Building Phase-Appropriate Quality from Preclinical to Commercial with Jackie Klecker
Episode
35 min
Read time
2 min
Topics
Relationships, Design & UX, Software Development
AI-Generated Summary
Key Takeaways
- ✓Phase-Appropriate Validation: Sponsors frequently over-request at preclinical stage — fully validated analytical methods are unnecessary and expensive before product understanding matures. Conversely, under-preparing by skipping design space testing creates downstream failures. CDMOs should provide sponsors a written phase roadmap specifying exactly when validations, bill of materials, and QMS requirements must be completed — for example, full analytical method validation before Phase 3.
- ✓FMEA as Product Lifecycle Encyclopedia: A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis should be initiated at preclinical and updated continuously through commercial production. Scope it by functional area — separate FMEAs for bulk drug substance, filling, and packaging — with a cross-functional team no larger than a minivan's capacity. Update occurrence rankings as controls are added, and incorporate complaint data and CAPA findings to keep it current.
- ✓EU vs. FDA Regulatory Gaps: EU submissions require completed Process Performance Qualification data before approval, whereas FDA accepts submitted protocols. EU Annex 13 also demands more complete analytical method validation at earlier phases and more extensive hold study data than FDA. Sponsors targeting European markets should pull forward stability studies and PPQ completion timelines to avoid resubmission delays.
- ✓Structured Knowledge Transfer at Program Start: Both sponsor and CDMO should document known product sensitivities — light exposure, oxygen sensitivity, pH specifications — alongside explicit gaps in knowledge before work begins. Sponsors often use only one API lot at preclinical, creating material variability blind spots. A formal written knowledge transfer document covering critical process parameters and material attributes reduces risk of late-stage surprises.
- ✓Quality Agreement as Conflict Prevention Tool: A detailed, documented quality agreement between sponsor and CDMO should define complaint response timelines, document approval authority, and review turnaround expectations before the program starts. Replacing ad-hoc email chains with regularly scheduled standing meetings — weekly, biweekly, or monthly — prevents documentation bottlenecks and eliminates tone misinterpretation that can damage working relationships.
What It Covers
Jackie Klecker, EVP and Head of Quality at Lifecore Biomedical, a 60-year-old fully integrated CDMO with 20 commercial SKUs, outlines how sponsors and CDMOs can build phase-appropriate quality systems from preclinical through commercial launch, avoiding costly delays through structured documentation, risk tools, and aligned communication.
Key Questions Answered
- •Phase-Appropriate Validation: Sponsors frequently over-request at preclinical stage — fully validated analytical methods are unnecessary and expensive before product understanding matures. Conversely, under-preparing by skipping design space testing creates downstream failures. CDMOs should provide sponsors a written phase roadmap specifying exactly when validations, bill of materials, and QMS requirements must be completed — for example, full analytical method validation before Phase 3.
- •FMEA as Product Lifecycle Encyclopedia: A Failure Mode and Effects Analysis should be initiated at preclinical and updated continuously through commercial production. Scope it by functional area — separate FMEAs for bulk drug substance, filling, and packaging — with a cross-functional team no larger than a minivan's capacity. Update occurrence rankings as controls are added, and incorporate complaint data and CAPA findings to keep it current.
- •EU vs. FDA Regulatory Gaps: EU submissions require completed Process Performance Qualification data before approval, whereas FDA accepts submitted protocols. EU Annex 13 also demands more complete analytical method validation at earlier phases and more extensive hold study data than FDA. Sponsors targeting European markets should pull forward stability studies and PPQ completion timelines to avoid resubmission delays.
- •Structured Knowledge Transfer at Program Start: Both sponsor and CDMO should document known product sensitivities — light exposure, oxygen sensitivity, pH specifications — alongside explicit gaps in knowledge before work begins. Sponsors often use only one API lot at preclinical, creating material variability blind spots. A formal written knowledge transfer document covering critical process parameters and material attributes reduces risk of late-stage surprises.
- •Quality Agreement as Conflict Prevention Tool: A detailed, documented quality agreement between sponsor and CDMO should define complaint response timelines, document approval authority, and review turnaround expectations before the program starts. Replacing ad-hoc email chains with regularly scheduled standing meetings — weekly, biweekly, or monthly — prevents documentation bottlenecks and eliminates tone misinterpretation that can damage working relationships.
Notable Moment
Klecker notes that skipping EU-required hold time studies to accelerate timelines backfires severely — regulators reject the submission outright, forcing sponsors to restart stability work from scratch. The resulting delay far exceeds any time saved by skipping the studies initially.
You just read a 3-minute summary of a 32-minute episode.
Get The Life Science Rundown summarized like this every Monday — plus up to 2 more podcasts, free.
Pick Your Podcasts — FreeKeep Reading
More from The Life Science Rundown
TerSera's VP of Quality on the Audit Risk Hiding Inside Your Own Procedures
May 18 · 30 min
Lenny's Podcast
Head of Claude Code: What happens after coding is solved | Boris Cherny
Feb 19
More from The Life Science Rundown
What Auditors Are Actually Looking For — and the Psychology Behind How They Find It
Apr 28 · 19 min
Feel Better, Live More
BITESIZE | The # 1 Lesson From The World’s Longest Scientific Study of Happiness | Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz #603
Dec 12
More from The Life Science Rundown
We summarize every new episode. Want them in your inbox?
TerSera's VP of Quality on the Audit Risk Hiding Inside Your Own Procedures
What Auditors Are Actually Looking For — and the Psychology Behind How They Find It
Why Kidney Disease Innovation Is a Tale of Two Cities — and What It Would Take to Change That
Syncing Global Regulatory Filings Across FDA, EMA, and PMDA with AJ Acker
Navigating Regulatory Leadership Across Large and Small Life Science with Tammy Sarnelli
Similar Episodes
Related episodes from other podcasts
Lenny's Podcast
Feb 19
Head of Claude Code: What happens after coding is solved | Boris Cherny
Feel Better, Live More
Dec 12
BITESIZE | The # 1 Lesson From The World’s Longest Scientific Study of Happiness | Robert Waldinger and Marc Schulz #603
Investing for Beginners
Jun 11
Not All Dividends Are Equal: Dividend Kings, Aristocrats, and Red Flags
How I AI
Jun 8
Shopping with Claude: How to find quality brands, automate returns, and buy things that last 100 years | Nicole Ruiz
20VC (20 Minute VC)
Jun 1
20VC: Mercor CEO on Why Application Layer Companies Have No Defensibility, The Model is the Product | Token Spend Will Exceed Headcount Spend in 5 Years | The True Cost of Hiring AI Researchers in the Valley Today with Brendan Foody
Explore Related Topics
This podcast is featured in Best Science Podcasts (2026) — ranked and reviewed with AI summaries.
Read this week's Software Engineering Podcast Insights — cross-podcast analysis updated weekly.
You're clearly into The Life Science Rundown.
Every Monday, we deliver AI summaries of the latest episodes from The Life Science Rundown and 192+ other podcasts. Free for up to 3 shows.
Start My Monday DigestNo credit card · Unsubscribe anytime