Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult

Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pharmaceutical technology (2003) 2016-08, p.45
Hauptverfasser: Walsh, Andrew, Crevoisier, Michel, Barle, Ester Lovsin, Flueckiger, Andreas, Dolan, David G, Ovais, Mohammad
Format: Magazinearticle
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Methods
Quality control
Risk assessment
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 45
container_title Pharmaceutical technology (2003)
container_volume
creator Walsh, Andrew
Crevoisier, Michel
Barle, Ester Lovsin
Flueckiger, Andreas
Dolan, David G
Ovais, Mohammad
description
format Magazinearticle
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A463292314</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A463292314</galeid><sourcerecordid>A463292314</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g1424-9e0d3fcc8762df887d8568fb7c9d0aa278ca73f6016be0489132e2c5451b9a673</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkM1qFUEQhWehYEx8hwK36dDd8-8uXPy5EDALXYea7uqZMj09capH8d18uIzGRYRLLQ4U3zkHzovizNRVqWxtzavitcg3rW3ZGXtW_D5EwsRphMgzZ1Hq5_QL8kRgtHp4mAGTB32ltVF-EQK3cqaVEWRatuhhIMBhZ5ZE_hJucc1wPL4Dt6QflDIvCeNTshLK-U9PJjcl_r6RAK4EackwEcY8qQGF_N9ChwlmvCdYWe4BRUhk3vNgXnaL5xDYbTFfFC8DRqE3__S8-Prh_ZfDJ3Xz-ePxcH2jRlPZSvWkfRmc69rG-tB1re_qpgtD63qvEW3bOWzL0GjTDKSrrjelJevqqjZDj01bnhdvn3JHjHTHKSx5RTezuLvrqiltb0tT7ZQ6QY2UaMW47xN4f__HX53g9_M0sztpuHxmGDbhtO_CSXicsoy4iTzHHwFmMp5D</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>magazinearticle</recordtype></control><display><type>magazinearticle</type><title>Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Walsh, Andrew ; Crevoisier, Michel ; Barle, Ester Lovsin ; Flueckiger, Andreas ; Dolan, David G ; Ovais, Mohammad</creator><creatorcontrib>Walsh, Andrew ; Crevoisier, Michel ; Barle, Ester Lovsin ; Flueckiger, Andreas ; Dolan, David G ; Ovais, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><identifier>ISSN: 1543-2521</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>UBM LLC</publisher><subject>Methods ; Quality control ; Risk assessment</subject><ispartof>Pharmaceutical technology (2003), 2016-08, p.45</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2016 UBM LLC</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Walsh, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crevoisier, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barle, Ester Lovsin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flueckiger, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolan, David G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovais, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><title>Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult</title><title>Pharmaceutical technology (2003)</title><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Quality control</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><issn>1543-2521</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>magazinearticle</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>magazinearticle</recordtype><sourceid>N95</sourceid><recordid>eNptkM1qFUEQhWehYEx8hwK36dDd8-8uXPy5EDALXYea7uqZMj09capH8d18uIzGRYRLLQ4U3zkHzovizNRVqWxtzavitcg3rW3ZGXtW_D5EwsRphMgzZ1Hq5_QL8kRgtHp4mAGTB32ltVF-EQK3cqaVEWRatuhhIMBhZ5ZE_hJucc1wPL4Dt6QflDIvCeNTshLK-U9PJjcl_r6RAK4EackwEcY8qQGF_N9ChwlmvCdYWe4BRUhk3vNgXnaL5xDYbTFfFC8DRqE3__S8-Prh_ZfDJ3Xz-ePxcH2jRlPZSvWkfRmc69rG-tB1re_qpgtD63qvEW3bOWzL0GjTDKSrrjelJevqqjZDj01bnhdvn3JHjHTHKSx5RTezuLvrqiltb0tT7ZQ6QY2UaMW47xN4f__HX53g9_M0sztpuHxmGDbhtO_CSXicsoy4iTzHHwFmMp5D</recordid><startdate>20160801</startdate><enddate>20160801</enddate><creator>Walsh, Andrew</creator><creator>Crevoisier, Michel</creator><creator>Barle, Ester Lovsin</creator><creator>Flueckiger, Andreas</creator><creator>Dolan, David G</creator><creator>Ovais, Mohammad</creator><general>UBM LLC</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20160801</creationdate><title>Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult</title><author>Walsh, Andrew ; Crevoisier, Michel ; Barle, Ester Lovsin ; Flueckiger, Andreas ; Dolan, David G ; Ovais, Mohammad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g1424-9e0d3fcc8762df887d8568fb7c9d0aa278ca73f6016be0489132e2c5451b9a673</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>magazinearticle</rsrctype><prefilter>magazinearticle</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Quality control</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Walsh, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Crevoisier, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barle, Ester Lovsin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flueckiger, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dolan, David G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ovais, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><jtitle>Pharmaceutical technology (2003)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Walsh, Andrew</au><au>Crevoisier, Michel</au><au>Barle, Ester Lovsin</au><au>Flueckiger, Andreas</au><au>Dolan, David G</au><au>Ovais, Mohammad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult</atitle><jtitle>Pharmaceutical technology (2003)</jtitle><date>2016-08-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><spage>45</spage><pages>45-</pages><issn>1543-2521</issn><pub>UBM LLC</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1543-2521
ispartof Pharmaceutical technology (2003), 2016-08, p.45
issn 1543-2521
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A463292314
source Business Source Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Methods
Quality control
Risk assessment
title Cleaning limits--why the 10-ppm and 0.001-dose criteria should be abandoned, Part II: conventional limit-setting techniques are not health-based and can make risk assessment more difficult
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T10%3A47%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cleaning%20limits--why%20the%2010-ppm%20and%200.001-dose%20criteria%20should%20be%20abandoned,%20Part%20II:%20conventional%20limit-setting%20techniques%20are%20not%20health-based%20and%20can%20make%20risk%20assessment%20more%20difficult&rft.jtitle=Pharmaceutical%20technology%20(2003)&rft.au=Walsh,%20Andrew&rft.date=2016-08-01&rft.spage=45&rft.pages=45-&rft.issn=1543-2521&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale%3EA463292314%3C/gale%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A463292314&rfr_iscdi=true