We will have limited operations from 15:00 Wednesday 24 December 2025 (AEDT) until Friday 2 January 2026. Find out how to contact us during the holiday period.
Test procedures for starting materials used in complementary medicines must use analytical methods that are validated for that purpose. In determining the minimum validation activities to be applied to a test procedure, a risk-based assessment should be undertaken.
Validation is defined as the process of demonstrating that the analytical procedure is suitable for its intended purpose, for example, identification, determination of impurities, assay of active or other ingredients.
This guideline document describes the minimum approach acceptable to achieve validation of the test procedure used for starting materials for use in complementary medicines. Additional validation activities may also be undertaken. Additional validation activities are at the discretion of the Sponsor. Different approaches to the validation of test procedures may be acceptable. Such approaches must be documented and justified.
Various terms are used to describe validation requirements. Definitions of the terms specificity, accuracy, precision, detection limit, quantitation limit, linearity, range and robustness are described in 'Note for Guidance on Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology (CPMP/ICH/381/95) Rev 1' and in other references included at the end of this guideline document. Some additional definitions (method transfer, system suitability testing and authenticated primary standard) are provided in the Glossary at the end of this guideline document.
Note: The British Pharmacopoeia (BP) and Therapeutic Goods Orders (TGOs) are the official standards for regulatory purposes in Australia. Where a substance is covered by a monograph in the BP, then this is the minimum standard that must be applied in its entirety, otherwise a justification* is required. The requirements of applicable general monographs of the BP must also be met except where a justification for not doing so is authorised by the TGA*(for example, the monographs, Herbal Drugs, Herbal Drug Preparations and Extracts). The TGA will consider the suitability of other national or international pharmacopoeial monographs or standards on a case-by-case basis. Note that the most recent edition of any cited pharmacopoeial monograph or standard should be used, or a justification* for not doing so is authorised by the TGA.
* As described in the Australian Regulatory Guidelines for Complementary Medicines (ARGCM) Part II, Section 5.1.3, Sponsors seeking to justify deviations from the use of official standards should apply to TGA in writing, seeking an exemption under Section 14 of the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989. Section 14 Exemption requests should explain why the official standard(s) cannot be met and detail what alternative(s) are proposed and why. The delegate of the Secretary will review the request and sponsors will be advised in writing of the delegate's decision.
If the analytical procedure for starting material testing is included in the current edition of the BP or other peer reviewed pharmacopoeia or reference text, then validation of that procedure is not required. Examples of peer reviewed pharmacopoeias or reference texts include, but are not limited to, the European Pharmacopoeia (Ph Eur.), United States Pharmacopoeia (USP), Japanese Pharmacopoeia (JP), French Pharmacopoeia (FP), German Pharmacopoeia (DAB), Chinese Pharmacopoeia (CP) or Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists (AOAC International).
Note: While pharmacopoeial methods do not require re-validation, certain procedures should be undertaken to ensure that methods are applicable at the point of use. See the Method Transfer section below.
