“It is basically the process of commissioning everything. You validate because it is not physically possible to test 100 percent of the final product,” says Lipszyc.

In order to assure purity, traceability, and quality control of products, all processes must be tightly controlled and validated. Personnel must be extensively trained to conduct the procedures, and all raw materials and packaging components must be tested and accepted as per quality control requirements. Air change rates, humidity, temperature, and pressure must all be controlled, maintained, and validated.

“Once you decide, for any reason, that a facility needs to be GMP, you can’t just pick one or two elements to implement. It is everything or nothing,” says Lipszyc.

Lessons in Execution

Orton and Lipszyc offer a number of recommendations for organizations considering GMP compliance. Laboratories that are already operating with clear programs or clinical missions have a greater chance of success, according to Orton. Identifying regulatory expectations early in the project helps avoid “over-quality” or “low-quality” designs. In this respect, working in advance with regulatory officials is crucial to understanding the burden. Moving from an innovative research orientation to routine production operations also means a paradigm shift for staff.

“Due to the significantly higher investment of time, money, and planning, compliance must be a key objective and processes should be well defined before starting design,” says Orton.

Project planning must anticipate ongoing staffing and operational costs, and secure long term institutional buy-in. Likewise, validation is a time-consuming, costly effort that can typically take four to six months from mechanical completion of construction to compliant operations.

“The expectations of the project’s promoters and of the host institution are not always the same for these facilities. You have to make sure there is a shared vision and commitment so that resources are there to support the operation well beyond the initial investment,” says Orton.

Once the facility is built, the hard part begins. In addition to maintaining the ongoing validation of all processes, the facility must maintain a full-time quality control and quality assurance staff to support that operation. There will also be a heightened need to market the facility and maximize its use in order to recover the significant added costs.

“I can’t stress enough the importance of getting out there and promoting these facilities because they don’t run on their own. It’s great to have one or two researchers with projects going but you have to find a lot more support within your university and healthcare network to feed this type of lab,” says Orton.

By Johnathon Allen

Circulate to:

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

Biographies

Alan E. Orton is a principal with NFOE Architects in Montreal who has led the design of complex projects in healthcare, education, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and electronics sectors. After graduating from McGill University in 1977 with a Bachelor in Architecture, Orton joined MerrettStahl Eliott (a predecessor firm of NFOE) in 1977 and became a partner of the firm in 1986. With more than 28 years of experience, he is a recognized expert in the design of sophisticated facilities for the research, development, and production of pharmaceutical and biological products.

Julie-Léa Lipszyc is a project manager, compliance specialist, and SLP quality representative with SNC Lavalin Pharma in Montreal. Lipszyc has a master’s degree in Sciences and Technology of Quality Assurance of Pharmaceutical, Cosmetics, and Dietetics Products from the University of Paris XI, and more than 10 years of experience in the pharmaceutical and biotech sectors.

This report is based on a presentation Orton and Lipszyc gave at the Tradeline Science Buildings Canada 2007 conference held in May.




For more information

Alan Orton
NFOE/NXL Architects
1255 University Ste 700
Montreal PQ H3B 3W1
CANADA
(514) 397-2616
ortoa@nfoe.com
NFOE Architects: www.nfoe.com
NXL Architects: www.nxl.ca

Julie-Léa Lipszyc
Project Manager & Compliance Specialist
SNC-Lavalin Pharma Inc.
8000 Décarie, 3rd Flr
Montreal PQ H4P 2S4
CANADA
(514) 735-5651
julie.lipszyc@snclavalin.com
SNC-Lavalin Pharma: www.snclavalin.com




GMP-Compliant Facilities

GMP (Good Manufacturing Practices)-compliant manufacturing facilities must adhere to guidelines and practices enforced by the World Health Organization and regulatory agencies in every major country. Compliant labs must be able to verify the ability to produce a product with pre-established quality standards. Work flow processes, products, and documentation must all be repeatable and traceable which requires extensive training and personnel management above and beyond the demands of a traditional research lab. (Photo courtesy of NFOE/NXL Architects.)




CMCF

The 3,900-sf Connell O’Reilly Cell Manipulation Core Facility at the Dana Farber Cancer Institute in Boston recently spent $5.1 million to increase manufacturing capacity and GMP compliance. The facility, which operates in conjunction with the Dana Farber Cancer Institute and the Harvard Cancer Center, manufactures cellular products for clinical use, features Class 10,000 cleanroom space, dedicated HVAC systems, and terminal HEPA filtration. (Photo courtesy of NFOE/NXL Architects.)




Find this report valuable?

The majority of Tradeline's Exclusive Reports evolve from sessions at one of Tradeline's facilities planning and management conferences. Click here for a list of upcoming conferences and see what data you could benefit from first hand.

Notes:














Copyright 2008 Tradeline Inc.
All Rights Reserved
ISSN: 1096-4894