Author(s):
Komal Jadhav, Ganesh Sonawane, Sadnisha Pagar, Pooja Sonawane, Shubham Thakare, Deepak Sonawane, Sunil Mahajan
Email(s):
pradipj058@gmail.com
DOI:
10.52711/0974-4150.2026.00011 
Address:
Komal Jadhav*, Ganesh Sonawane, Sadnisha Pagar, Pooja Sonawane, Shubham Thakare, Deepak Sonawane, Sunil Mahajan
Divine College of Pharmacy, Satana, Dist. Nashik - 423301, Maharashtra (India)
*Corresponding Author
Published In:
Volume - 19,
Issue - 1,
Year - 2026
ABSTRACT:
High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) system qualification is an essential need for GxP-regulated laboratories to ensure data integrity, regulatory compliance, and reliable analytical performance. Traditional manual and paper-based qualification techniques are often time-consuming, error-prone, and have issues with documentation and audit readiness. This study investigates the transition to automated and paperless certification techniques, with a focus on the integration of HPLC equipment with digital validation platforms, electronic protocols, and cloud-based centralised systems. Automation is motivated by the efficiency needs of Pharma 4.0, adherence to ALCOA+ principles, and compliance with 21 CFR Part 11. It covers risk-based computerised system validation, data governance, and regulatory requirements from the FDA, EMA, and MHRA. Despite challenges like software, case studies demonstrate successful adoption, improved audit results, and reduced errors. Case studies demonstrate efficient deployment, improved audit findings, and fewer errors while taking into account concerns like software validation, change management, and legacy system integration. The analysis concludes with a discussion of future directions for AI-driven predictive maintenance, end-to-end digital validation ecosystems, and the creation of fully digital, smart laboratories.
Cite this article:
Komal Jadhav, Ganesh Sonawane, Sadnisha Pagar, Pooja Sonawane, Shubham Thakare, Deepak Sonawane, Sunil Mahajan. Automated and Paperless Qualification of HPLC Systems in Gxp Laboratories: A Digital Transformation Review. Asian Journal of Research in Chemistry. 2026; 19(1):60-8. doi: 10.52711/0974-4150.2026.00011
Cite(Electronic):
Komal Jadhav, Ganesh Sonawane, Sadnisha Pagar, Pooja Sonawane, Shubham Thakare, Deepak Sonawane, Sunil Mahajan. Automated and Paperless Qualification of HPLC Systems in Gxp Laboratories: A Digital Transformation Review. Asian Journal of Research in Chemistry. 2026; 19(1):60-8. doi: 10.52711/0974-4150.2026.00011 Available on: https://ajrconline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2026-19-1-11
REFERENCES:
1. GxP Cellators. HPLC and UPLC qualification protocols March 2025 [Internet]. 2025 Mar 14 [cited 2025 Oct 7]; Available from: https://www.gxpcellators.com/resources/HPLC-UPLC-qualification-march-2025
2. Smith P, McDowall R. Life Cycle Risk Assessment of HPLC Instruments.
3. Kaminski L, Degenhardt M, Ermer J, Feußner C, Höwer-Fritzen H, Link P, Renger B, Tegtmeier M, Wätzig H. Efficient and economic HPLC performance qualification. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis. 2010 Feb 5; 51(3): 557-64.
4. Ullagaddi, P. Digital transformation in the pharmaceutical industry: Enhancing quality management systems and regulatory compliance. International Journal of Health Sciences. 2024; 12(1): 31-43.
5. Jindal, D., Kaur, H., Patil, R. K., and Patil, H. C. Validation – In pharmaceutical industry: Equipment validation: A brief review. Adesh University Journal of Medical Sciences & Research. 2020; 2(2): 52–57.
6. Ahir, K. B., Singh, K. D., Yadav, P., Patel, H. S., and Patel, P. R. Overview of validation and basic concepts. Scholars Academic Journal of Pharmacy (SAJP). 2014; 3(2): 178–190.
