Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

TransCelerate has developed a risk-based monitoring methodology that transforms clinical trial monitoring from a model rooted in source data verification (SDV) to a comprehensive approach leveraging cross-functional risk assessment, technology, and adaptive on-site, off-site, and central monitoring activities to ensure data quality and subject safety. Evidence suggests that monitoring methods that concentrate on what is critical for a study and a site may produce better outcomes than do conventional SDV-driven models. This article assesses the value of SDV in clinical trial monitoring via a literature review, a retrospective analysis of data from clinical trials, and an assessment of major and critical findings from TransCelerate member company internal audits. The results support the hypothesis that generalized SDV has limited value as a quality control measure and reinforce the value of other risk-based monitoring activities.

Keywords

source data verification source data review risk-based monitoring quality control data integrity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ICH harmonised tripartite guideline, guideline for good clinical practice E6(R1). http://www.ich.org/products/guidelines/efficacy/article/efficacy-guidelines.html. Accessed April 18, 2014.

Schuyl

Engel

. A review of the source document verification process in clinical trials. Drug Information Journal. 1999;33:789–797.

International Federations of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations. Clinical trials portal. http://clinical-trials.ifpma.org/clinicaltrials/en/tips/#s-link.

TransCelerate BioPharma Inc. Position paper: risk-based monitoring methodology. http://www.transceleratebiopharmainc.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/TransCelerate-RBM-Position-Paper-FINAL-30MAY2013.pdf. Published 2013.

Funning

Grahnen

Eriksson

Kettis-Linblad

. Quality Assurance within the scope of good clinical practice (GCP): what is the cost of GCP-related activities? A survey within the Swedish Association of Pharmaceutical Industry (LIF)’s members. Qual Assur J. 2009;12:3–7.

Baigent

Harrell

Buyse

. Ensuring trial validity by data quality assurance and diversification of monitoring methods. Clin Trials. 2008;5:49–55.

Tantsyura

Grimes

Mitchel

. Risk-based source data verification approaches: pros and cons. Drug Information Journal. 2010;44:745–756.

Duley

Antman

Arena

. Specific barriers to the conduct of randomized trials. Clin Trials. 2008;5:40–48.

. Hybrid approaches to clinical trial monitoring: practical alternatives to 100% source data verification. Perspect Clin Res. 2011;2(3):100–104.

10.

European Medicines Agency, Science Medicinces Health. Reflection Paper on Risk Based Quality Management in Clinical Trials. London, England: European Medicines Agency; 2013. Publication EMA/269011/2013.

11.

Bakobaki

Rauchenberger

Joffe

McCormack

Stenning

Meredith

. The potential for central monitoring techniques to replace on-site monitoring: findings from an international multi-centre clinical trial. Clin Trials. 2012;9:257–264.

12.

Tudur Smith

Stocken

Dunn

. The value of source data verification in a cancer clinical trial. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(12):e51623.

13.

US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Oversight of Clinical Investigations—A Risk-Based Approach to Monitoring. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2013. OMB control 0910-0733.

14.

Neilsen

Hyder

Deng

. A data-driven approach to risk-based source data verification. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science. 2014;48:173–180.

15.

Medidata Solutions. Industry metric indicates low ROI with full source document verification. http://www.appliedclinicaltrialsonline.com/appliedclinicaltrials/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=767452. Published April 2012.

16.

Atkinson

. Accuracy of data transfer: double data entry and estimating levels of error. J Clin Nurs. 2012;21:2730–2735.

17.

Verhulst

Artiles-Carloni

Beck

. Source document verification in the Mucopolysaccharidosis Type I Registry. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21:749–752.

18.

Carraro

Plebani

. Post-analytical errors with portable glucose meters in the hospital setting. Clin Chim Acta. 2009;404:65–67.

19.

Grahnen

Karlsson

Bragazzi

. Impact of transcription errors on the outcome of a clinical trial. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2007;81(1):S21.

20.

Brosteanu

Houben

Ihrig . Risk analysis and risk adapted on-site monitoring in noncommercial clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2009;6:585–596.

21.

Toth-Allen

. Building Quality Into Clinical Trials: An FDA Perspective. Washington, DC: US Food and Drug Administration; 2012.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB