360 likes | 520 Views
Science Board FDA’s New Bioresearch Monitoring Initiative. Dr. Janet Woodcock Deputy Commissioner for Operations Food and Drug Administration November 4, 2005. “BiMo” = Bioresearch Monitoring Program.
E N D
Science Board FDA’s New Bioresearch Monitoring Initiative Dr. Janet Woodcock Deputy Commissioner for Operations Food and Drug Administration November 4, 2005
“BiMo” = Bioresearch Monitoring Program • Cross-cutting Agency program — all centers, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Office of the Chief Counsel, Office of the Commissioner • Standard-setting • Inspections • Review and compliance/enforcement with good laboratory practices (GLP) standards in animal safety studies • Good clinical practices (GCP) standards in human trials of FDA-regulated products • Human subject protection (HSP) closely associated with BiMo, accomplishes IRB inspections and sets standards
Objectives of BiMo Program • Protect human subjects in trials of FDA-regulated products • Ensure high-quality and integrity of data used to: • Support marketing applications • Support regulatory decision making • Provide evidence base for clinical use of regulated products
Status of FDA’s New BiMo Initiative • Begun December 2004 • Steering committee charter approved by FDA Management Council • Currently scoping out dimensions of issues • Part of FDA’s Critical Path Initiative
BiMo Initiative — Cross Cutting Co-Chairs: Janet Woodcock M.D. and David LePay M.D. Scientific Lead: Rachel Behrman, M.D. Project Manager: Terrie Crescenzi Representatives from all centers and relevant offices
BiMo Program Is Very Important • Proper conduct of trials to ensure human safety • Trust and confidence in animal safety studies, clinical research, and product development process depend on the integrity of process and supporting data • Regulatory program provides assurance of integrity but can inhibit innovation — ideally will be facilitative • Regulatory program must modernize as practices change
Evolution of Clinical Trial Practices During Last Few Decades • New trial methods and designs • New methods of data collection and processing (e.g., electronic data capture) • New arrangements between sponsors and various contractors, among investigators, among institutions, among IRBs, and rise of free-standing for-profit study centers • Great number of studies in children and other vulnerable populations • Approaches to studies using existing human specimens
Evolution of Clinical Trial Practices • Delegation to parties not directly regulated by the FDA • Larger trials where contribution of single site may be small, but where study-wide systems of data control and management may be very significant • Centralized and/or for-profit IRBs • Increased globalization • Increase in implanted/complex medical device trials
Does FDA’s Current Regulatory Program Fit Today’s Realities? • Must facilitate effective IRB oversight of evolving clinical trials arena to facilitate • IRB oversight of human subject protection • FDA oversight of IRB function • Must provide regulatory guidance and perhaps new regulatory scheme that encompasses modern trial arrangements and participants/contractors • Need common standards and regulatory requirements for electronic data handling — both domestic and international
Does Regulatory Program Fit Realities? (cont.) • Must be able to accommodate globalization of clinical trials • Must ensure comprehensive approach to protection of vulnerable populations • Need to provide additional guidance to all parties regarding various procedures and special circumstances
Internal Challenges for BiMo/HSP Program • Highly decentralized function • Units of varying size in review centers • Field force — only a few experts in any given district • Very small centralized group in OC • Non-automated environment • Relative lack of guidance and standards
Additional Challenges: Multiplicity of Stakeholders • Patients and doctors • Investigators/clinical research community • Data managers • Industry sponsors • FDA review staff • Compliance/enforcement staff • HHS and other government agencies/depts.
