Navigating the intricate landscape of pharmacovigilance at the affiliate level requires a strategic approach to ensure compliance, patient safety, and operational efficiency. In this blog, we delve into the rationale behind outsourcing pharmacovigilance activities at the affiliate level and explore the essential requirements for appointing local persons for pharmacovigilance (LPPVs). As we examine the potential challenges inherent in managing pharmacovigilance locally, we uncover the complexities arising from geographical diversity, streamlined processes, and oversight by marketing authorisation holder (MAH) headquarters. Furthermore, we shed light on the pivotal role LPPVs play in aligning with regulatory expectations and facilitating robust pharmacovigilance systems. Join us on this exploration of how outsourcing, standardised procedures, and strategic resource allocation can optimise affiliate pharmacovigilance activities and elevate regulatory compliance.
Requirements for local and qualified persons for pharmacovigilance
In many jurisdictions, the appointment of a LPPV is a mandatory requirement for the authorisation and launch of pharmaceutical products. The timing of this appointment may vary, occurring either at the time of application or approval. The term LPPV is more commonly used in the EU/EEA, where there is an EU qualified person responsible for pharmacovigilance (QPPV). Outside of the EU/EEA (e.g., in the UK) the LPPV is referred to as a QPPV. The legal foundation for this appointment varies across jurisdictions, encompassing expectations such as proficiency in the local language, residency, specific qualifications, notification to the Member State or local authority, 24/7 availability (with backup arrangements), and personal liability.
The LPPV assumes a pivotal role in ensuring that the MAH adheres to pharmacovigilance requirements during product launches in each country. This encompasses establishing and maintaining mechanisms, systems, and processes for the collection, reporting, and follow-up on adverse reactions. Beyond these responsibilities, the LPPV is often tasked with overseeing the local PV system, providing valuable insights into the local market, competitive landscape, and regulatory agency preferences. Serving as the primary point of contact for regulatory agencies, the LPPV bears the ultimate responsibility for ensuring safety and compliance while supporting initiatives for risk minimisation and overall success.
Potential challenges with local pharmacovigilance activities
Effectively managing pharmacovigilance activities at the local level requires careful consideration of several potential challenges. One significant obstacle is geographical diversity, where different regions may have distinct regulatory requirements and reporting mechanisms, posing a challenge in maintaining uniformity. Additionally, the lack of emphasis on local pharmacovigilance activities and the absence of streamlined processes can result in inefficiencies, hindering the timely identification and reporting of adverse events. The reduced oversight by the MAH headquarters in the pharmacovigilance activities of the local affiliate may lead to poor compliance metrics, potentially jeopardising patient safety. Failure to address and control the pharmacovigilance activities of local affiliates can result in time-consuming and costly repercussions. Moreover, the heightened likelihood of regulatory authorities inspecting a complex pharmacovigilance system adds another layer of complexity, underscoring the crucial importance of establishing robust local processes to ensure compliance and patient well-being.
The MAH bears the responsibility of ensuring that appropriately qualified LPPVs are in place, meeting the minimum requirements of the Member State/local authority and possessing adequate training and experience. Failure to fulfil this responsibility could lead to non-compliance with regulations and inspection findings. Finite resources within existing local affiliate offices of the MAH may impose limitations, potentially causing service disruptions.
A potential "silo" mentality among local affiliates may result in disparate pharmacovigilance activities and procedures, lacking a common organisational and governance framework and placing increased demands on the MAH. Establishing a set of procedures and key performance indicators (KPIs) agreed upon by each LPPV through a service provider ensures that safety responsibilities are consistently carried out in accordance with global policies. Harmonising procedures and quality standards among all LPPVs not only align pharmacovigilance processes, including risk management, but also provides access to metrics at individual, country, and global levels.
How to get the best outcome from an outsourced affiliate model
Outsourcing affiliate pharmacovigilance activities to a service provider streamlines operations by consolidating responsibilities into a single interface. This centralised approach entails the delivery of affiliate pharmacovigilance activities through a centrally managed service, fostering global harmonisation of pharmacovigilance processes. The service provider establishes a robust infrastructure leveraging a network of established LPPVs, acting as a liaison between the Member State/local authority, the MAH, and local and front-line staff, including pharmacovigilance and the medical call centre. This ensures effective communication of queries, locally generated product safety information, safety emerging issues, product recalls, and safety profile monitoring within stipulated timeframes in compliance with local regulations.
An outsourced solution offers access to readily available resources within an established LPPV network, allowing LPPVs to cover multiple projects efficiently. This strategic resourcing aligns with geographical and linguistic requirements, optimising in-country resource allocation. The outsourced model also centralises resources, enhancing efficiency and reducing costs. The single outsourced interface managing the medical information call centre team for different regions facilitates information sharing during key events of a product’s lifecycle, promoting process alignment, and providing insights on reported safety events, product complaints, and medical requests.
The outsourced provider conducts rigorous selection processes, reviewing IT security, business continuity, code of conduct, and pharmacovigilance SOPs. Transferring responsibility to the service provider ensures accountability for ongoing pharmacovigilance training throughout the partnership lifecycle with the MAH. Experienced LPPVs utilise their network to stay informed on the latest local regulations, contributing to the global pharmacovigilance system's compliance with local regulations. Additionally, the MAH gains access to an overview of local regulations from the service provider.
Financial management in an outsourced solution occurs through a single interface, consolidating multiple invoices into one transparent invoice. Leveraging the LPPV network allows for swift billing adjustments to meet evolving pharmacovigilance requirements and enables the expansion of pharmacovigilance services to new countries. The existing network's flexibility and dynamism optimise infrastructure for quick deployment of pharmacovigilance services in new countries and emerging markets. These aspects collectively lead to cost efficiencies, resource optimisation, and enhanced flexibility when deploying an outsourced solution.
