In today's ACT Brief, we examine what genuine patient voice requires beyond buzzwords, why AI's next bottleneck is system integration not models, and how regulators across three jurisdictions are formalizing patient input requirements.
|Articles|March 30, 2022
Managing the Impact of the War in Ukraine on Clinical Trials
Advertisement
In view of the disruptions caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the European Commission (EC), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the Heads of Medicines Agencies (HMA) are issuing initial advice for sponsors on how to manage the conduct of clinical trials in this situation.
The ongoing war in Ukraine may require sponsors to adjust the way clinical trials are run in this region, and sponsors may need advice on how to deal with the impact of protocol deviations and other consequences of the disruptions. Certain changes and protocol deviations in the current situation are unavoidable, when for example scheduled study visits cannot take place, or arrangements need to be made to transfer trial participants who are fleeing Ukraine to other investigator sites of the same trial in the European Union (EU). Adaptations will also be needed to protect the participants’ right and safety, including the continuation of ongoing trial treatment if possible, as well as to preserve the quality of the data generated by the trials. Sponsors have asked for guidance on how to handle the situation in terms of trial records, documentation, data collection, protocol deviations, and missing data with its potential impact on methodological aspects.
Read more about this guidance from EMA
Advertisement
Related to this article
The clinical research industry talks about patient-centeredness constantly but embeds it too late, too narrowly, and without clear ownership, and the cost shows up in enrollment failures, protocol deviations, and outcomes that don't reflect what patients actually care about.
Why clinical development’s next AI bottleneck is not the model, but the system around it.
In today's ACT Brief, we examine FDA's expedited pathway for first-in-human trials, why operating model design matters more than sourcing strategy, and how early readiness signals predict trial risk.
FDA Opens Applications for Expedited IND Pilot Designed to Accelerate First-in-Human Trial Timelines
The pilot pairs drug sponsors with qualified research institutions to compress the path from drug identification to first-in-human study through rolling submission review and earlier coordination of institutional review board and site activation activities.
A Syneos Health-announced study from Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development finds no single sourcing model consistently outperforms others, pointing instead to vendor coordination, governance, and fit-for-purpose design as the real performance drivers.
Regulatory expectations for patient input in drug development have shifted from aspiration to documented methodology across three major jurisdictions.
This episode of The Human Side of Clinical Trials, hosted by Brian S. McGowan, PhD, FACEHP, chief learning officer and co-founder of ArcheMedX, Inc., and Kelly Ritch, chief operating officer of ArcheMedX, Inc., explores why training completion metrics like attendance and quiz scores fail to capture true study readiness, and how measuring both competence and confidence can reveal trial risks before enrollment even begins.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Trending on Applied Clinical Trials Online
1
Lessons from Hundreds of Clinical Trials: AI’s Successes, Gaps, and Opportunities
2
The Execution Gap: Why Clinical Trial Infrastructure Has to Be Built Before AI Can Deliver
3
Benchmarking Study Finds Clinical Trial Performance Is Shaped by Operating Model Design, Not Sourcing Strategy
4
ACT Brief: Expedited IND Pilot Launch, Operating Model Importance, and Readiness Prediction
5