Health authority inspections are one of the most stress-inducing experiences a sponsor, CRO, or site will go through. The mere mention of inspections is enough to throw some people into full on panic-mode. While preparing for an inspection will never be a care- and stress-free process, there are appropriate ways to get your organization ready for one without adding another layer of stress and frustration.
In response to the increasing opacity of the trial master file (TMF), clinical trial decision makers have embraced quantitative metrics as a way of characterizing and understanding the health of a TMF. Quantitative metrics are easily generated through the reporting functionality of a modern electronic TMF (eTMF) and appear to add value by leveraging the data passively generated through modern clinical applications. Although helpful to address specific concerns, especially those related to completeness, these metrics are often unintuitive and do not readily describe the aspects of a clinical trial most instrumental for TMF health.
Historically, patient involvement has been vital in the design and execution of clinical trials, but in recent years there has been an increased desire to engage patients from start to finish during the drug development process. Today, patients are empowered by technological advances that have given them access to more information than ever before, especially regarding diseases and drug development.
Those who know me understand the value I put on bringing the voice of the patient and caregiver into the drug development process. They also know that I believe that today’s terminology — phrases like “patient-centricity,” “patient at the center,” and other sexy mottos — is sometimes used by organizations to show the world that the patient is at the forefront of everything they do. But are they really? Is patient feedback on a protocol enough to prove that their voices are heard? Is providing input on an informed consent what a patient really wants to do? Maybe.
Clinical research has benefited from several advancements in recent decades. Expanding access to information has empowered patients to have greater autonomy in their care and a voice during the development process. Personalized medicine has given rise to promising new therapies treating smaller, more targeted populations. And the number of clinical trials leveraging virtual health tools and mobile technology is increasing. But seismic challenges still remain.
Now more than ever, patients are informed and active about their health. Technological advances are equipping patients with real-time health data. At-home genetic testing kits have the potential to reveal future health risks. And the internet can help increase health literacy and connect patients with other patients. These, and other tools, can empower patients to take control of their health while enhancing their ability to engage with the healthcare ecosystem.
This is the second article in a two-part series addressing real-world evidence (RWE) for life sciences leaders who may be struggling to make sense of the rules. In this part, we will explore the challenges and opportunities RWE presents for life sciences companies, review two recent examples, and discuss how this newer way of thinking will transform the way we design and conduct clinical research or evaluate value-based decisions for the better.
Pharmaceutical and device manufacturing companies often outsource their pharmacovigilance (PV) activities to vendors and consultants to meet their safety, medical information, and regulatory needs. When doing so, these companies have a regulatory obligation to oversee the activities and quality of their vendors. However, vendor audits conducted by these companies can yield a wide range of results due to differences in auditors, scope, and understanding of PV principles and operations.
This is the first article in a two-part series addressing real-world evidence (RWE) for life sciences leaders who may be struggling to make sense of the rules.
Novo Nordisk recognized that if it wanted to develop innovative treatments for patients living with chronic diseases, it was essential to form meaningful partnerships in which patients’ expertise, knowledge, and experience are included and put into action. It was this radical shift in thinking that led to the creation of the Novo Nordisk Disease Experience Expert Panel (DEEP), a network of patient experts and advocates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|