Cargando…

A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan

INTRODUCTION: In Japan, the PMDA conducted inspections based on GCP in the review process of the submission of NDAs or sNDAs. In this descriptive study, we examined in detail the contents of exclusion data from submitted clinical data package subjects in the results of GCP inspections in Japan for N...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Asada, Ryuta, Yoshimura, Kenichi, Hattori, Kayo, Nonaka, Yujiro, Kasai, Hiroi, Shimizu, Shinobu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6682372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31406948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100416
_version_ 1783441882387316736
author Asada, Ryuta
Yoshimura, Kenichi
Hattori, Kayo
Nonaka, Yujiro
Kasai, Hiroi
Shimizu, Shinobu
author_facet Asada, Ryuta
Yoshimura, Kenichi
Hattori, Kayo
Nonaka, Yujiro
Kasai, Hiroi
Shimizu, Shinobu
author_sort Asada, Ryuta
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: In Japan, the PMDA conducted inspections based on GCP in the review process of the submission of NDAs or sNDAs. In this descriptive study, we examined in detail the contents of exclusion data from submitted clinical data package subjects in the results of GCP inspections in Japan for NDAs or sNDAs. METHODS: For NDAs or sNDAs approved in Japan between January 2007 and December 2017, we gathered information about the PMDA's conclusion from review reports, concerning the results of the GCP on-site inspection. RESULTS: For 1193 NDAs and sNDAs approved in Japan between 2007 and 2017, there were 37 cases in 33 applications of non-compliance with GCP, including 1 by the sponsor and 32 at the clinical trial site. Of the 32 applications at the clinical trial site, 9 cases were categorized as “General findings” and 28 as “Findings for individual subjects.” Of the 9 “General findings” cases, problems related to the IRB were most common (44.4%), while faulty record keeping was the most common (60.7%, 95% confidence interval 42.6%–78.9%) problem in the 27 “Findings for individual subjects” cases. Violations of GCP were mostly found in 2007 and 2009, but few were found after 2013. CONCLUSION: In this study, we revealed that record keeping was the most common reason for exclusion from the analysis data of subjects in the results of GCP inspections. It is necessary to be careful in maintaining medical records, especially when conducting clinical trials without using electronic medical records.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6682372
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66823722019-08-12 A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan Asada, Ryuta Yoshimura, Kenichi Hattori, Kayo Nonaka, Yujiro Kasai, Hiroi Shimizu, Shinobu Contemp Clin Trials Commun Article INTRODUCTION: In Japan, the PMDA conducted inspections based on GCP in the review process of the submission of NDAs or sNDAs. In this descriptive study, we examined in detail the contents of exclusion data from submitted clinical data package subjects in the results of GCP inspections in Japan for NDAs or sNDAs. METHODS: For NDAs or sNDAs approved in Japan between January 2007 and December 2017, we gathered information about the PMDA's conclusion from review reports, concerning the results of the GCP on-site inspection. RESULTS: For 1193 NDAs and sNDAs approved in Japan between 2007 and 2017, there were 37 cases in 33 applications of non-compliance with GCP, including 1 by the sponsor and 32 at the clinical trial site. Of the 32 applications at the clinical trial site, 9 cases were categorized as “General findings” and 28 as “Findings for individual subjects.” Of the 9 “General findings” cases, problems related to the IRB were most common (44.4%), while faulty record keeping was the most common (60.7%, 95% confidence interval 42.6%–78.9%) problem in the 27 “Findings for individual subjects” cases. Violations of GCP were mostly found in 2007 and 2009, but few were found after 2013. CONCLUSION: In this study, we revealed that record keeping was the most common reason for exclusion from the analysis data of subjects in the results of GCP inspections. It is necessary to be careful in maintaining medical records, especially when conducting clinical trials without using electronic medical records. Elsevier 2019-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC6682372/ /pubmed/31406948 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100416 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Asada, Ryuta
Yoshimura, Kenichi
Hattori, Kayo
Nonaka, Yujiro
Kasai, Hiroi
Shimizu, Shinobu
A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title_full A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title_fullStr A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title_full_unstemmed A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title_short A descriptive research: Exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to GCP violation in Japan
title_sort descriptive research: exclusion from submitted clinical data package in the review process of new drug approval due to gcp violation in japan
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6682372/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31406948
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conctc.2019.100416
work_keys_str_mv AT asadaryuta adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT yoshimurakenichi adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT hattorikayo adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT nonakayujiro adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT kasaihiroi adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT shimizushinobu adescriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT asadaryuta descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT yoshimurakenichi descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT hattorikayo descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT nonakayujiro descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT kasaihiroi descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan
AT shimizushinobu descriptiveresearchexclusionfromsubmittedclinicaldatapackageinthereviewprocessofnewdrugapprovalduetogcpviolationinjapan