Journal Content

There's an Opportunity for You to Be Part of the Discussion Regarding New Rules Governing Human Subject Protection in Clinical Trials...

A posting will appear in tomorrow's US Federal Register (July 25). You will have the opportunity to comment on the following:

1.Revising the existing risk-based framework to more accurately calibrate the level of review to the level of risk.

2.Using a single Institutional Review Board review for all domestic sites of multi-site studies.

3.Updating the forms and processes used for informed consent.

4.Establishing mandatory data security and information protection standards for all studies involving identifiable or potentially identifiable data.

5.Implementing a systematic approach to the collection and analysis of data on unanticipated problems and adverse events across all trials to harmonize the complicated array of definitions and reporting requirements, and to make the collection of data more efficient.

6.Extending federal regulatory protections to apply to all research conducted at U.S. institutions receiving funding from the Common Rule agencies.

7.Providing uniform guidance on federal regulations.
The public’s input on these matters will be critically important to the government’s efforts to ensure that regulations keep up with today’s changing research environment, and will be considered by HHS as it develops new proposed rules, which will also be made public for comment.

It appears by the second bullet that the US government is proposing to follow other countries in having a central ethics review for multi-site studies. Looks like they recognize both time and money could be saved if they perhaps follow the steps of the private sector!Read the HHS (Health and Human Services) press release below and click through to comment.

HHS announces proposal to improve rules protecting human research... hhs.gov

Centerwatch News Online

Survey: Large sites winning more trials than small; Internet use not as widespread as thought

Monday, March 21, 2011 08:05 AM

Are large sites—hospitals, academic medical centers—getting all the trials, while smaller sites continue to fight for the work that’s left over?

That’s what results of a recent survey by Clinical Research Site Training (CRST) seem to indicate. The nearly 20-year-old site-training firm surveyed 500 U.S. sites in December 2010, finding that 66% of large sites say they have won more trials in the last three years. Smaller sites weren’t asked specifically, but anecdotally many small and medium-sized sites reported fewer trials in recent years.

“Like in all other areas in our society, there’s consolidation going on,” said Lester Levine, founder and president of Philadelphia-based CRST, which conducts a similar survey every few years. “Hospitals are merging, and sponsors are going to larger organizations to get more subjects.”

Responses came from large organizations such as Mayo Clinic and Johns Hopkins, hospitals including Rush Presbyterian and the Hospital for Sick Children, and multi-specialty and private practices.

Another surprising result: sites aren’t turning to the Internet as much as thought.

“Both investigators and study coordinators don’t use the Internet to get information,” said Levine. “It’s a combination of not being aware of where they might go and, even if they are, they don’t spend much time going there.”

The survey showed those at sites using the Internet to seek information are mostly coordinators, and they’re primarily using Google or other general search engines instead of seeking more targeted information such as websites of trade groups including the Association of Clinical Research Professionals (ACRP) and the Society of Clinical Research Associates (SOCRA).

“I thought people would report spending a lot of time on the ACRP and SOCRA sites,” said Levine.

Almost 80% of nurses (mostly coordinators) and 60% of doctors surveyed reported using Google. About 50% of nurses and less than 40% of doctors said they used the National Institutes of Health site. Next, in terms of usage, was the ACRP site, followed by SOCRA, then CenterWatch.

Awareness was very low, too. Only a small percentage of respondents had heard of bioethics-research institutions such as the Hastings Center or news outlets such as Medpage Today, added Levine, which surprised him.

Among the findings Levine expected were that 60% of respondents reported increasing difficulty in managing trial profitability, and 40% said they were seeing increasing difficulty in recruiting and retaining subjects. Specifically, respondents pointed to many more protocol amendments that require re-consenting; the amount of data from multiple vendors (diary, ECG, IVRS, remote data capture, CROs); protracted queries/resolution; and more detailed informed consents.

Eighty percent of nurses said they wanted more quality assurance training, while 60% of all respondents said they desired more training in preparing for FDA audits. This, said Levine, reflects a recent trend among smaller sites to put in place the same standard operating procedures (SOPs) as their larger brethren.

“The small and medium-sized sites have been feeling the pressure to have SOPs,” said Levine. “I wouldn’t think you’d need SOPs unless you had 10 to 15 coordinators. But now SOPs and a greater emphasis on quality are becoming expected.”

--Suz Redfearn

Clinical Research Sites Struggle With Increasing Trial Complexity

According to CRST Survey

Philadelphia, PA March 8, 2011 -- A new North American survey of 500+ clinical research site professionals documents the impact of more kinds of, and more complex, clinical trials. The survey focused on 3-year trial trends and found key challenges in subject recruitment/retention and tracking and reporting data. Increased complexity also impacted trial financials– especially negotiating contracts and managing profitability.  

The December, 2010 survey was conducted among investigators, study coordinators and other clinical site professionals from large organizations, such as Mayo Clinic and Johns Hopkins, hospitals like Rush Presbyterian and the Hospital for Sick Children, as well as multi-specialty and private practices. Clinical Research Site Training (CRST), a leading training provider and Web “community” for clinical research sites conducted the survey. “Given our unique focus on site professionals, conducting regular surveys puts our hands on their pulse” said Lester Levine, CRST President.

Survey highlights include:

  • 66% of large organizations report an increase in trials conducted
  • 60% report increasing difficulty in managing trial profitability
  • 40% report increasing difficulty in recruiting and retaining subjects
  • Training remains a major issue, even though over 50% report an increase in training
  • 80%+ of nurses want more QA training
  • 60%+ of all respondents want more FDA Audits training

The survey also explored sites’ Web use for work information. In spite of increased specialized Web content about the clinical research site “world”, awareness and usage were both relatively low.

  • Google (or other search sites) was the primary information tool
  • Only the NIH and Clinical Trial Network sites have over 50% awareness among all site professionals
  • Usage of major specialized sites averaged less than 40% for nurses and less than 20% for doctors

Mr. Levine noted: “Our findings suggest clinical research sites should:

  • Increase training on financial management, site QA, subject recruitment/retention and FDA inspections;
  • Manage the convergence of increased and more complex trials by improving both new staff recruitment and experienced staff retention; and
  • Reach out on the Web for new/improved ways of working from both formal information sites and clinical research site communities.”

 Full results of the survey are available on the CRST website www.crstnet.com

About Clinical Research Site Training (CRST)

Clinical Research Site Training (CRST) www.crstnet.com provides high quality, hands-on workshops for clinical research site professionals. For over 19 years, CRST has trained thousands of coordinators, investigators and other professionals from diverse sites—private practices, multi-specialty clinics, hospitals and research organizations —for example, Memorial Sloan Kettering, Massachusetts General Hospital, University of California- San Francisco and Phoenix Children’s Hospital. CRST offers both public and onsite workshops throughout the United States and Canada. Our website, www.crstnet.com is building a unique community for site professionals with a blog, polls, article links and discussion forums.

Contact Information:
Lester Levine
President, CRST
lester.levine@crstnet.com
(484) 798-7503