When I was a teenager, my grandfather would invite my new boyfriends to run short, pointless errands with him, just so he could watch them drive. He said he could tell a lot about a boy’s character simply by observing his actions behind the wheel. Did he stay under the speed limit? Did he use his signal when he was switching lanes? Did he slow down when children were playing near the road? If so, it was a good sign that the boy was generally a careful and attentive fellow. If not, it was an early indication of reckless tendencies, and I would do well to be on my guard.
What does this have to do with PI oversight?
We've created this blog to share our perspective on happenings and trends in the pharmaceutical, device, and supplement industry. We welcome your feedback.
Sunday, November 12, 2017
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Anticipating Tensions Between Clinical Care and Study Protocol
Protocol trumps practice. This principle seems clear enough, but complying with it is not always as straight-forward as it sounds. Years of practicing medicine has reinforced the way a physician responds to medical situations. But do these responses run counter to the investigational plan? Can a site’s commitment to standard of care affect its ability to meet enrollment targets?
There’s a lot to consider.
There’s a lot to consider.
Labels:
adverse events,
clinical research,
clinical trials,
protocol,
protocol deviations,
standard of care
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
Coping with Scoping Your CSV/Part 11 Audit
You know you need a computer systems audit, but that’s literally the extent of what you know.
Has this ever been you?
Yes, you use computers on a daily basis, and you may even use the system that needs to be audited. But you don’t spend your day thinking about where all the system components are located, how services and software are combined, and what Part 11 requirements apply. Terms like “cloud computing” make you feel slightly queasy. You’d rather get a root canal than discuss “distributed processing.” Your expertise is in manufacturing. Or clinical research. Or non-clinical lab operations. And somehow it’s your job to make sure an effective and properly-sized system audit is conducted. Great.
Has this ever been you?
Yes, you use computers on a daily basis, and you may even use the system that needs to be audited. But you don’t spend your day thinking about where all the system components are located, how services and software are combined, and what Part 11 requirements apply. Terms like “cloud computing” make you feel slightly queasy. You’d rather get a root canal than discuss “distributed processing.” Your expertise is in manufacturing. Or clinical research. Or non-clinical lab operations. And somehow it’s your job to make sure an effective and properly-sized system audit is conducted. Great.
Labels:
audit,
cloud,
COTS,
CSV,
Part 11,
QA,
system,
validation,
vendor qualification
Monday, May 22, 2017
Notes 2 Fix Your Notes 2 File
Q: If Notes to File can be regulatory red flags, should we quit using them?
A: No, and here's why...
Regulatory inspections are often conducted long after the conclusion of the study. When an FDA investigator asks you a question about an anomaly five years after it’s happened, will anyone recall the circumstances well enough to satisfy the regulator’s concerns? You’ll be doing yourself a huge favor if you write NTFs that answer the questions regulators might one day be asking you.
A: No, and here's why...
Regulatory inspections are often conducted long after the conclusion of the study. When an FDA investigator asks you a question about an anomaly five years after it’s happened, will anyone recall the circumstances well enough to satisfy the regulator’s concerns? You’ll be doing yourself a huge favor if you write NTFs that answer the questions regulators might one day be asking you.
Labels:
CAPA,
Deviation,
GCP,
ICF,
Informed Consent,
Note To File,
NTF,
protocol,
red flag
Tuesday, April 4, 2017
When GCP & GMP Meet
Developing safe and effective drugs requires a coordinated effort across a diverse set of disciplines. This is easier to observe at some points in the process than at others. Once a product is well into human trials, it can be easy to forget that developments on the manufacturing side of the house can affect the clinicians who are conducting the studies.
Labels:
bioequivalence,
clinical trials,
GCP,
GMP,
Investigational product,
recall,
relabel,
study sites
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Site Selection: Don't Forget About the Study Drug
As a sponsor or CRO, you understand the importance of a thorough site selection process. A site needs to be able to meet enrollment targets and time frames, protect the rights and safety of study participants, execute the protocol, deliver quality data, and maintain GCP compliance. That’s what your site feasibility surveys and pre-study visits are designed to evaluate. And as you’re assessing a site’s abilities, the site is conducting its own feasibility process. They’re mining their patient database and assessing inclusion/exclusion criteria. They’re reviewing staff credentials and ensuring they have adequate resources to manage the number of subject visits and collect the data the protocol requires.
But when we conduct GCP audits, we find there’s one perspective that is sometimes overlooked by both sides: the needs of the study drug itself.
But when we conduct GCP audits, we find there’s one perspective that is sometimes overlooked by both sides: the needs of the study drug itself.
Labels:
clinical research,
clinical trials,
Investigational product,
Site Feasibility,
Site Selection,
Study drug
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)