PHARMACEUTICALS 2011 - Why and How - Verification of Compendial Methods - USP <1226>
View: 1296
Website http://complianceonline.com/ecommerce/control/trainingFocus/~product_id=701752?channel=ourglocal |
Edit Freely
Category Pharmaceuticals,conference,event,Webinar
Deadline: April 08, 2011 | Date: April 08, 2011
Venue/Country: Palo Alto, U.S.A
Updated: 2011-02-02 18:39:19 (GMT+9)
Call For Papers - CFP
Why Should You Attend: Recent warning letter continue to emphasize the fact that the FDA has stepped up the stringency and frequency of inspections. Non-compliance to USP <1226> continues to feature prominently in the 483s issued.This webinar will provide an in-depth discussion of USP <1226>, 'Verification of Compendial Methods' requirements. FDA 483s on the subject of Method Verification will be discussed to understand current FDA expectations. Conditions under which Methods can be classified as 'basic' and not require verification will be discussed. The factors under actual conditions of use which impact method performance and make method verification necessary will be addressed. FDA 483s on the subject of Method Verification will be discussed to understand current FDA expectations on which compendial methods needs to be verified.Areas Covered in the Seminar:FDA 483s related to method verification.Requirements of USP <1226>, 'Verification of Compendial Methods'.What are the current FDA expectations related to method verification.FDA 483s related to method verification.Requirements of USP <1226>, 'Verification of Compendial Methods'.What are the factors which impact method performance under actual condition of use?How compliance to USP <1226> and investment risk.NOTE: Use This Promocode ( 117660 ) To Get 10% Discount.
Keywords: Accepted papers list. Acceptance Rate. EI Compendex. Engineering Index. ISTP index. ISI index. Impact Factor.
Disclaimer: ourGlocal is an open academical resource system, which anyone can edit or update. Usually, journal information updated by us, journal managers or others. So the information is old or wrong now. Specially, impact factor is changing every year. Even it was correct when updated, it may have been changed now. So please go to Thomson Reuters to confirm latest value about Journal impact factor.