Use of Remote Regulatory Assessment (RRA) for Site Evaluations during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The USFDA’s Office of Study Integrity and Surveillance (OSIS) Perspective

IF 3.4 4区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Tahseen Mirza, Nicola Fenty-Stewart, Clint Mitchell, Brian Folian, Sean Kassim
{"title":"Use of Remote Regulatory Assessment (RRA) for Site Evaluations during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The USFDA’s Office of Study Integrity and Surveillance (OSIS) Perspective","authors":"Tahseen Mirza,&nbsp;Nicola Fenty-Stewart,&nbsp;Clint Mitchell,&nbsp;Brian Folian,&nbsp;Sean Kassim","doi":"10.1208/s12249-024-03024-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Travel restrictions during the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) public health emergency affected the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ability to conduct on-site bioavailability/bioequivalence (BA/BE) and Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) nonclinical inspections. FDA’s Office of Study Integrity and Surveillance (OSIS) developed a remote regulatory assessment (RRA) as an alternate tool to evaluate the reliability and integrity of data from such studies submitted in marketing applications for drug approval. This manuscript provides a retrospective comparative evaluation of metrics from three pre-pandemic years (2017–2019) <i>versus</i> those of RRAs performed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022). More clinical inspections than analytical inspections were conducted during the pre-pandemic years, while this trend was reversed during the pandemic years. A normalized comparison of inspections and RRAs revealed that RRAs were able to identify potential concerns in study conduct and data reliability comparable to on-site BA/BE and GLP nonclinical study inspections. The number of studies, types of studies, and final classification of site evaluations were reviewed. During the pandemic years, fewer RRAs were performed by OSIS as compared with the number of on-site inspections performed by OSIS during the pre-pandemic years. This can be attributed in part to the dedication of resources for the development of the RRA approach, the need to focus all efforts on the highest priority sites, the limited availability of staff, or the lack of adequate data sharing software or audio-visual hardware at the sites.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":6925,"journal":{"name":"AAPS PharmSciTech","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AAPS PharmSciTech","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1208/s12249-024-03024-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Travel restrictions during the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) public health emergency affected the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) ability to conduct on-site bioavailability/bioequivalence (BA/BE) and Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) nonclinical inspections. FDA’s Office of Study Integrity and Surveillance (OSIS) developed a remote regulatory assessment (RRA) as an alternate tool to evaluate the reliability and integrity of data from such studies submitted in marketing applications for drug approval. This manuscript provides a retrospective comparative evaluation of metrics from three pre-pandemic years (2017–2019) versus those of RRAs performed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022). More clinical inspections than analytical inspections were conducted during the pre-pandemic years, while this trend was reversed during the pandemic years. A normalized comparison of inspections and RRAs revealed that RRAs were able to identify potential concerns in study conduct and data reliability comparable to on-site BA/BE and GLP nonclinical study inspections. The number of studies, types of studies, and final classification of site evaluations were reviewed. During the pandemic years, fewer RRAs were performed by OSIS as compared with the number of on-site inspections performed by OSIS during the pre-pandemic years. This can be attributed in part to the dedication of resources for the development of the RRA approach, the need to focus all efforts on the highest priority sites, the limited availability of staff, or the lack of adequate data sharing software or audio-visual hardware at the sites.

在COVID-19大流行期间使用远程监管评估(RRA)进行现场评估:USFDA研究完整性和监测办公室(OSIS)的观点
在新型冠状病毒SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19)突发公共卫生事件期间,旅行限制影响了美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)进行现场生物利用度/生物等效性(BA/BE)和良好实验室规范(GLP)非临床检查的能力。FDA的研究完整性和监督办公室(OSIS)开发了一种远程监管评估(RRA),作为评估此类研究在药物批准上市申请中提交的数据的可靠性和完整性的替代工具。本文对大流行前三年(2017-2019年)与COVID-19大流行期间(2020-2022年)进行的RRAs的指标进行了回顾性比较评估。在大流行前几年,临床检查多于分析检查,而在大流行期间,这一趋势发生了逆转。检查和RRAs的标准化比较显示,RRAs能够识别研究行为和数据可靠性方面的潜在问题,与现场BA/BE和GLP非临床研究检查相当。审查了研究的数量、研究的类型和场地评价的最终分类。在大流行年份,与大流行前年份大流行期间进行的现场视察次数相比,大流行国家统计系统进行的实地视察次数较少。这可部分归因于为制订RRA办法而投入的资源,需要将所有努力集中在最优先的场址,工作人员有限,或场址缺乏适当的数据共享软件或视听硬件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AAPS PharmSciTech
AAPS PharmSciTech 医学-药学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
264
审稿时长
2.4 months
期刊介绍: AAPS PharmSciTech is a peer-reviewed, online-only journal committed to serving those pharmaceutical scientists and engineers interested in the research, development, and evaluation of pharmaceutical dosage forms and delivery systems, including drugs derived from biotechnology and the manufacturing science pertaining to the commercialization of such dosage forms. Because of its electronic nature, AAPS PharmSciTech aspires to utilize evolving electronic technology to enable faster and diverse mechanisms of information delivery to its readership. Submission of uninvited expert reviews and research articles are welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信