An outsourced affiliate model empowers the MAH with access to skilled resources specialising in local pharmacovigilance, providing scalability, transparency, and the standardisation necessary for improved regulatory compliance and effective MAH oversight.
To learn more, watch our webinar “Why outsourcing pharmacovigilance makes sense at an affiliate level” .
In this section
-
Digital Disruption
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Digital Disruption whitepaper
- AI and clinical trials
-
Clinical trial data anonymisation and data sharing
-
Clinical Trial Tokenisation
-
Closing the evidence gap: The value of digital health technologies in supporting drug reimbursement decisions
-
Digital disruption in biopharma
-
Disruptive Innovation
- Remote Patient Monitoring
-
Personalising Digital Health
- Real World Data
-
The triad of trust: Navigating real-world healthcare data integration
-
Clinical strategies to optimise SaMD for treating mental health
-
Patient Centricity
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Capturing the voice of the patient in clinical trials
-
Charting the Managed Access Program Landscape
-
Developing Nurse-Centric Medical Communications
- Diversity and inclusion in clinical trials
-
Exploring the patient perspective from different angles
-
Patient safety and pharmacovigilance
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Taking safety reporting to the next level with automation
-
Outsourced Pharmacovigilance Affiliate Solution
-
The evolution of the Pharmacovigilance System Master File: Benefits, challenges, and opportunities
-
Sponsor and CRO pharmacovigilance and safety alliances
-
Understanding the Periodic Benefit-Risk Evaluation Report
-
A guide to safety data migrations
-
Patient voice survey
-
Patient Voice Survey - Decentralised and Hybrid Trials
-
Reimagining Patient-Centricity with the Internet of Medical Things (IoMT)
-
Using longitudinal qualitative research to capture the patient voice
-
Agile Clinical Monitoring
-
Regulatory Intelligence
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
- EU Clinical Trials Regulation
-
Using innovative tools and lean writing processes to accelerate regulatory document writing
-
Current overview of data sharing within clinical trial transparency
-
Global Agency Meetings: A collaborative approach to drug development
-
Keeping the end in mind: key considerations for creating plain language summaries
-
Navigating orphan drug development from early phase to marketing authorisation
-
Procedural and regulatory know-how for China biotechs in the EU
-
RACE for Children Act
-
Early engagement and regulatory considerations for biotech
-
Regulatory Intelligence Newsletter
-
Requirements & strategy considerations within clinical trial transparency
-
Spotlight on regulatory reforms in China
-
Demystifying EU CTR, MDR and IVDR
-
Transfer of marketing authorisation
-
An innovative approach to rare disease clinical development
-
Therapeutics insights
- Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
- Cardiovascular
- Cell and Gene Therapies
- Central Nervous System
-
Glycomics
- Infectious Diseases
- NASH
- Oncology
- Paediatrics
-
Respiratory
-
Rare and orphan diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Cross-border enrollment of rare disease patients
-
Crossing the finish line: Why effective participation support strategy is critical to trial efficiency and success in rare diseases
-
Diversity, equity and inclusion in rare disease clinical trials
-
Identify and mitigate risks to rare disease clinical programmes
-
Leveraging historical data for use in rare disease trials
-
Natural history studies to improve drug development in rare diseases
-
Patient Centricity in Orphan Drug Development
-
The key to remarkable rare disease registries
-
Therapeutic spotlight: Precision medicine considerations in rare diseases
-
Advanced therapies for rare diseases
-
Transforming Trials
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Ensuring the validity of clinical outcomes assessment (COA) data: The value of rater training
-
Linguistic validation of Clinical Outcomes Assessments
-
Optimising biotech funding
- Adaptive clinical trials
-
Best practices to increase engagement with medical and scientific poster content
-
Decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
Decentralised and Hybrid clinical trials
-
Practical considerations in transitioning to hybrid or decentralised clinical trials
-
Navigating the regulatory labyrinth of technology in decentralised clinical trials
-
Biopharma perspective: the promise of decentralised models and diversity in clinical trials
-
eCOA implementation
- Blended solutions insights
-
Implications of COVID-19 on statistical design and analyses of clinical studies
-
Improving pharma R&D efficiency
-
Increasing Complexity and Declining ROI in Drug Development
-
Innovation in Clinical Trial Methodologies
- Partnership insights
-
Risk Based Quality Management
-
Transforming the R&D Model to Sustain Growth
-
Accelerating biotech innovation from discovery to commercialisation
-
Value Based Healthcare
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
US payers and PROs
-
Accelerated early clinical manufacturing
-
Cardiovascular Medical Devices
-
CMS Part D Price Negotiations: Is your drug on the list?
-
COVID-19 navigating global market access
-
Ensuring scientific rigor in external control arms
-
Evidence Synthesis: A solution to sparse evidence, heterogeneous studies, and disconnected networks
-
Global Outcomes Benchmarking
-
Health technology assessment
-
Perspectives from US payers
-
ICER’s impact on payer decision making
-
Making Sense of the Biosimilars Market
-
Medical communications in early phase product development
-
Navigating the Challenges and Opportunities of Value Based Healthcare
-
Payer Reliance on ICER and Perceptions on Value Based Pricing
-
Payers Perspectives on Digital Therapeutics
-
Precision Medicine
-
RWE Generation Cross Sectional Studies and Medical Chart Review
-
Survey results: How to engage healthcare decision-makers
-
The affordability hurdle for gene therapies
-
The Role of ICER as an HTA Organisation
-
Strategies for commercialising oncology treatments for young adults
-
Blog
-
Videos
-
Webinar Channel