-
On June 5, 2025, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning letter and FDA Form 483 to an investigator as a result of objectional conditions observed during a Bioresearch Monitoring Program (BIMO) inspection. According to the letter, the investigator did not adhere to the applicable statutory requirements of Title 21 CFR part 312.60 which states: “An investigator is responsible for ensuring that an investigation is conducted according to the signed investigator statement, the investigational plan, and applicable regulations”.
-
In February 2025 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) posted a series of frequently asked questions (FAQ) on their website from the public regarding Institutional Review Boards (IRB) and the protection of human subjects in research.
-
In February 2025, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Human Research Protection (OHRP) released the final guidance “Institutional Review Board (IRB) Written Procedures.”
-
In the ever changing world of clinical research, staying up to date with the latest guidelines and best practices is crucial. Our Major Changes in GCP from ICH E6(R2) to (R3): Road Map is designed for busy professionals who want to deepen their knowledge on GCP to help ensure they meet the highest standards of quality, safety, and compliance.
-
In January 2025, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a draft guidance titled “Considerations for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to Support Regulatory Decision-Making for Drug and Biological Products” for trial sponsors and stakeholders intending to use AI to generate data and clinical evidence.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register November 15, 2018 entitled, “Institutional Review Board Waiver or Alteration of Informed Consent for Minimal Risk Clinical Investigations.” The NPRM seeks to amend regulations 21 CFR Parts 50, 312, and 812 in alignment with provisions in the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act). Our previous blog details the proposed rule.
Do you understand the difference between consent and centricity? Perhaps you already know that patient centricity is the process where the patient has control over information and are free to make choices they are comfortable with. Learn from subject matter experts about challenges to integrating patient centricity into clinical trials and how eConsent supports subject comprehension and decision making. Our own Sandra “SAM” Sather and an expert panel present information to help you support patient centricity with eConsent.
Currently, clinical trials are conducted at a center where the subjects have to return for study visits. This can be burdensome and may slow down enrollment or lead to reduced compliance or retention. In decentralized trials (DCT), subjects may meet study requirements without the need to return to the study site. CTTI has released its recommendations for DCT.
Topic: Electronic Informed Consent (eIC): How The FDA/OHRP Final Guidance Affects You
Date: January 29, 2019
Time: 1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. EST
Duration: 90 minutes
Sponsored by: Life Science Training Institute
Webinar: Live interactive session. Recording will be available for 30 days.
Sign up here.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) have announced efforts to modernize the 510(k) clearance pathway for medical device approval. Device manufacturers more frequently use the 510(k) pathway than other pathways to market. To gain market approval under 510(k), the manufacturer demonstrates that their device is substantially equivalent to an already marketed, or predicate, device. The 510(k) pathway is faster and easier than for devices that have no predicate. Modern devices are more technologically advanced than devices from even ten years ago. Because of its reliance on existing devices, there are concerns that following the 510(k) pathway may inhibit advancements in technology.
