Literature DB >> 12757992

Toward protecting the safety of participants in clinical trials.

Robert M Califf1, Michael A Morse, Janet Wittes, Steven N Goodman, Daniel K Nelson, David L DeMets, R Peter Iafrate, Jeremy Sugarman.   

Abstract

It is a widely held belief that the current system of oversight of clinical research, particularly the means of assessing risks and minimizing harms to participants in clinical trials, could be improved. In particular, the system is inefficient with overemphasis on the monitoring ability of some groups such as research ethics review boards and investigators, underemphasis on others such as data monitoring committees (DMCs) and sponsors, confusion about responsibilities for safety and imperfect communication between these different groups. Research ethics review boards are not able to perform safety monitoring by review of individual adverse events and are often burdened by duplicative reviews of large multicenter studies. There are no standards for DMCs to ensure they can reliably identify safety issues. Sponsors may be overreliant on data audits and slow to disseminate safety data in a coherent summary. Investigators, their staffs and clinical sites may not fully appreciate all the nuances of good clinical practice or may be inattentive to the daily conduct of studies. Regulators, particularly those in the United States, have failed to completely harmonize their policies with each other or with international regulatory agencies. We recommend well-designed monitoring plans for all studies that are appropriate to their scope and risk, more centralized review of large multisite studies and closer local scrutiny of single-institution studies. In addition, sponsors should pay greater attention to monitoring adverse events and keeping up-to-date databases or investigator's brochures emphasizing safety issues. A minimal standard of education or expertise in good clinical practice should be established for investigators, their staffs and research ethics review board members. DMC composition and functions should be standardized and regulations should be harmonized nationally and internationally. Finally, there should be a concerted effort to study the efficacy of various components of the system.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12757992     DOI: 10.1016/s0197-2456(03)00005-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Control Clin Trials        ISSN: 0197-2456


  14 in total

1.  Randomized clinical trials: slow death by a thousand unnecessary policies?

Authors:  Salim Yusuf
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-10-12       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Regulatory impediments jeopardizing the conduct of clinical trials in Europe funded by the National Institutes of Health.

Authors:  James D Neaton; Abdel Babiker; Mark Bohnhorst; Janet Darbyshire; Eileen Denning; Arnie Frishman; Jesper Grarup; Gregg Larson; Jens Lundgren
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Strategies to minimize risks and exploitation in phase one trials on healthy subjects.

Authors:  Adil E Shamoo; David B Resnik
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 11.229

4.  Principles for the ethical analysis of clinical and translational research.

Authors:  Jonathan A L Gelfond; Elizabeth Heitman; Brad H Pollock; Craig M Klugman
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Taking stock of the ethical foundations of international health research: pragmatic lessons from the IU-Moi Academic Research Ethics Partnership.

Authors:  Eric M Meslin; Edwin Were; David Ayuku
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Meta-consent in research on decisional capacity: a "Catch-22"?

Authors:  Elyn R Saks; Laura B Dunn; Barton W Palmer
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2005-10-27       Impact factor: 9.306

7.  Data monitoring committees: Promoting best practices to address emerging challenges.

Authors:  Thomas R Fleming; David L DeMets; Matthew T Roe; Janet Wittes; Karim A Calis; Amit N Vora; Alan Meisel; Raymond P Bain; Marvin A Konstam; Michael J Pencina; David J Gordon; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Charles H Hennekens; James D Neaton; Gail D Pearson; Tomas Lg Andersson; Marc A Pfeffer; Susan S Ellenberg
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 2.486

8.  Serious adverse events in randomized psychosocial treatment studies: safety or arbitrary edicts?

Authors:  Nancy M Petry; John M Roll; Bruce J Rounsaville; Samuel A Ball; Maxine Stitzer; Jessica M Peirce; Jack Blaine; Kimberly C Kirby; Dennis McCarty; Kathleen M Carroll
Journal:  J Consult Clin Psychol       Date:  2008-12

9.  Electronic reporting to improve patient safety.

Authors:  D Tuttle; R Holloway; T Baird; B Sheehan; W K Skelton
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-08

10.  Manufacturing mistrust: issues in the controversy regarding foster children in the pediatric HIV/AIDS clinical trials.

Authors:  Jacquelyn Slomka
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 3.525

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.