Suppr超能文献

日本肿瘤注册临床试验中的良好临床实践依从性。

Compliance with Good Clinical Practice in oncology registration trials in Japan.

机构信息

Department of Breast and Medical Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital.

Department of Management Science, Graduate School of Engineering, Tokyo University of Science.

出版信息

Ann Oncol. 2011 Jun;22(6):1451-1456. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdq594. Epub 2010 Nov 30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine the quality in oncology registration trials for new drug application (NDA) or supplemental new drug application (sNDA) as extensions of the indications for use in Japan based on Good Clinical Practice (GCP) audit findings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected audit reports of on-site GCP inspections for registration trials in 383 NDAs or sNDAs that were reviewed by the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency between the fiscal years 2004 and 2009.

RESULTS

Among the 40 audits for oncology drug applications, the frequencies at which one or more deficiencies ascribed to institution, investigator, sponsor, and institutional review board were found to be 15 (37.5%), 13 (32.5%), 21 (52.5%), and 10 (25.0%), respectively. The exclusion of patients from the review objective due to serious violations of GCP in 40 audits for oncology drug applications was observed in 2 (5.0%) cases, whereas that in the remaining 343 audits for other drug applications was observed in 40 (11.7%) cases.

CONCLUSION

The overall compliance of GCP in oncology registration trials was moderately better than that in registration trials for other diseases, although there was no statistically significant difference between them.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在根据《药品和医疗器械管理局》对 2004 至 2009 年间审查的 383 份新药申请(NDA)或补充新药申请(sNDA)中的注册试验的现场 GCP 检查审核报告,考察日本扩大药品使用适应证的肿瘤学注册试验的质量。

材料与方法

我们收集了 40 份肿瘤药物申请的审核报告,这些报告涉及 383 份新药申请或补充新药申请中的注册试验,这些申请在 2004 至 2009 年间接受了《药品和医疗器械管理局》的审查。

结果

在 40 项肿瘤药物应用的审核中,有 15 项(37.5%)被认为存在机构、研究者、申办者和机构审查委员会的一个或多个缺陷,13 项(32.5%)被认为存在机构、研究者、申办者和机构审查委员会的一个或多个缺陷,21 项(52.5%)被认为存在机构、研究者、申办者和机构审查委员会的一个或多个缺陷,10 项(25.0%)被认为存在机构、研究者、申办者和机构审查委员会的一个或多个缺陷。在 40 项肿瘤药物应用的审核中,由于严重违反 GCP,有 2 项(5.0%)被排除在审查目标之外,而在其余 343 项其他药物应用的审核中,有 40 项(11.7%)被排除在审查目标之外。

结论

尽管肿瘤学注册试验的总体 GCP 合规性略好于其他疾病的注册试验,但两者之间没有统计学上的显著差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验