The Harmonization of the Microbial Limits Test - Enumeration
Scott Sutton,
Ph.D.
Vectech
Pharmaceutical Consultants
This article first appeared in the
PMF Newsletter
of March, 2006 and is protected by copyright to PMF. It
appears here with permission.
The USP and the European Pharmacopoeia (EP, Pharm Eur)
Microbial Limits Tests are in the final stages of harmonization.
They were signed off to Stage 6A at the November, 2005 meeting
of the Pharmacopeial Discussion Group (PDG) held in Chicago, IL
USA (USP 2006a). However, the signed-off versions have yet to be
published. This makes the description of the test a bit
difficult, as the current tests will be disappearing, and the
final, harmonized test is not yet public knowledge. However, we
do know that the harmonized tests do not differ greatly from the
drafts published in 2003 (USP 2003a, USP 2003b, USP 2003c), and
so we will use those drafts as the description of the finalized
test.
The Microbial Limits Tests are actually two chapters in the
current USP: Current USP <61> Microbial Limits Tests (USP 2006b)
and <1111> Microbiological Attributes of Nonsterile
Pharmaceutical Products (USP 2006c). This will be modified in
the harmonized version to mirror the European format:
|
USP |
EP |
|
<61> Microbiological Examination Of
Nonsterile Products: Microbial Enumeration Tests |
2.6.12 Microbiological Examination
Of Nonsterile Products: Microbial Enumeration Tests |
|
<62> Microbiological Examination of
Nonsterile Products: Tests for Specified Microorganisms |
2.6.13 Microbiological Examination
of Nonsterile Products: Tests for Specified
Microorganisms |
|
<1111> Microbiological Quality of
Nonsterile Pharmaceutical Products |
5.1.4 Microbiological Quality of
Nonsterile Pharmaceutical Products |
Table 1: Harmonized Chapter
Numbering Scheme
This review will only address the microbial enumeration
portions of the harmonization effort – that which will become
USP chapter <61> and Pharm. Eur. chapter 2.6.12.
The microbial enumeration test is a basic, simple design to
count the number of CFU in a nonsterile product or raw material.
The preferred method is to put the material into solution and
then plate aliquots to determine the CFU/gram (or mL) of initial
material. If the product cannot be put into solution, there are
provisions to use the Most Probable Number method (MPN – see FDA
BAM website). The method of plating can be either pour plate,
spread plate or the filtration of material and then placing the
membrane filter on the surface of an agar plate. The membrane
filtration method should only be used when there are few
expected colony forming units in the material to be tested as it
is a good method to test a large volume of liquid, but can only
count up to approximately 100 CFU/membrane.
The harmonized method provides a great deal more detail than
any of the current pharmacopeial methods in terms of
demonstration of method suitability (validation of the method)
and in terms of media growth promotion.
The demonstration of method suitability should be performed
using the challenge organisms listed (see Table 2 below) in
accordance with the recommendations found in USP chapter <1227>
(USP 2006d). Growth promotion is an area of some ambiguity in
the compendial text. Although media growth promotion is not
described in the tests, demonstration of media suitability is
required, and the draft USP Chapter <1117> (USP 2004) provides
assistance in designing the studies using 10-100 CFU of the
challenge organisms.
A major concern of many QC workers is if the changes in the
harmonized chapter will necessitate revalidation of existing
assays to meet the requirements of the harmonized test. There
are several considerations that might lead to revalidation – a
required change in media, in volume of material required for
testing, in general testing conditions. It is difficult to
determine whether all product types would require revalidation,
and so a summary table is provided (Table 2) describing the
critical aspects of the current Microbial Limits Tests
(Enumeration) and the draft harmonization text. The summaries
provided in Table 2 are only meant as an aid, the decision as to
whether or not revalidation is necessary rests with each
individual facility for their particular products.
Note: Due to it's extreme length,
Table 2 is
provided here as a .pdf file from the
PMF
Newsletter article
References:
-
EP. 2006. 5.1.3 Efficacy of Antimicrobial Preservation.
Pharm Eur. 5.0:447-449.
-
FDA. BAM (Bacterial Analytical Manual Online) website -
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ebam/bam-toc.html. The second
appendix to this document is an excellent tutorial on MPN
methods. This can be found at
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ebam/bam-a2.html
-
USP. 2003a. <61> Microbiological Examination Of
Nonsterile Products: Microbial Enumeration Tests. Pharm
Forum. 29(5):1714-1722.
-
USP. 2003b. <62> Microbiological Examination of
Nonsterile Products: Tests for Specified Microorganisms
Pharm Forum. 29(5):1722-1733
-
USP. 2003c. <1111> Microbiological Quality of Nonsterile
Pharmaceutical Products Pharm Forum. 29(5):1733-1735
-
USP. 2004. <1117> Microbiological Best Laboratory
Practices. Pharm Forum. 30(5):1713-1721.
-
USP. 2006a. <1196> Pharmacopeial Harmonization. USP
29:3031-3035
-
USP. 2006b. <61> Microbial Limits Tests USP 29:2503-2508
-
USP. 2006c. <1111> Microbiological Attributes of
Nonsterile Pharmaceutical Products USP 29:2969
-
USP. 2006d. <1227> Validation of Microbial Recovery from
Pharmacopeial Articles. USP 29:3053-3055
Consulting with Scott Sutton
|