Article Text
Abstract
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issues warning letters to all research stakeholders if unacceptable deficiencies are found during site visits. Warning letters issued by the FDA between January 2011 and December 2012 to clinical investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) were reviewed for various violation themes and compared to similar studies in the past. Warning letters issued to sponsors between January 2005 and December 2012 were analysed for the first time for a specific set of violations using descriptive statistics. Failure to protect subject safety and to report adverse events to IRBs was found to be significant compared to prior studies for clinical investigators, while failure to follow standard operating procedures and maintain documentation was noted as significant in warning letters to IRBs. Failure to maintain minutes of meeting and to follow written procedures for continuing review were new substantial violations in warning letters issued to IRBs. Forty-six warning letters were issued to sponsors, the most common violations being failure to follow a monitoring schedule (58.69%), failure to obtain investigator agreement (34.78%), failure to secure investigators’ compliance (30.43%), and failure to maintain data records and ship documents to investigators (30.43%). Appropriate methods for handling clinical trial procedural violations should be developed and implemented worldwide.
- Clinical Trials
- Ethics Committees/Consultation
- Legal Aspects
- Research Ethics
- Informed Consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Failure to adhere to study plans is the most common research error among US investigators
- Understanding FDA Regulatory Requirements for Investigational New Drug Applications for Sponsor-Investigators
- Investigational New Drug applications: a 1-year pilot study on rates and reasons for clinical hold
- Trends in clinical development timeframes for antiviral drugs launched in the UK, 1981–2014: a retrospective observational study
- Measuring clinical trial transparency: an empirical analysis of newly approved drugs and large pharmaceutical companies
- Streamlining the Clinical Research Enterprise
- Blood product use for radiological/nuclear trauma: product development and US regulatory considerations
- Clinical trial transparency and data sharing among biopharmaceutical companies and the role of company size, location and product type: a cross-sectional descriptive analysis
- Postmarket studies required by the US Food and Drug Administration for new drugs and biologics approved between 2009 and 2012: cross sectional analysis
- The FDA, Juno Therapeutics, and the ethical imperative of transparency