Standards Comparison

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11

    Mandatory
    1997

    US FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records and signatures

    VS

    ISO 17025

    Voluntary
    2017

    International standard for competence of testing and calibration laboratories

    Quick Verdict

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11 ensures electronic records/signatures are trustworthy for regulated industries, while ISO 17025 accredits labs for competent, impartial testing. Companies adopt Part 11 for FDA compliance; ISO 17025 for global result acceptance and market trust.

    Electronic Records

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11

    21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures

    Cost
    €€€€
    Complexity
    Medium
    Implementation Time
    18-24 months

    Key Features

    • Establishes equivalency of electronic records to paper records
    • Mandates secure, time-stamped audit trails for changes
    • Requires unique multi-component electronic signatures
    • Differentiates controls for closed vs open systems
    • Enforces access, authority, and device checks
    Laboratory Quality

    ISO 17025

    ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for laboratory competence

    Cost
    €€€€
    Complexity
    High
    Implementation Time
    12-18 months

    Key Features

    • Impartiality and confidentiality as foundational requirements
    • Risk-based thinking integrated across all clauses
    • Personnel competence lifecycle with authorization records
    • Metrological traceability and measurement uncertainty evaluation
    • Method validation, proficiency testing, and result validity monitoring

    Detailed Analysis

    A comprehensive look at the specific requirements, scope, and impact of each standard.

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11 Details

    What It Is

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11 is a U.S. regulation establishing criteria for electronic records and electronic signatures to be trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It applies to FDA-regulated industries using electronic systems for predicate-rule records. The approach is control-based with risk-based enforcement discretion per 2003 guidance, focusing on closed/open systems.

    Key Components

    • Subparts: General provisions, electronic records (§11.10/11.30), electronic signatures (§11.50-11.300).
    • Core controls: validation, audit trails, access limits, operational/authority/device checks, training, accountability policies, signature linking/uniqueness.
    • Built on ALCOA+ principles for data integrity; no certification but FDA inspection enforcement.

    Why Organizations Use It

    Ensures compliance with predicate rules, mitigates enforcement risks like warning letters, enhances data integrity for quality decisions. Provides strategic benefits: efficient inspections, faster CAPA, digital transformation in pharma/biotech/devices.

    Implementation Overview

    Risk-based CSV lifecycle (GAMP5): scoping, validation (IQ/OQ/PQ), SOPs/training, supplier governance. Applies to life sciences globally under U.S. jurisdiction; ongoing audits via inspections, no external certification.

    ISO 17025 Details

    What It Is

    ISO/IEC 17025:2017, titled "General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories," is an international accreditation standard. It ensures competence, impartiality, and consistent operation of labs performing testing, calibration, and sampling. The risk-based, performance-oriented approach structures requirements into eight elements: general, structural, resource, process, and management system.

    Key Components

    • Core clauses (4-8): impartiality/confidentiality, organization, personnel/facilities/equipment, methods/validity/reporting, and QMS (Option A standalone or B with ISO 9001).
    • Emphasizes metrological traceability, measurement uncertainty, method validation.
    • Principles: risk-based thinking, technical validity, continual improvement.
    • Accreditation model via ILAC-signatory bodies with assessments and surveillance.

    Why Organizations Use It

    • Gains market access, regulatory acceptance for results.
    • Mitigates risks of invalid data impacting safety/finance.
    • Builds customer/regulator trust; competitive differentiation.
    • Meets supply chain/contractual mandates.

    Implementation Overview

    • Phased: gap analysis, documentation, competence training, validation, internal audits.
    • Suits labs globally, all sizes; requires proficiency testing, witnessed activities for accreditation.

    Key Differences

    Scope

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11
    Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness
    ISO 17025
    Laboratory competence, impartiality, testing

    Industry

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11
    FDA-regulated pharma, devices, food
    ISO 17025
    Testing/calibration labs all sectors

    Nature

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11
    US FDA regulation, mandatory reliance
    ISO 17025
    International accreditation standard

    Testing

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11
    Risk-based system validation, audit trails
    ISO 17025
    Proficiency testing, method validation

    Penalties

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11
    Warning letters, enforcement actions
    ISO 17025
    Loss of accreditation, market exclusion

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Common questions about FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and ISO 17025

    FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ

    ISO 17025 FAQ

    You Might also be Interested in These Articles...

    Run Maturity Assessments with GRADUM

    Transform your compliance journey with our AI-powered assessment platform

    Assess your organization's maturity across multiple standards and regulations including ISO 27001, DORA, NIS2, NIST, GDPR, and hundreds more. Get actionable insights and track your progress with collaborative, AI-powered evaluations.

    100+ Standards & Regulations
    AI-Powered Insights
    Collaborative Assessments
    Actionable Recommendations

    Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages