1
|
Halwai A, Vaswani V. Post-approval process: A challenge for ethics committees. Perspect Clin Res 2023; 14:139-145. [PMID: 37554242 PMCID: PMC10405536 DOI: 10.4103/picr.picr_214_22] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2022] [Revised: 01/17/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2023] [Indexed: 08/10/2023] Open
Abstract
Context Ethics committees (ECs) work toward upholding rights, dignity, safety, and well-being of research participants. They are also tasked with conducting oversight pre- and post-approval. ECs face various challenges in their functioning. Post-approval oversight is one of the major challenges, and various studies have stressed the importance of post-approval oversight. Aims The aim of this study was to explore the challenges in the post-approval processes that are faced by the ECs and to suggest solutions to the most common challenges. Methods We conducted a quantitative study contacting member secretaries of different ECs using an online Google Forms questionnaire. The questionnaire consisted of three domains and included questions about the description of the EC, conduct of post-approval activities, and challenges encountered during the post-approval process. Results and Conclusion We received responses from 61 member secretaries. We were able to identify challenges faced by the EC members in the post-approval process in the areas of site monitoring visit, review of post-approval submission (nonsubmission/incomplete submission/late submission of documents by PI, long time taken by reviewers, nonavailability of reviewers, nonadherence to timeline and too much paperwork), review of serious adverse events, and review of protocol deviations. Our study also noted the difference between accredited/assessed (National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers/Forum for Ethical Review Committees in the Asian and Western Pacific Region) ECs versus registered (Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation/Department of Health Research only) ECs by comparing the challenges.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aarti Halwai
- Former MSc (Research Ethics) Scholar, YU-FIC Research Ethics Master’s Program for India, Yenepoya Deemed to be University, Mangalore, India
| | - Vina Vaswani
- Director, Centre for Ethics, Program Director, YU-FIC Masters in Research Ethics for India, Yenepoya Deemed to be University, Mangalore, India
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Lovo E, Woodward L, Larkins S, Preston R, Baba UN. Indigenous knowledge around the ethics of human research from the Oceania region: A scoping literature review. Philos Ethics Humanit Med 2021; 16:12. [PMID: 34625108 PMCID: PMC8501683 DOI: 10.1186/s13010-021-00108-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/04/2019] [Accepted: 09/08/2021] [Indexed: 05/17/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many indigenous people have died or been harmed because of inadequately monitored research. Strong regulations in Human Research Ethics (HRE) are required to address these injustices and to ensure that peoples' participation in health research is safe. Indigenous peoples advocate that research that respects indigenous principles can contribute to addressing their health inequities. This scoping literature review aims to analyze existing peer reviewed and grey literature to explore how indigenous values and principles from countries of Oceania are incorporated into HRE and the governance of research involving human participants. METHODS A scoping literature review framework was used for this study. A search for peer reviewed and grey literature from Google, bibliographies, and electronic databases such as SCOPUS, SPRINGER, Medline (Ovid) and JBI Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted, limited to the years 2002-2020. Sixty (60) documents that focused on indigenous knowledge from Oceania region and HRE were included, from which key findings and themes were synthesized. RESULTS Charting the data showed that more than half the eligible documents were peer-reviewed journal articles (54%). Other sources included: International Declarations on Human Research (8%); book chapters (8%); government documents (8%); HRE Guidelines or protocols (13%); news articles (7%) and PhD thesis (2%). The literature was from Australia, Cook Islands, Guam, New Zealand, Fiji, Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu, some of which focused specifically on HREs in the Pacific Region. Issues emerging from the literature were grouped into five themes (i) indigenous and cultural principles of HRE; (ii) informed consent in indigenous settings in Oceania; (iii) vulnerability and minority status of indigenous populations exploited for research; (iv) research ethics governance for Oceania indigenous peoples; and (v) research ethics committees in Oceania. Respect, relationship building, and trust were priority indigenous HRE principles that encompass the principles of partnership, capacity building, reciprocity, and equality. Relationship building and trust imply the equal distribution of benefits for indigenous population and researchers. CONCLUSION Indigenous principles of HRE identified were interconnected and interdependent. Recommendations were to incorporate indigenous principles of research in HRE regulations and processes of all countries with indigenous populations. This is especially pertinent for emerging national research committees in LMIC countries, including Fiji and Tonga. Relationship building among researchers and indigenous populations is key to successful research with indigenous populations. HRE principles important for relationship building include respect that is reciprocal among researchers and indigenous people. Elements of the principle of respect highlighted are empathy, collaboration, sharing of benefits, reciprocity, appreciation, empowerment, protection, safety and awareness of culture and languages. Indigenous ontology from the Oceania region involves spirituality, connectedness to land, religious beliefs and a participatory approach to HRE and should be respected in research. An ethical governance mechanism of HRE is one that incorporates indigenous principles and applications for the purpose of maximizing the protection of the dignity and rights of indigenous peoples of Oceania.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Etivina Lovo
- College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Fiji National University, Suva, Fiji Islands
- James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811 Australia
| | - Lynn Woodward
- James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811 Australia
| | - Sarah Larkins
- James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811 Australia
| | - Robyn Preston
- School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, CQUniversity Australia, 538 Flinders St, Townsville, QLD 4810 Australia
| | - Unaisi Nabobo Baba
- College of Humanities and Education, Fiji National University, Nasinu Campus, Suva, Fiji Islands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Paramasivan S, Davies P, Richards A, Wade J, Rooshenas L, Mills N, Realpe A, Raj JP, Subramani S, Ives J, Huxtable R, Blazeby JM, Donovan JL. What empirical research has been undertaken on the ethics of clinical research in India? A systematic scoping review and narrative synthesis. BMJ Glob Health 2021; 6:e004729. [PMID: 34006518 PMCID: PMC8137180 DOI: 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004729] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/12/2020] [Revised: 02/13/2021] [Accepted: 02/24/2021] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The post-2005 rise in clinical trials and clinical research conducted in India was accompanied by frequent reports of unethical practices, leading to a series of regulatory changes. We conducted a systematic scoping review to obtain an overview of empirical research pertaining to the ethics of clinical trials/research in India. METHODS Our search strategy combined terms related to ethics/bioethics, informed consent, clinical trials/research and India, across nine databases, up to November 2019. Peer-reviewed research exploring ethical aspects of clinical trials/research in India with any stakeholder groups was included. We developed an evidence map, undertook a narrative synthesis and identified research gaps. A consultation exercise with stakeholders in India helped contextualise the review and identify additional research priorities. RESULTS Titles/Abstracts of 9699 articles were screened, full text of 282 obtained and 80 were included. Research on the ethics of clinical trials/research covered a wide range of topics, often conducted with little to no funding. Studies predominantly examined what lay (patients/public) and professional participants (eg, healthcare staff/students/faculty) know about topics such as research ethics or understand from the information given to obtain their consent for research participation. Easily accessible groups, namely ethics committee members and healthcare students were frequently researched. Research gaps included developing a better understanding of the recruitment-informed consent process, including the doctor-patient interaction, in multiple contexts and exploring issues of equity and justice in clinical trials/research. CONCLUSION The review demonstrates that while a wide range of topics have been studied in India, the focus is largely on assessing knowledge levels across different population groups. This is a useful starting point, but fundamental questions remain unanswered about informed consent processes and broader issues of inequity that pervade the clinical trials/research landscape. A priority-setting exercise and appropriate funding mechanisms to support researchers in India would help improve the clinical trials/research ecosystem.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sangeetha Paramasivan
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
| | - Philippa Davies
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Medical Research Council (MRC) ConDuCT-II Trials Methodology Hub, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Alison Richards
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- Medical Research Council (MRC) ConDuCT-II Trials Methodology Hub, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Julia Wade
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Leila Rooshenas
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
| | - Nicola Mills
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
| | - Alba Realpe
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
| | - Jeffrey Pradeep Raj
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Supriya Subramani
- Institute of Biomedical Ethics and History of Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Jonathan Ives
- Centre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Richard Huxtable
- Centre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Jane M Blazeby
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, Bristol, UK
| | - Jenny L Donovan
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, NIHR ARC West, Bristol, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ghooi RB. Ethics committee meetings - Online or face to face? Perspect Clin Res 2020; 11:121-123. [PMID: 33033701 PMCID: PMC7513781 DOI: 10.4103/picr.picr_97_20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 05/26/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Ethics committee meetings are held periodically, with all members being physically present in the meeting room. During the COVID-19 pandemic, and the lockdown, a number of committees have resorted to the use of videoconferencing. Online meetings have significant advantages over physical or face-to-face meetings, though the guidelines and regulations imply that online meetings should not be the norm. Considering the advantages of online meetings in terms of saving time and costs, can the regulations and guidelines be tweaked to allow them even after the lockdown is over?
Collapse
|
5
|
Vennu V, Dahiya S. Awareness and Opinions of Research Professionals on India's New Drug and Clinical Trials Regulations: Protocol for a Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey Study. JMIR Res Protoc 2020; 9:e14744. [PMID: 31961327 PMCID: PMC7001046 DOI: 10.2196/14744] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2019] [Revised: 10/19/2019] [Accepted: 11/12/2019] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although several studies have been conducted and several articles have been published on India's new clinical trial regulations, very few have examined the views of investigators and ethics board members regarding modifications to the previous regulations. Overall, they have neglected to find out the opinions of other relevant professionals, such as research assistants, coordinators, associates, and managers. To our knowledge, no study has yet investigated the awareness and opinions of Indian research professionals on the new 2019 regulations. Objective This study aims to describe the awareness and opinions of Indian research professionals on the new drug and clinical trial regulations. Methods In this cross-sectional, Web-based study, we will conduct an open survey for various Indian research professionals. These professionals will be selected randomly using multiple sources. The survey questionnaires, which have already been validated, were developed using the form function in Google docs. A Web link was generated for participants to take the survey. Descriptive statistics will be shown as means and standard deviations for constant variables, whereas certain variables will instead be shown as numbers and percentages. Results The survey was opened in July 2019. Enrollment has already started and will be completed in three months. The results calculations are expected to begin in October 2019. Conclusions The results of the survey are expected to represent the views of research professionals on the new regulations that will support the development of clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry in India. These regulations are expected to help advance clinical trials, help with the approval of new drugs, and enhance ethical norms in the country. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) PRR1-10.2196/14744
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vishal Vennu
- School of Pharmacy, Lingaya's Vidyapeeth, Faridabad, India.,Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
| | - Saurabh Dahiya
- School of Pharmacy, Lingaya's Vidyapeeth, Faridabad, India
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
Continuing review of studies approved by the Ethics Committees (ECs) involves review of the progress of the study, annual reports, protocol deviations/violations, serious adverse event monitoring, and on-site monitoring. International and national regulations and guidelines for continuing review state that it is an opportunity for the EC to be assured that risks to subjects are minimized and is are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits if any to the subjects and the knowledge it will generate. There are several barriers (e.g. lack of workforce, lack of training of members for conducting onsite review, and poor infrastructure) for ECs to do ongoing review of projects approved by them. Industry is an important stakeholder for the research enterprise in India and strongly advocates that ECs should at a minimum have pragmatic standard operating procedures for continuing review/monitoring of studies initially approved. ECs which deal with larger volume of studies with well-functioning secretariat, appropriately trained EC members and funding should definitely conduct onsite review/monitoring in addition to the ongoing review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sanish Davis
- Senior Medical Director and Head, Clinical Operations, Covance India Pharmaceutical Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.,General Secretary, Indian Society for Clinical Research, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|