WHO Validation of Computerized Systems Appendix 5
WHO Validation of Computerized Systems Appendix 5
Appendix 5
Validation of computerized systems
Background
This is a revision of the previous publication:
■ Supplementary guidelines on good manufacturing practices: validation. In:
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations,
fortieth report. Appendix 5: Validation of computerized systems. Geneva:
World Health Organization; 2006: Annex 4 (WHO Technical Report
Series, No. 937; http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/documents/s20108en/
s20108en.pdf).
160
Annex 3
Documentation covering, but not limited to, the following information and
supporting process should be accessible on-site for review:
■ purpose and scope;
■ roles and responsibilities;
■ validation approach;
■ risk management approach;
■ approved system requirement/specifications;
■ system acceptance criteria;
■ supplier selection and assessment;
■ configuration management and change-control procedures;
■ backup and recovery (application and data);
■ error handling and corrective action;
■ business continuity plan and disaster recovery;
■ maintenance and support;
■ data security, including cybersecurity;
■ validation deliverables and documentation.
2. Glossary
The definitions given below apply to the terms used in these guidelines. They
may have different meanings in other contexts.
archiving. Archiving is the process of protecting records from the
possibility of being further altered or deleted, and storing these records under
the control of independent data management personnel throughout the required
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
164
Annex 3
165
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations Fifty-third report
Validation protocol
3.2 Validation should be executed in accordance with the validation protocol
and applicable written procedures.
3.3 A validation protocol should define the objectives and the validation
strategy, including roles and responsibilities and documentation and
activities to be performed. The protocol should at least cover the scope, risk
management approach, specification, acceptance criteria, testing, review,
personnel training and release of the computerized system for GMP use.
3.4 The validation protocol should be tailored to the system type, impact, risks
and requirements applicable to the system for which it governs validation
activities.
Validation report
3.5 A validation report should be prepared, summarizing system validation
activities.
3.6 The report should make reference to the protocol, outline the validation
process, and include an evaluation and conclusion of results. Any changes or
deviations from the validation protocol and applicable written procedures
should be described and assessed, and justification for their acceptance or
rejection should be documented. Deviations should be investigated and a
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
4. Supplier management
4.1 When third parties (e.g. suppliers, service providers) are used, such
as to provide, install, configure, validate, maintain, modify or retain a
computerized system or related service, or for data processing or system
components, including cloud-based systems, an evaluation of the supplier,
supplied system or service, and the supplier’s quality systems should be
conducted and recorded. The scope and depth of this evaluation should
be based upon risk management principles.
4.2 The competence and reliability of a supplier are key factors when selecting
a product and/or service provider. Supplier management is an ongoing
process that requires periodic assessment and review of the system or
service provided. Supplier evaluation activities may include, but are not
limited to: completion of a quality-related questionnaire by the supplier;
gathering of supplier documentation related to system development, testing
and maintenance, including supplier procedures, specifications, system
architecture diagrams, test evidence, release notes and other relevant
supplier documentation; an on-site audit of the supplier’s facilities, which
may be conducted based on risk principles to evaluate the supplier’s system
life-cycle control procedures, practices and documentation.
4.3 A contract should be in place between the manufacturer and the supplier
and/or the service provider, defining the roles and responsibilities and
quality procedures for both parties, throughout the system life-cycle. The
contract acceptor should not pass to a third party any of the work entrusted
to her/him under the contract, without the manufacturer’s prior evaluation
and approval of the arrangements.
5. Requirements specifications
5.1 Requirements specifications should be written to document user
requirements and functional or operational requirements and performance
requirements. Requirements may be documented in separate user
requirements specification (URS) and functional requirements specifications
(FRS) documents, or in a combined document.
Functional specifications
5.5 Functional specifications should describe in detail the functions,
performance and interfaces of the computerized system, based upon the
technical requirements needed to satisfy user requirements, and should be
linked to user specifications.
5.6 The functional specifications provide a basis for the system design and
configuration specifications. Functional specifications should consider
requirements for operation of the computerized system in the intended
computing environment, such as functions provided by supplier-provided
software, as well as functions required for user business processes that are
not met by commercial off-the-shelf software (COTS) functionality, and
default configurations that will require custom code development. Network
infrastructure requirements should also be taken into account. Each
described function should be verifiable.
5.7 Personnel access roles that provide the ability and/or authorization to write,
alter or access programs or configuration should be defined and qualified.
169
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations Fifty-third report
7. Design qualification
7.1 Following design qualification (DQ), a review should be conducted to
verify that the proposed design and configuration of the system is suitable
for its intended purpose and will meet all applicable user and functional
specifications.
7.2 It may include a review of supplier documentation, if applicable, and
verification that requirements specifications are traceable to proposed design
and configuration specifications. The DQ review should be documented.