7. Patel B, Patel JJ. Risk-Based Approach for Audit Trail in Pharmaceutical Industry: Ensuring Data Integrity under FDA and EU Regulations.
8. Mays, J. A., and Mathias, P. C. Measuring the rate of manual transcription error in outpatient point-of-care testing. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 2019; 26(3): 269–272.
9. Klages B, Zaeh M. Concept of a data-based approach for the prediction and reduction of human errors in manual assembly. Procedia CIRP. 2023 Jan 1; 116: 209-14.
10. Barchard KA, Pace LA. Preventing human error: The impact of data entry methods on data accuracy and statistical results. Computers in Human Behavior. 2011 Sep 1; 27(5): 1834-9.
11. Digital Solutions. Admin. The challenges of manual paperwork — and the solutions [Internet]. 2020 Nov 18 [cited 2025 Nov 3]. Available from: https://[insert-website-url-here]
12. Charoo NA, Khan MA, Rahman Z. Data integrity issues in pharmaceutical industry: Common observations, challenges and mitigations strategies. International Journal of Pharmaceutics. 2023 Jan 25;631: 122503.
13. Duncan RA, Whittington M. Enhancing cloud security and privacy: the power and the weakness of the audit trail. Cloud Computing 2016. 2016 Mar 24.
14. Dowling J, Hartwick R, Crowther J, Ciccone B. Performance qualification of HPLC instrumentation in regulated laboratories.
15. Dakhole MR, Thombre KR, Gupta KR, Umekar MJ. Ensuring data integrity in the pharmaceutical lifecycle: challenges, principles, and global implications. In Annales Pharmaceutiques Françaises 2025 Oct 9. Elsevier Masson.
16. Parapalli SL. 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance in MES: Electronic Signatures and Data Integrity. International Journal of Networks and Security. 2025 Jun 19; 5(1):187-201.
17. Martinez L, Klitou T, Olschewski D, Melero PC, Fokaides PA. Advancing building intelligence: Developing and implementing standardized Smart Readiness Indicator (SRI) on-site audit procedure. Energy. 2025 Feb 1; 316: 134538.
18. Joshi M, Sinha R, Dhuri M. Analysis of Industry 4.0 and Transformative Trends in Pharma.
19. Wilson O. HPLC Data Interpretation and Management: Tools, Techniques, and Compliance 12 Jun 2025.
20. Mazzarese R, Zipfell P, Bird S, Dong M. Chromatography data systems: Perspectives, principles, and trends.
21. Anhel A-M, Alejaldre L, Goñi-Moreno Á. The Laboratory Automation Protocol (LAP) format and repository: a platform for enhancing workflow efficiency in synthetic biology. ACS Synth Biol. 2023; 12(11): 3381-3391. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.3c00397.
22. Dwarakanath A, Era D, Priyadarshi A, Dubash N, Podder S. Accelerating test automation through a domain specific language. ArXiv [cs.SE]. 2018 Sep 21; Available from: https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.08100
23. Gjorgjevikj D, Madjarov G, Chorbev I, Angelovski M, Georgiev M, Dikovski B. Asgrt–automated report generation system. International Conference on ICT Innovations 2010 Sep 12 (pp. 369-376). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
24. Scilife. IQ OQ PQ: Get equipment validation right the first time [Internet]. Updated 2025 Sep 05. Available from: https://www.scilife.io/
25. Buldas A, Lipmaa H. Digital signatures, timestamping and the corresponding infrastructure. Küberneetika AS, Technical Report. 1998 Jan 6.
26. Burns R, Peterson Z, Ateniese G, Bono S. Verifiable audit trails for a versioning file system. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM workshop on Storage security and survivability 2005 Nov 11 (pp. 44-50).
27. Leon J. Certification Tracking Software: Comparing Top Solutions for Compliance & Automation. Expiration Reminder blog [Internet]. 2025 [cited 2025 Nov 5]. Available from: https://www.expirationreminder.com/blog/certification-tracking-software-comparing-top-solutions-for-compliance-automation
28. Liang N, Wu G, Kang W, Wang Z, Feng DD. Real-time long-term tracking with prediction-detection-correction. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia. 2018 Feb 7;20(9):2289-302.
29. Nair S. Explainable AI in Gxp Validation: Balancing Automation, Traceability, and Regulatory Trust in he Pharmaceutical Industry. Clinical Medicine and Health Research Journal. 2025 Sep 2; 5(05):1430-42.
30. McMillan C. Rethinking the regulation of digital contraception under the medical device’s regime. Medical Law International. 2023 Mar; 23(1):3-25.
31. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). GxP Data Integrity Guidance and Definitions. Revision 1. London (UK): MHRA; March 2018.
32. Vuolo-Schuessler L, Newton ME, Smith P, Burgess C, McDowall RD. Harmonizing USP< 1058> and GAMP for analytical instrument qualification. Pharmaceutical Engineering. 2014 Jan; 34(1):1-8.
33. Schilling M, Rühl N. Near-infrared spectroscopy in compliance with pharma regulations.
34. Huber L. Analytical Instrument Qualification and System Validation. Delaware, USA: Agilent Technologies. 2009.
35. Cahilly MJ. Validation of Computerized Systems. Biotechnology and Bioprocessing series. 2005; 29:395.
36. McDowall RD. Effective and practical risk management options for computerised system validation. The Quality Assurance Journal: The Quality Assurance Journal for Pharmaceutical, Health and Environmental Professionals. 2005 Sep; 9(3): 196-227.
37. Elser C. Validation master plans: progress of implementation within the pharmaceutical industry (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California).
38. Van Geel D. 9 Instrument qualification and software validation. In Separation Science and Technology. 2007 Jan 1 (Vol. 8, pp. 269-296). Academic Press.
39. Patel M, et al. Digital transformation in pharma QC laboratories: Enhancing compliance and efficiency. J Pharm Innov. 2021; 16(2):135–146.
40. Allen C, et al. Transitioning from manual to automated systems in pharmaceutical quality control: A case study at AstraZeneca. J Valid Technol. 2019; 25(4):23–29.
41. Kumar, S., & Sharma, R. Impact of Digital Transformation on Quality Metrics in Pharmaceutical Laboratories. PDA Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology. 2020, 74(5), 520-530.DOI: 10.5731/pdajpst.2020.00732
42. Smith J, Patel A. Overcoming implementation challenges in pharmaceutical digital transformation: a case study from GSK. J Pharm Innov. 2018; 13(3):185-92. doi:10.1007/s12247-018-9334-5
43. Kim J, Kim S. Software Qualification Approach for Safety-critical Software of the Embedded System. International Conference on Future Generation Communication and Networking. 2012 Dec 16 (pp. 175-180). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
44. Sohn H, Tucker A, Ferguson O, Gomes I, Dowdy D. Costing the implementation of public health interventions in resource-limited settings: a conceptual framework. Implementation Science. 2020 Sep 29; 15(1): 86.
45. Gold HT, McDermott C, Hoomans T, Wagner TH. Cost data in implementation science: categories and approaches to costing. Implementation Science. 2022 Jan 28; 17(1): 11.
46. Velimeneti S. Data migration from legacy systems to modern database.
47. Wu B, Lawless D, Bisbal J, Grimson J, Wade V, O’Sullivan D, Richardson R. Legacy system migration: A legacy data migration engine. In Proceedings of the 17th International Database Conference (DATASEM’97) 1997 Oct (pp. 129-138).
48. Parlakkılıc A. E-learning change management: Challenges and opportunities. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education. 2013; 14(4):54-68.
49. Nelson RR, Whitener EM, Philcox HH. The assessment of end-user training needs. Communications of the ACM. 1995 Jul 1; 38(7): 27-39.
50. Xu X, Lu Q, Liu Y, Zhu L, Yao H, Vasilakos AV. Designing blockchain-based applications a case study for imported product traceability. Future Generation Computer Systems. 2019 Mar 1; 92: 399-406.