FDA 21 CFR Part 11
FDA regulation for trustworthy electronic records and signatures
ISO/IEC 42001:2023
International standard for AI management systems.
Quick Verdict
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 mandates electronic record trustworthiness for life sciences compliance, while ISO/IEC 42001:2023 provides voluntary AI governance frameworks. Pharma adopts Part 11 for FDA enforcement; all firms use 42001 for ethical AI trust and certification.
FDA 21 CFR Part 11
21 CFR Part 11: Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures
Key Features
- Establishes equivalency criteria for electronic records to paper
- Mandates controls for closed and open systems separately
- Requires secure, time-stamped audit trails for traceability
- Enforces unique, linked electronic signatures with non-repudiation
- Applies narrow, risk-based scope via reliance principle
ISO/IEC 42001:2023
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 AI Management Systems
Key Features
- PDCA framework for full AI lifecycle governance
- AI Impact Assessments for high-risk systems
- Annex A: 38 AI-specific risk controls
- Third-party AI supplier risk management
- Integration with ISO 27001 and HLS standards
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 under which electronic records and electronic signatures are considered trustworthy, reliable, and equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures. It applies to FDA-regulated industries using electronic systems for predicate-rule-required records. The approach is risk-based, with narrow scope focused on business reliance on electronic records, per 2003 FDA guidance.
Key Components
- Subpart A: scope, definitions; Subpart B: closed (§11.10)/open (§11.30) system controls like validation, audit trails, access; Subpart C: signature requirements (§§11.50-11.300) for uniqueness, linking, multi-component authentication.
- Core controls: ~11 for closed systems, plus encryption/digital signatures for open; built on ALCOA+ data integrity principles.
- Compliance via validation (IQ/OQ/PQ), no formal certification but FDA inspection.
Why Organizations Use It
Life sciences firms comply to avoid enforcement (warnings, holds), ensure data integrity for decisions, enable paperless operations, reduce risks in audits/investigations. Benefits: efficiency, faster releases, stakeholder trust.
Implementation Overview
Risk-based CSV lifecycle: scope records, classify systems, validate controls, SOPs/training. Applies to pharma/devices globally via U.S. ops; multi-phase (6+ months), ongoing audits/change control. (178 words)
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Details
What It Is
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 is the world's first international standard for Artificial Intelligence Management Systems (AIMS), a certifiable framework to govern AI responsibly. It specifies requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and improving AIMS using Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) methodology and High-Level Structure (HLS), addressing AI risks like bias, transparency, and ethics across the full lifecycle.
Key Components
- Clauses 4-10: context, leadership, planning, support, operation, performance evaluation, improvement
- **Annex A38 AI-specific controls for data, transparency, integrity, resiliency
- Built on ISO standards like 27001, 31000; Annex B/C for guidance and risks
- Third-party certification with audits and 3-year validity
Why Organizations Use It
- Mitigates AI risks, ensures ethical practices, regulatory alignment (e.g., EU AI Act)
- Drives innovation, trust, competitive differentiation
- Enhances reputation, supply chain resilience, UN SDG alignment
Implementation Overview
- Phased: gap analysis, AIIAs, training, monitoring, audits
- Universal applicability: any size, sector, AI role
- 6-12 months typical; integrates with existing MSS for efficiency
Key Differences
| Aspect | FDA 21 CFR Part 11 | ISO/IEC 42001:2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Electronic records/signatures trustworthiness | AI management systems lifecycle governance |
| Industry | FDA-regulated life sciences, global | All industries using AI, universal |
| Nature | Mandatory US regulation, enforced | Voluntary international certification standard |
| Testing | Risk-based system validation, IQ/OQ/PQ | AI impact assessments, third-party audits |
| Penalties | Warning letters, fines, product holds | Loss of certification, reputational damage |
Scope
Industry
Nature
Testing
Penalties
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about FDA 21 CFR Part 11 and ISO/IEC 42001:2023
FDA 21 CFR Part 11 FAQ
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 FAQ
You Might also be Interested in These Articles...
Decoding Tomorrow's Regulations: How Advanced Compliance Tools Predict and Prepare for Future Shifts
Advanced compliance tools use AI, analytics & real-time monitoring to predict regulatory shifts, cut non-compliance costs 3x, and ensure audit readiness. Stay p
NIST CSF 2.0: Key Enhancements and How They Address Evolving Cyber Threats
Explore NIST CSF 2.0 updates: Govern function, supply chain security, SME playbooks for ransomware & AI threats. Boost your cyber defenses now!
The Human-AI Synergy: How Modern Compliance Tools Amplify Your Team's Strategic Impact
Unlock human-AI synergy with modern compliance tools. Automate monitoring, cut non-compliance risks 3x, and boost strategic decision-making. Elevate your team's
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.
Check out these other Gradum.io Standards Comparison Pages
GMP vs UL Certification
Compare GMP vs UL Certification: Key differences in pharma quality controls & product safety testing. Unlock compliance strategies for risk-free manufacturing. Achieve excellence now!
ISO 37301 vs APRA CPS 234
ISO 37301 vs APRA CPS 234: Certifiable CMS meets Aussie financial info sec prudence. Compare governance, risks, controls, whistleblowing & testing. Align for resilient compliance now!
HIPAA vs ISO 19600
Compare HIPAA vs ISO 19600: U.S. health privacy/security rules vs global compliance systems. Master risks, safeguards, breaches & governance for resilient programs. Dive in!