Issues in Human Subject Protection • IRB System • Must modernize adverse event reporting to IRBs to accommodate major trend toward multicenter trials (Held Part 15 Hearing last summer) • Use of central IRBs — issued draft guidance Using a Centralized IRB Process, final guidance in clearance
Issues in Human Subject Protection (cont.) • Proposed rule: Institutional Review Board — Registration Requirements, published (with OHRP), FDA reviewing comments • FDA finalizing interim rule: 21 CFR 50.54 Subpart D — Additional Safeguards for Children in Clinical Investigations of FDA Regulated Products • Other rules and guidances in preparation
Issues in Human Subject Protection (cont.) • Risk-based approach optimization • Real-time inspection vs. retrospective • Risk-based algorithm for targeting inspections • Better technology approaches for tracking compliance
Current Issues in Clinical Trials Area — Regulations • Finalizing rule: Foreign Clinical Studies not Conducted Under an IND (21 CFR 312.120 • Will propose rule on reporting information related to falsification of clinical data • Developing revised rules on treatment use and charging under an IND
Current Issues in Clinical Trials Area — Guidance • Guidance on use of data monitoring committees • Guidances on conduct of clinical trials • Reviewing comments on guidance Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Trials
Current Issues In Clinical TrialsArea — Data Quality Need • Common definition of data quality • Methods to assess • Assessment of current system for data quality • Continuous improvement
A Shared Goal — High-Quality Clinical Trial Data • Support integrity of clinical research enterprise • Support confidence of public/patients in human studies • Provide evidentiary base for product approvals and medical practices
Clinical Trial Data Quality —A Shared Responsibility • Investigator/site • Sponsor • FDA • ?Academia; journal editors
Investigator/Site Responsibilities • Embodied in GCPs • Accurate protocol compliance, observations, timing, and data entry • Importance of study personnel • ? Patient adherence
Sponsor Responsibilities • Clear and achievable study plans and protocols • Investigator and site training • Monitoring and auditing • “Data clean up”
FDA Responsibilities • Regulatory oversight of trial protocols and adverse events • Site inspections: “Bioresearch monitoring” • Review of data: paper-based or electronic data audit • Guidance: Framework for best practices and compliance with regulations • Enforcement: sanctions against sloppy performers or fraud
Additional System-Wide Issues — Automation and Standardization • Computer program validation and integrity (FDA Part 11, etc.) • Data and format standardization • Standard format CRF (case report form) • Standardized terminologies • Standardization is best tool for decreasing variation
Definition of High-Quality Data? • 100 % Accurate • Fit for use • Meets protocol — specified parameters • Arbitrary “acceptable levels of variation” per explicit protocol specification?
Definition of High-Quality Data — Considerations • Allow risk management approach • Probability the “x” level of variation could affect conclusions/sensitivity analysis • Are all questions equally important? (Concomitant meds)
General Definition of Quality • Meets needs of customer • Sponsor • Regulator • Ultimately, patient and provider • What, exactly, are customer’s needs? • How to actually assess quality?
Frequent Operational Definition of Quality • Control variability • Acceptable variability differs by use/customer (specification) • ? Trade offs among efficiency, productivity, and control of variability • Need tools to assess and quantify
Generally — Quality is a System Property • Difficult to inspect “quality in” — i.e., monitoring, auditing • Need to build “quality in” (e.g., analogous to quality in other industries) • How to obtain within the healthcare system • What combination of FDA programs — education, guidance, collaboration, inspection, enforcement — will achieve the best results?
FDA Role in Overall System for Data Quality • Oversee whole enterprise — ensure that the system is working • Evaluate level of data quality problems across all studies/development programs • Not able to directly oversee each study — use risk management approach • High risk (experience, country, complexity, sponsor-investigator) • Quality assurance, not quality control
Are There Opportunities for Improvement in Current System? • Large number of resources expended on ensuring data quality • Overall system has not been explicitly examined • FDA currently evaluating; will need to include many others in process
Probable Opportunities • Automation, e.g. linked networks (e.g. CA BIG project) • Standardization • Establish common definitions of data quality • Systems-based approach at FDA
BiMo Initiative Work Plan • Continue to gather information from internal and external stakeholder groups • Identify short-term deliverables and complete (e.g. guidances) • Define desired states and develop longer term plan for achievement • Conduct workshops and create other opportunities for public input