170
Annex 3
Supplier-provided systems
8.2 For supplier-provided systems, the development controls for the supplier-
provided portion of the computerized system should be assessed during
the supplier evaluation or supplier qualification. For supplier-provided
systems that include custom components (such as custom-coded interfaces
or custom report tools) and/or require configuration (such as configuration
of security profiles in the software or configuration of the hardware within
the network infrastructure), the system should be developed under an
appropriate documented quality management system.
Custom-developed systems
8.3 For custom-developed and configurable systems, the system should be
developed under an appropriate documented quality system. For these
systems or modules, the quality management system controls should
include development of code in accordance with documented programing
standards, review of code for adherence to programing standards, and
design specifications and development testing that may include unit testing
and module/integration testing.
8.4 System prototyping and rapid, agile development methodologies may be
employed during the system build and development testing phase. There
should be an adequate level of documentation of these activities.
171
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations Fifty-third report
8.6 Prior to the initiation of the system qualification phase, the software program
and requirements and specifications documents should be finalized and
subsequently managed under formal change control.
8.7 Persons who will be conducting the system qualification should be trained
to adhere to the following requirements for system qualification:
■ test documentation should be generated to provide evidence of testing;
■ test documentation should comply with good documentation
practices;
■ any discrepancies between actual test results and expected results
should be documented and adequately resolved, based upon risk
prior to proceeding to subsequent test phases.
9. Installation qualification
9.1 Installation qualification (IQ) – also referred to as installation verification
testing – should provide documented evidence that the computerized
system, including software and associated hardware, is installed and
configured in the intended system test and production environments,
according to written specifications.
9.2 The IQ will verify, for example, that the computer hardware on which the
software application is installed has the proper firmware and operating
system, that all components are present and in the proper condition,
and that each component is installed per the manufacturer or developer
instructions.
9.3 IQ should include verification that configurable elements of the system are
appropriately set as specified. Where appropriate, this could also be done
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
Legacy systems
12.6 The continued use of a legacy system should be justified by demonstrating
the system continues to be relevant to the GMP process being supported
and by ensuring adequate validation of the system (i.e. hardware, software,
peripheral devices, networks) has been performed.
12.7 The validation approach to be taken should aim at providing data and
information to justify and support the retrospective qualification of
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
■ personnel training;
■ disaster recovery and business continuity;
■ availability of replacement parts and technical support;
■ periodic re-evaluation.
13.12 Automatic or live updates should be subject to review prior to becoming
effective.
Data migration
13.13 Where electronic data are transferred from one system to another, it
should be demonstrated that data are not altered during the migration
process. Conversion of data to a different format should be considered as
data migration. Where data are transferred to another medium, they must
be verified as an exact copy, prior to any destruction of the original data.
13.14 Procedures for data migration may vary greatly in complexity, and
measures to ensure appropriate transfer of data should be commensurate
with identified risks. Migrated data should remain usable and should
retain their content and meaning. The value and/or meaning of and links
between a system audit trail and electronic signatures should be ensured
in a migration process.
Periodic review
13.15 Computerized systems should be periodically reviewed to determine
whether the system remains in a validated state or whether there is a
need for revalidation. The scope and extent of the revalidation should be
determined using a risk-based approach. The review should at least cover:
■ system performance and functionality;
■ security;
■ maintenance;
■ review of changes including upgrades;
■ review of deviations;
■ review of incidents/events (including review of audit trail);
■ systems documentation;
■ procedures;
■ training;
■ effectiveness of corrective and preventive action.
177
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations Fifty-third report
References
1. Guidance on good data and record management practices. In: WHO Expert Committee on
Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations, fiftieth report. Geneva: World Health Organization;
2016: Annex 5 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 966; https://www.who.int/medicines/
publications/pharmprep/WHO_TRS_996_annex05.pdf, accessed 8 February 2019).
2. WHO good manufacturing practices for pharmaceutical products: main principles. In: WHO Expert
Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations, forty-eighth report. Geneva: World
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
Health Organization; 2014: Annex 2 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 986; http://academy.gmp-
compliance.org/guidemgr/files/TRS986ANNEX2.PDF, accessed 10 February 2019).
Further reading
■ Supplementary guidelines on good manufacturing practices: validation. In: WHO Expert
Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations, fortieth report. Geneva: World
Health Organization; 2006: Annex 4 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 937; http://apps.who.int/
medicinedocs/documents/s20108en/s20108en.pdf, accessed 9 February 2019).
■ Appendix 6: Qualification of systems and equipment. In: WHO Expert Committee on Specifications
for Pharmaceutical Preparations, fortieth report. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006:
Annex 4 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 937; http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/documents/
s20108en/s20108en.pdf, accessed 9 February 2019; (for update see Annex 3 Appendix 6 in
TRS 1019).
