• SKIP TO CONTENT
  • SKIP NAVIGATION
  • Patient Resources
    • COVID-19 Patient Resource Center
    • Clinical Trials
    • Search Clinical Trials
    • Patient Notification System
    • What is Clinical Research?
    • Volunteering for a Clinical Trial
    • Understanding Informed Consent
    • Useful Resources
    • FDA Approved Drugs
  • Professional Resources
    • Research Center Profiles
    • Clinical Trial Listings
    • Market Research
    • FDA Approved Drugs
    • Training Guides
    • Books
    • eLearning
    • Events
    • Newsletters
    • White Papers
    • SOPs
    • eCFR and Guidances
  • White Papers
  • Trial Listings
  • Advertise
  • COVID-19
  • iConnect
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Home » The CenterWatch Monthly, April 2016

The CenterWatch Monthly, April 2016

April 1, 2016
CenterWatch Staff

Facing protocol amendments head-on

The unplanned costs and delays as­sociated with protocol amendments have prompted many sponsor com­panies to identify new approaches to simplify protocol designs and reduce the frequency of protocol amendments over the course of the past few years. Yet a new Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Devel­opment (CSDD) analysis found that the majority of protocols still require sub­stantial amendments, which led to signifi­cantly longer clinical trial cycle times and higher costs. The new analysis builds on a 2010 Tufts CSDD study that, for the first time, quantified the prevalence and causes of protocol amendments. It found that 57% of protocols had at least one substantial amendment and nearly half (45%) of these amendments could have been avoided, compared to 33% in 2010. About one in four (23%) amendments were implement­ed before the first patient was dosed.

Capture

The long wave goodbye to phantom PIs

Efforts to reduce the number of phan­tom investigators—principal inves­tigators (PIs) who are not adequately supervising their staff and clinical trials—appear to be having a measurable impact. But problems associated with phantom PIs and their causes linger. “We are still suffering from huge issues of PI disengagement,” said industry veter­an Beth Harper, president of Clinical Per­formance Partners, a company that helps get sites back on track following large errors in their data or processes. “And I think, in part, we’ve created this problem."

 

To read the full articles for this issue of The CenterWatch Monthly, please click here for subscription information.

Upcoming Events

  • 16Feb

    Fundamentals of FDA Inspection Management: Reduce Anxiety, Increase Inspection Success

  • 21May

    WCG MAGI Clinical Research Conference – 2023 East

Featured Products

  • Spreadsheet Validation: Tools and Techniques to Make Data in Excel Compliant

    Spreadsheet Validation: Tools and Techniques to Make Data in Excel Compliant

  • Surviving an FDA GCP Inspection

    Surviving an FDA GCP Inspection: Resources for Investigators, Sponsors, CROs and IRBs

Featured Stories

  • SurveywBlueBackground-360x240.png

    Sites Name Tech Acceptance as Essential Factor in Selection of Sponsors, Survey Finds

  • TrendsInsights2023-360x240.png

    WCG Clinical Research Trends and Insights for 2023, Part Two

  • TimeMoneyEffort-360x240.png

    Time is Money and So Is Effort, Budgeting Experts Say

  • TrendsInsights2023A-360x240.png

    WCG Clinical Research Trends and Insights for 2023, Part Three

Standard Operating Procedures for Risk-Based Monitoring of Clinical Trials

The information you need to adapt your monitoring plan to changing times.

Learn More Here
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Data

Footer Logo

300 N. Washington St., Suite 200, Falls Church, VA 22046, USA

Phone 617.948.5100 – Toll free 866.219.3440

Copyright © 2023. All Rights Reserved. Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing