 |
July-September 2011 Volume 2 | Issue 3
Page Nos. 81-112
Online since Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Accessed 197,979 times.
PDF access policy Journal allows immediate open access to content in HTML + PDF
EPub access policy Full text in EPub is free except for the current issue. Access to the latest issue is reserved only for the paid subscribers.
|
| |
|
Show all abstracts Show selected abstracts Add to my list |
|
EDITORIAL |
|
|
|
Trends in Food and Drug Administration inspection: A warning for the industry! |
p. 81 |
Kunal Shah DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83220 PMID:21897879 |
[HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE |
 |
|
|
|
The Year Ahead: An initiative to assess the impact of an intervention "Speaking Book" on awareness among the potential participants about clinical trials in India |
p. 83 |
Urmila Thatte, Santosh Taur DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83222 PMID:21897880 |
[HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Challenges in clinical research |
p. 84 |
Ashwini Mathur DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83223 PMID:21897881 |
[HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (1) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
 |
|
|
 |
Perception of various stakeholders regarding clinical drug trial industry in India |
p. 86 |
Rakesh M Parikh, Kirti Pandia, Mahesh Goyal, Meenakshi Sharma, MS Dolima DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83225 PMID:21897882Context: Though India has been thought to be an ideal destination for conduct of clinical drug trials, other smaller countries seem to be doing better. The pace of growth observed during 2005-2009 seems to be plateaued in 2010. Aims: There is an urgent need for introspection and corrective actions. Materials and Methods: An online survey was conducted among various stakeholders from clinical drug trial industry in India regarding their perception about clinical drug trial industry in India. Respondents were requested to rate training of investigator sites, industry, performance of regulatory, etc. Results: Majority of respondent felt that the clinical drug trial industry in India is growing, though India is not utilizing its full potential. Lack of trained investigators and delay in regulatory approvals came out as biggest hurdles. Conclusions: Urgent steps need to be taken in terms of proper training of all stakeholders. Regulatory bodies ought to bring about some radical changes in the system so as to match the other competing nations. |
[ABSTRACT] [HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (1) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
SITE MANAGEMENT |
 |
|
|
|
Clinical trials in private clinics |
p. 90 |
Pankaj K Agarwal DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83227 PMID:21897883 |
[HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (2) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
REGULATORY |
 |
|
|
|
Regulations and guidelines governing stem cell based products: Clinical considerations |
p. 94 |
Bobby George DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83228 PMID:21897884The use of stem cells as medicines is a promising and upcoming area of research as they may be able to help the body to regenerate damaged or lost tissue in a host of diseases like Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, liver disease, spinal cord damage, cancer and many more. Translating basic stem cell research into routine therapies is a complex multi-step process which entails the challenge related to managing the expected therapeutic benefits with the potential risks while complying with the existing regulations and guidelines. While in the United States (US) and European Union (EU) regulations are in place, in India, we do not have a well-defined regulatory framework for "stem cell based products (SCBP)". There are several areas that need to be addressed as it is quite different from that of pharmaceuticals. These range from establishing batch consistency, product stability to product safety and efficacy through pre-clinical, clinical studies and marketing authorization. This review summarizes the existing regulations/guidelines in US, EU, India, and the associated challenges in developing SCBP with emphasis on clinical aspects. |
[ABSTRACT] [HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (33) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
MONITORING |
 |
|
|
 |
Hybrid approaches to clinical trial monitoring: Practical alternatives to 100% source data verification |
p. 100 |
Sourabh De DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83226 PMID:21897885For years, a vast majority of clinical trial industry has followed the tenet of 100% source data verification (SDV). This has been driven partly by the overcautious approach to linking quality of data to the extent of monitoring and SDV and partly by being on the safer side of regulations. The regulations however, do not state any upper or lower limits of SDV. What it expects from researchers and the sponsors is methodologies which ensure data quality. How the industry does it is open to innovation and application of statistical methods, targeted and remote monitoring, real time reporting, adaptive monitoring schedules, etc. In short, hybrid approaches to monitoring. Coupled with concepts of optimum monitoring and SDV at site and off-site monitoring techniques, it should be possible to save time required to conduct SDV leading to more available time for other productive activities. Organizations stand to gain directly or indirectly from such savings, whether by diverting the funds back to the R&D pipeline; investing more in technology infrastructure to support large trials; or simply increasing sample size of trials. Whether it also affects the work-life balance of monitors who may then need to travel with a less hectic schedule for the same level of quality and productivity can be predicted only when there is more evidence from field. |
[ABSTRACT] [HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (14) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
TRAINING |
 |
|
|
 |
Negotiation skills for clinical research professionals |
p. 105 |
Sanjay Hake, Tapankumar Shah DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83224 PMID:21897886Negotiation as a skill is a key requirement for each and every job profile where dealing with multiple parties is involved. The important focus while negotiating should be on the interest then position. Key to every successful negotiation is advance planning, preparation, and patience as the objective is to create value and establish the terms on which parties with differing and often conflicting aims will co-operate. While preparing one should collect facts, know priorities, principles, identify common ground, decide on walk-away position, and try and identify the next best alternative. Negotiation is a set of skills that can be learned and practiced so that your ability to utilize relationship, knowledge, money, power, time, and personality to negotiate improves with each negotiation. In a successful negotiation, all parties win. Important thing to note is that not every negotiation involves money. Anytime you want something from someone else and anytime someone wants something from you, you are negotiating. Everything is negotiable and every day you negotiate with customers, suppliers, colleagues, your wife, and even your children. Negotiation is a game, and like any game it has its rules and tactics. Clinical Research professionals deal with various parties for different purposes at the same time; hence, they require excellent negotiation skills. Project Mangers and Clinical Research Associates are the two most important roles in clinical research industry who require negotiation skills as they deal with various internal and external customers and vendors. |
[ABSTRACT] [HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (1) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
BIOSTATISTICS |
 |
|
|
|
Intention-to-treat concept: A review  |
p. 109 |
Sandeep K Gupta DOI:10.4103/2229-3485.83221 PMID:21897887Randomized controlled trials often suffer from two major complications, i.e., noncompliance and missing outcomes. One potential solution to this problem is a statistical concept called intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. ITT analysis includes every subject who is randomized according to randomized treatment assignment. It ignores noncompliance, protocol deviations, withdrawal, and anything that happens after randomization. ITT analysis maintains prognostic balance generated from the original random treatment allocation. In ITT analysis, estimate of treatment effect is generally conservative. A better application of the ITT approach is possible if complete outcome data are available for all randomized subjects. Per-protocol population is defined as a subset of the ITT population who completed the study without any major protocol violations. |
[ABSTRACT] [HTML Full text] [PDF] [Mobile Full text] [EPub] [Citations (1037) ] [PubMed] [Sword Plugin for Repository]Beta |
|
|
|
|
|