GAMP 5 Cloud Infrastructure Qualification Framework
Complete validation scope, 21 CFR Part 11 compliance, and ALCOA+ data integrity reference for XaaS deployment models
Vendor Managed – Covered by vendor qualification (IQ/OQ/PQ)
Customer Responsibility – CSV/validation deliverables required
Key Takeaways
- Traditional IT: Full validation responsibility – complete control but highest compliance burden
- IaaS: ~30% reduced scope – vendor manages infrastructure, customer validates application stack
- PaaS: ~60% reduced scope – vendor manages platform, customer validates application and data
- SaaS: ~80% reduced scope – vendor manages everything, customer validates configuration and data governance
📋 GAMP 5 Validation Strategy
⚖️ 21 CFR Part 11 Compliance Implementation
🔒 ALCOA+ Data Integrity Controls
📊 Comprehensive Comparison Matrix
| Aspect | Traditional IT | IaaS | PaaS | SaaS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Validation Scope | Complete infrastructure from hardware to application | Application stack + vendor qualification review | Application layer + data management | Configuration validation + vendor assessment |
| GAMP Category | Category 4 (Custom System) | Category 4 (Application) + Category 1 (Infrastructure) | Category 4/5 + Category 3 (Platform) | Category 3/5 (Configurable Product) |
| IQ Focus | Hardware installation, network setup, server configuration | VM configuration, OS installation, vendor IQ review | Application deployment, platform configuration | Vendor certificates, SOC 2, ISO 27001 review |
| OQ Focus | All system parameters, performance, security | Application tier, OS config, network performance | Application functions, integrations, data validation | Configuration settings, user access, workflows |
| PQ Focus | End-to-end process validation, full data lifecycle | Production scenarios, audit trails, redundancy | Data integrity, 21 CFR Part 11, audit logs | Application-level data integrity, audit testing |
| Audit Trail | Custom development required | Application-level + CloudTrail/Azure Monitor | Application + platform logging services | Native SaaS audit logs (review capabilities) |
| Data Security | AES-256, TLS 1.3, custom key management | Customer-managed keys, VPC isolation, encryption | Transparent data encryption, managed keys | Vendor encryption (review key management) |
| Business Continuity | Custom DR solution, RPO/RTO as designed | Multi-AZ, cross-region replication (customer config) | Platform HA, automated backup (managed) | Vendor SLA (99.9%+), vendor-managed BC/DR |
| Validation Effort | Baseline (100%) | ~70% of Traditional IT | ~40% of Traditional IT | ~20% of Traditional IT |
| Primary Risk | Complete responsibility for all layers | Shared responsibility complexity | Platform dependency, limited infrastructure access | Heavy vendor reliance, update management |
| Best For | Legacy systems, maximum control requirements | Custom applications, flexible infrastructure needs | Rapid development, standardized applications | Commercial software, minimal IT overhead |
Validation Strategy Selection Guide
- Choose Traditional IT when: Maximum control required, legacy infrastructure, no cloud migration option, complete data sovereignty needed
- Choose IaaS when: Custom applications with specific infrastructure needs, gradual cloud migration, need infrastructure flexibility
- Choose PaaS when: Focus on application development, standardized platforms acceptable, rapid deployment needed
- Choose SaaS when: Commercial off-the-shelf solution available, minimal IT overhead desired, vendor has strong compliance credentials