Computer Software Assurance Software
CSA reframes validation as risk-based assurance rather than exhaustive documentation. cGen is CSA software built around FDA's Computer Software Assurance guidance: critical-thinking risk assessments, right-sized testing, and AI drafting that only draft — never approve.
The AI Risk Assessor runs CSA-aligned critical thinking on every system: what could go wrong, what is the patient/data impact, what testing does the risk actually justify.
GAMP 5 categorisation and CSA risk drive test scope automatically. High-risk paths get scripted execution; low-risk paths get supplier evidence and ad-hoc testing.
FDA warning letters on AI-generated compliance documents make one thing clear: AI cannot approve records. cGen enforces qualified human sign-off on every controlled artefact.
The FDA's Computer Software Assurance guidance, first issued in draft in 2022 and finalized in 2026, is a deliberate move away from the "validate everything to the same depth" mindset that dominated Part 11 practice for two decades. Under CSA, the assurance effort you invest in a computerized system is proportional to the risk that a software failure would impact product quality, patient or user safety, and data integrity.
This has direct implications for the software you use to run validation. Old CSV tools generate the same 9-document ritual for a batch scheduler and a bench-top temperature logger. CSA software has to be smarter — it has to know how to apply risk to decide how much evidence is actually needed, and it has to make critical-thinking risk assessments easy to author, review, and revisit.
CSA software should:
How cGen fits
cGen was built CSA-first. Every system that enters the platform is risk-classified before the first test script is generated; the AI Risk Assessor documents the critical-thinking rationale in the workflow itself; the test-script generator produces scripts scaled to the risk category. The FDA's CSA guidance says "assurance effort should be commensurate with risk." cGen makes that operational instead of aspirational.
FAQ
We value your privacy
We use analytics cookies to understand how you use our site. No advertising or tracking cookies.