Medtech Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

ClinicalTrials.gov patient consent issues

This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet

Executive Summary

Clinical research stakeholders say a Dec. 29 proposed rule, requiring study sponsors to inform trial participants that information from the study may be submitted to the National Institutes of Health's ClinicalTrials.gov database, should be rewritten to make the required informed consent language more readable. Commenters, including Kaiser Permanente, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and the Association of Clinical Research Organizations, say the proposed language is far too technical. Several recommend giving sponsors leeway to craft their own ClinicalTrials.gov patient consent language (1"The Gray Sheet" Jan. 4, 2010)

You may also be interested in...



Regulatory News In Brief

Informed consent rule

Regulatory News In Brief

Electro-shock controversy: Psychiatrists and skeptic patient advocacy groups remain split on the safety and efficacy of electroconvulsive shock therapy devices. After requiring manufacturers of certain "pre-amendment" Class III devices, including ECT devices, to submit safety and effectiveness information, FDA opened a docket to allow the public to weigh in as the agency decides whether to require PMAs for the devices or downclassify them (1"The Gray Sheet" Sept. 14, 2009). The psychiatric community maintains that ECT is a safe and effective treatment option for psychiatric disorders such as severe depression. "When patients are appropriately screened and ECT is appropriately delivered, there is no question about its efficacy in a significant percentage of very ill patients," Cleveland Clinic's Donald Malone, M.D., comments. "Requiring a PMA of the current ECT device companies would place a tremendous burden on relatively small companies." Others, such as the Center for Disability Rights, oppose down-regulation. Because of the "severe danger" of electro-shock, the procedure is banned in Texas for children under age 16, noted one psychologist who urged FDA to require PMAs for ECT devices. Though not a booming market, ECT is still used in some facilities; manufacturers include Mecta Corporation (SpECTrum) and Somatics (Thymatron)

Sanofi Prepares Pulmonologists As Dupixent Nears COPD Finishing Line

The French drugmaker has identified education as a key challenge ahead of its June action date for the huge-selling IL4/IL-13 inhibitor in the lung condition. An approval would make it the first biologic for the disease.

Topics

Latest Headlines
See All
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

MT028580

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel