Aardvark released exploratory data from its stopped Phase 3 HERO trial in Prader-Willi syndrome after FDA lifted the hold, and plans a redesigned Phase 3.
|Articles|July 31, 2017
Schulman IRB Launches Central Neurology Review (CNR) Service
Advertisement
CINCINNATI, OHIO & DURHAM, NC, JULY 31, 2017 – Schulman IRB, an industry central IRB in customer service and technology, announced the formal launch of its
Through its partnership with the National Biomedical Research Ethics Council (NBREC), a Nevada-based 501(c) non-profit, Schulman developed CNR to assist research institutions and biopharma and device companies in navigating the latest developments in neurology research and human subject protections.
“As neurology research continues to evolve at a rapid rate, we saw the need to create a specialized IRB model that conducts neurology-focused scientific and regulatory review for multi-site studies,” said Eli Alford, Schulman’s Chief Operating Officer. “Together with NBREC, we’re excited to launch CNR and look forward to supporting the development of the latest techniques, methodologies, and discoveries in neurology research.”
CNR features a scientific review committee to complement Schulman’s best-in-class IRB review. CNR is therapeutically focused and comprised of distinguished scientists and industry leaders who have experience conducting neurology research. By combining the robust expertise of a local IRB, the collaborative capabilities of a central IRB, and the leading minds in neurology research, CNR delivers independent, objective, and authoritative review services.
Advertisement
Related to this article
Clinical trials capture data faster than ever, but the real bottleneck is the distance between data capture and a decision teams can trust.
In today’s ACT Brief, we examine why the future of AI in trials is a trusted orchestration system rather than a single model, how coordinators rate eSource-enabled workflows, and what a bipartisan bill proposes for reusable trial networks.
The Faster Clinical Trials Act would create an FDA Center for Clinical Trial Innovation and aims to cut trial costs and enrollment time by at least 30%.
Standardized measurement across five oncology centers found that clinical research coordinators rated eSource-enabled workflows positively (Overall Mean Satisfaction 5.79 of 7), with reduced manual entry and electronic data transfer earning strong marks, while perceived reduction in sponsor and monitor queries lagged as the one domain below threshold.
In this video interview, Rajneesh Patil, global head of AI, digital, and innovation in clinical development at Syneos Health, describes the industry’s trajectory toward a unified intelligence orchestration environment—and explains why the future isn’t one model that knows everything, but a trusted system that brings the right evidence to the right human decision.
In today’s ACT Brief, we examine how sites can avoid both fear-driven and overly aggressive AI adoption, why community-based research needs sustained financial investment, and why patient access matters more than organizational size.
Pacing obesity trial enrollment, anchoring eligibility to stable real-world therapies, and building site and physician relationships improve retention and data quality more than aggressive recruitment or restrictive exclusion criteria do.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Trending on Applied Clinical Trials Online
1
Where the Industry Is Headed as Clinical, Operational, and Real-World Data Connect
2
ACT Brief: Orchestrated AI Clinical Environments, eSource Coordinator Satisfaction, and Faster Clinical Trials Act
3
Where AI Governance in Clinical Development Falls Short
4
Clinical Trials Do Not Have a Data Problem, They Have a Decision-Readiness Problem
5