
News|Videos|October 21, 2026
PharmTech AI Pulse Check: New Approach Methodologies Demand New QC Skills
Jaenisch, Muraru, and Pandey discuss new skills for QC and regulatory teams, plus patient trust, as new approach methodologies reshape pharma.
Advertisement
Advertisement
As new approach methodologies (NAMs) and non-animal testing models gain ground in pharma manufacturing, quality, and regulatory functions, the question is shifting from whether these tools will reshape QC and regulatory affairs to how quickly teams can build the literacy to use them responsibly. That was the center of the latest PharmTech AI Pulse Check, in which Christopher Cole moderates Richard Jaenisch, Florin Muraru, and Gourav Pandey through a conversation on skills, validation, and the one stakeholder often left out of the technical debate: the patient.
Related to this article

Jaenisch, Muraru, and Pandey join PharmTech's Cole to discuss FDA's generative AI paper, ARPA-H's SURPASS trials, and AI accountability.

Panelists on PharmTech AI Pulse Check debate SURPASS, a new digital-twin trial program, regulatory acceptance, and the data-cleanup burden it will create.

Nine duloxetine recalls since 2024 show why generic drug manufacturers need route-level nitrosamine risk assessment, not end-product testing alone.

The deadline to comment on FDA's generative AI paper is Oct 19, 2026. We explain why professionals in pharma manufacturing should weigh in.

PharmTech AI Pulse Check panelists explain why attribution, audit trails, and sign-off matter more than AI watermark detection for GxP quality teams.

Richard Jaenisch examines whether FDA's NAM pathway truly shortens drug pipelines or just shifts the evidentiary burden elsewhere.

API-gated journals may skew pharma regulatory research as AI agents favor accessible sources, raising citation integrity and pharmacovigilance risks.
Advertisement
Advertisement
