In meetings at INTERPHEX, and even while just observing the
wide range of equipment offerings on display at the show, it struck me quite
strongly that pharmaceutical product quality often relies to some degree on
very small parts and components. My experience has largely been related to the
chemistry and processing of APIs, and not so much with the physical equipment
involved in their final formulation.
Not only is the vast array of required machined parts and
the level of detail to which they have been developed quite impressive, the
potentially significant impact that even a little wear or damage to these small
parts can have on product quality is quite something. As a result of this
recent education, I have a new appreciation for the complexity of
pharmaceutical manufacturing equipment and the work required to properly
maintain it.
Do you have strong feelings about a type of manufacturing
equipment that you feel doesn’t receive the recognition it deserves? Let us
know.
And what insights did you take away from this year’s
INTERPHEX? Did you spot any significant new trends (the growing use of x-ray
and terahertz analysis techniques), regulatory concerns (the push for
serialization) or facility design issues (modular systems), or something all
together different? Share your thoughts!
Don’t forget to sign up for the eNewsletter here if you
haven’t done so yet.
Cynthia A. Challener, PhD
Editor
The Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Manufacturing & Marketplace Report
No comments:
Post a Comment