Sponsor – CRO communication critical to IRB transfer; FDA

- Last updated on GMT

Related tags: Clinical trial, Irb

FDA draft guidance on IRB oversight transfer calls for openness
Clear communication between sponsors, CROs and regulators is critical to the smooth transfer of IRB responsibilities, the FDA said.

Draft guidance from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) calls on all parties to maintain open dialogue when transferring oversight from one institutional review board (IRB) to another. Failing to do so can impact on the smooth running of a clinical trial.

In some situations, a transfer may disrupt study enrolment or other aspects of a clinical investigation, whether because of unforeseen difficulties in the transfer process or because of concerns arising from the study​”, the FDA wrote in draft guidance on transferring IRB oversight​.

The FDA draft guidance places the burden of telling the CRO (contract research organisation), data safety monitoring board, and other entities linked to the clinical investigation, on the study sponsor.

So the FDA can access records quickly openness must also extend to the agency. “It is important for the agency to know which entity (eg the original IRB, the receiving IRB, the institution that housed the original IRB, a CRO or other responsible third party) will maintain the records​”, the FDA wrote.

The need for communication is lessened when clinical trial oversight is transferring between IRBs at the same institution. In these instances the FDA expects “simpler and more expeditious​” transfers that can exclude some of the precautionary measures needed when moving to a separate IRB.

Timelines for transfers are also affected by the number and risk of the studies being moved, as well as the reasons for making the switch, with some motivations carrying greater legal, regulatory, administrative, and logistical burdens than others.

Transfer of IRB oversight due to purely administrative reasons such as consolidating IRB workload may be straight-forward, whereas a transfer of oversight due to the original IRB’s non-compliance would be anticipated to be more lengthy and involved​”, the FDA wrote.

IRB warning letter

This week the FDA also hit the IRB Advocate Health Care with a warning letter criticising its informed consent process in a clinical trial, submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov in 2007​, run by the hospital in which it is based.

The IRB approved Study 4257, a clinical investigation for which informed consent was not sought from prospective subjects or their legally authorised representatives, without satisfying the requirements for approving such an investigation​”, the FDA wrote in its warning letter​.

Related news

Show more

Related products

show more

Laboratory Solutions for COVID-19 Clinical Trials

Laboratory Solutions for COVID-19 Clinical Trials

Q2 Solutions | 10-Jun-2020 | Clinical Study

As a leading laboratory services organization for trials across the globe, we are proud to partner with clients to support COVID-19 clinical trials. Our...

Parents as Gatekeepers for Children with Cancer

Parents as Gatekeepers for Children with Cancer

PRA Health Sciences | 08-Jun-2020 | Technical / White Paper

The RACE for Children Act will require new drugs intended for adult cancer treatment to also be studied in pediatric cancers when the molecular target...

RACE Act Prompts Pediatric Oncology Trials

RACE Act Prompts Pediatric Oncology Trials

PRA Health Sciences | 04-May-2020 | Technical / White Paper

Many providers prescribe drugs off-label to pediatric patients, even though there have been few pediatric trials for many of these drugs. In response,...

Manufacturing Cyto and Non-Cyto Drugs in One Facility

Manufacturing Cyto and Non-Cyto Drugs in One Facility

Baxter BioPharma Solutions | 01-Mar-2020 | Technical / White Paper

Recent market reports suggest increasing product niches, which may lead to decreasing numbers of units per product, making dedicated facilities less practical....

Related suppliers

Follow us


View more