Global CRO Streamlines Study Startup By Centralizing IRB Review

PRA Health Sciences was working with a substantial volume of sites that historically were required to leverage local IRBs for approvals. To break down the split, on average PRA saw about a 30% central IRB/70% local IRB across their portfolio of work. Furthermore, PRA estimated that working with local IRBs cost PRA and its clients substantially more time with less transparency than working with their central IRB partner.

According to reports, research sites relying on a local IRB take at least twice as long to activate than sites that can rely on the study’s single central IRB. Utilizing the central IRB not only helps to streamline study startup but also enables increased efficiencies in managing sites throughout the study’s lifecycle.

Due to the known benefits of operating from a central IRB, PRA expressed an interest in flipping its ratio so that more sites could take advantage of the efficiencies, transparency, and time savings. See how the CRO was able to convert to a central IRB to improve the overall study startup processes and timelines.