178
Annex 3
■ WHO good manufacturing practices: water for pharmaceutical use. In: WHO Expert Committee
on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations, forty-sixth report. Geneva: World Health
Organization; 2012: Annex 2 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 970; Geneva, World Health
Organization 2012 (WHO Technical Report Series, No. 970; http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/
documents/s19464en/s19464en.pdf, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ OECD series on principles of good laboratory practice and compliance monitoring. No. 17.
Advisory document of the Working Group on Good Laboratory Practice (GLP). Application of
GLP principles to computerised systems. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and
Development; 2016 (ENV/JM/MONO(2016)13; http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdis
playdocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono(2016)13&doclanguage=en, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Annex 11: Computerised systems. In: EudraLex. The rules governing medicinal products in the
European Union. Volume 4: Good manufacturing practice (GMP) guidelines: Annex 11. Brussels:
European Commission; 2011 (SANCO/C8/AM/sl/ares(2010)1064599; https://ec.europa.eu/health/
sites/health/files/files/eudralex/vol-4/annex11_01-2011_en.pdf, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Drug Information Association. Computerized systems used in non-clinical safety assessment:
current concepts in validation and compliance. Horsham (, PA): Drug Information Association;
(DIA), 22008.
■ GAMP® 5. A risk-based approach to compliant GxP computerized systems. Tampa (FL):
International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2008.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. A risk-based approach to GxP compliant laboratory computerized
systems, 2nd ed. Tampa (FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2012.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. A risk-based approach to operation of GxP computerized systems
– a companion volume to GAMP 5. Tampa (FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical
Engineering (ISPE); 2010.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. A risk-based approach to regulated mobile applications. Tampa
(FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2014.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. A risk-based approach to testing of GxP Systems, 2nd edition. Tampa
(FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2012.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. Global information systems control and compliance, 2nd ed.
Tampa (FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2017.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. IT infrastructure control and compliance. Tampa (FL): International
Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE); 2005.
■ GAMP® good practice guide. Manufacturing execution systems – a strategic and program
management approach. Tampa (FL): International Society for Pharmaceutical Engineering (ISPE);
2010.
■ National Institute of Standards and Technology, US Department of Commerce. NIST Cloud
Computing Program (NCCP) (https://www.nist.gov/programs-projects/nist-cloud-computing-
program-nccp, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Official Medicines Control Laboratories Network of the Council of Europe. Quality management
document. Validation of computerised systems. Core document. Brussels: Council of Europe; 2018
(PA/PH/OMCL (08) 69 3R; https://www.edqm.eu/sites/default/files/medias/fichiers/Validation_
of_Computerised_Systems_Core_Document.pdf, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Official Medicines Control Laboratories Network of the Council of Europe. Quality management
document. Validation of computerised systems. Annex 1: Validation of computerised calculation
systems. Example of validation of in-house software. Brussels: Council of Europe; 2009 (PA/
PH/OMCL (08) 87 2R; https://www.edqm.eu/medias/fichiers/NEW_Annex_1_Validation_of_
computerised_calculation.pdf, accessed 11 February 2019).
179
WHO Expert Committee on Specifications for Pharmaceutical Preparations Fifty-third report
■ Official Medicines Control Laboratories Network of the Council of Europe. Quality management
document. Validation of computerised systems. Annex 2: Validation of databases (DB), laboratory
information management systems (LIMS) and electronic laboratory notebooks (ELN). Brussels:
Council of Europe; 2009 (PA/PH/OMCL (08) 88 R; https://www.edqm.eu/medias/fichiers/NEW_
Annex_2_Validation_of_Databases_DB_Laboratory_.pdf, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Official Medicines Control Laboratories Network of the Council of Europe. Quality management
document. Validation of computerised systems. Annex 3: Validation of computers as part of
test equipment. Brussels: Council of Europe; 2009 (PA/PH/OMCL (08) 89 R; https://www.edqm.
eu/medias/fichiers/NEW_Annex_3_Validation_of_computers_as_part_of_tes.pdf, accessed 11
February 2019).
■ Official Medicines Control Laboratories Network of the Council of Europe. Quality management
document. Validation of computerised systems. Annex 12:
■ FDA US Food and drug Administration. CFR Code of Federal Regulations Title 21. Part 11:
Electronic records; electronic signatures (https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/
cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?CFRPart=11, accessed 11 February 2019).
■ Guide to good manufacturing practice for medicinal products. Annexes. Annex 11 (Computerised
systems). Geneva: Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme; 2018.
■ Good practices for computerised systems in regulated GXP environments. Geneva: Pharmaceutical
Inspection Co-operation Scheme; 2007.
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 1019, 2019
180