VALIDATIONOFCOMPENDIALPROCEDURES药典方法的验证Testproceduresforassessmentofthequalitylevelsofpharmaceuticalarticlesaresubjecttovariousrequirements.AccordingtoSection501oftheFederalFood,Drug,andCosmeticAct,assaysandspecificationsinmonographsoftheUnitedStatesPharmacopeiaandtheNationalFormularyconstitutelegalstandards.TheCurrentGoodManufacturingPracticeregulations[21CFR211.194(a)]requirethattestmethods,whichareusedforassessingcomplianceofpharmaceuticalarticleswithestablishedspecifications,mustmeetproperstandardsofaccuracyandreliability.Also,accordingtotheseregulations[21CFR211.194(a)(2)],usersofanalyticalmethodsdescribedinUSP–NFarenotrequiredtovalidatetheaccuracyandreliabilityofthesemethods,butmerelyverifytheirsuitabilityunderactualconditionsofuse.RecognizingthelegalstatusofUSPandNFstandards,itisessential,therefore,thatproposalsforadoptionofneworrevisedcompendialanalyticalproceduresbesupportedbysufficientlaboratorydatatodocumenttheirvalidity.用于评估药品质量的检验方法需要满足不同的要求。根据联邦食品，药品，和化妆品法案501章，美国药典和国家处方专题论文里的试验和规范构成了法律标准。CGMP法规[21CFR211.194(a)]要求：用于评估药品满足已建立的规范的检验方法必须满足准确、可靠、适当的标准。此外，根据法规21CFR211.194(a)(2)，USP-NF中叙述的分析方法的使用者不需要验证这些方法的准确度和可信度，仅仅需要确认在实际使用条件下的适用性。考虑到USP和NF的法律地位，采用新的或修改后的药典分析方法的建议，并且这个建议是由充分的实验室数据支持以证明其有效，这是十分必要的。Thetextofthisinformationchapterharmonizes,totheextentpossible,withtheTripartiteInternationalConferenceonHarmonization(ICH)documentsValidationofAnalyticalProceduresandtheMethodologyextensiontext,whichareconcernedwithanalyticalproceduresincludedaspartofregistrationapplicationssubmittedwithintheEC,Japan,andtheUSA.这一章节的内容尽可能地和ICH文献“分析方法的验证和方法学”（文献与包含在EC，日本和美国递交的注册申请中的分析方法相关）协调一致。SUBMISSIONSTOTHECOMPENDIA递交至药典SubmissionstothecompendiaforneworrevisedanalyticalproceduresshouldcontainsufficientinformationtoenablemembersoftheUSPCouncilofExpertsanditsExpertCommitteestoevaluatetherelativemeritofproposedprocedures.Inmostcases,evaluationsinvolveassessmentoftheclarityandcompletenessofthedescriptionoftheanalyticalprocedures,determinationoftheneedfortheprocedures,anddocumentationthattheyhavebeenappropriatelyvalidated.Informationmayvarydependinguponthetypeofmethodinvolved.However,inmostcasesasubmissionwillconsistofthefollowingsections.将新的或修改后的分析方法递交至药典，应包含足够的资料从而使得USP委员会专家和其专家委员会能够评估拟定方法的价值。绝大多数情况下，评估包括透明度的评估和分析方法叙述完整性的评估，确定方法需求，以及专家已经充分验证的文件。涉及方法的类别改变，资料可能也会改变。然而，大部分情况下，递交应包含如下的章节Rationale—Thissectionshouldidentifytheneedfortheprocedureanddescribethecapabilityofthespecificprocedureproposedandwhyitispreferredoverothertypesofdeterminations.Forrevisedprocedures,acomparisonshouldbeprovidedoflimitationsofthecurrentcompendialprocedureandadvantagesofferedbytheproposedprocedure.基本原理—此章节应确定方法的需求和叙述拟定的具体的方法的能力以及它优于其它类别测定方法的原因。对于已修改的方法，需比较当前方法的局限性和拟定方法的优点。ProposedAnalyticalProcedure—Thissectionshouldcontainacompletedescriptionoftheanalyticalproceduresufficientlydetailedtoenable...
