Dataset Information

GCP inspections in Germany and Europe following the implementation of the Directive 2001/20/EC.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and the Good Clinical Practice Directive 2005/28/EC fundamentally restructured and harmonized the conduct of clinical trials in Europe. GCP inspections - which affect study sites, laboratories, sponsors and contract research organizations (CRO) alike - make up an important part of these regulations. A common understanding of how these regulations apply in daily life is however not always ensured.

Methods

A working group of the Clinical Research/Quality Assurance subcommittee of the German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies (VFA) was established to outline the regulatory requirements, the experience gathered with inspections by means of a survey and to set up guidance on how to manage an inspection.

Results and conclusions

The survey, conducted with the help of 15 pharmaceutical companies within the VFA, included a total of 224 inspections (74 inspections in Germany, 150 from other European countries). Most frequent findings in and outside Germany were related to "documentation" (40.5% vs. 21.3%), "investigational new drugs" (16.2% vs. 14.7%), "drug safety" (13.5% vs. 8%) and "application for a clinical trial authorization" (5.4% vs. 12%). From a German perspective, key findings of this working group were the necessity for a clear differentiation of responsibilities between national and federal as well as international authorities, a harmonization of inspection procedures and topics, and a clarification of whether pre-study/on-study and pre-approval/post-approval GCP inspections of the federal higher authority are included in the "Zentralstelle der Länder für Gesundheitsschutz bei Arzneimitteln und Medizinprodukten" (ZLG) requirements. The survey illustrated, that inspections usually are conducted at the investigational site, and that most of the findings are well known and thus could be prevented by communicating and discussing audit results more intensely within study groups. Again, the survey illustrated, that a harmonization of inspections appears warranted. Finally a code of practice is provided that considers these findings and delivers a basis for a successful inspection whether at the sponsor or the GCP site.

SUBMITTER: Gobel C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2716552 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

GCP inspections in Germany and Europe following the implementation of the Directive 2001/20/EC.

Göbel Claus C Baier Dieter D Ruhfus Birgit B Hundt Ferdinand F

German medical science : GMS e-journal 20090331

<h4>Background</h4>The implementation of the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC and the Good Clinical Practice Directive 2005/28/EC fundamentally restructured and harmonized the conduct of clinical trials in Europe. GCP inspections - which affect study sites, laboratories, sponsors and contract research organizations (CRO) alike - make up an important part of these regulations. A common understanding of how these regulations apply in daily life is however not always ensured.<h4>Methods</h4>A w ...[more]

PMID: 19675741

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHygiene inspections on passenger ships are important for the prevention of communicable diseases. The European Union (EU) countries conduct hygiene inspections on passenger ships in order to ensure that appropriate measures have been taken to eliminate potential sources of contamination which could lead to the spread of communicable diseases. This study was implemented within the framework of the EU SHIPSAN project and it investigates the legislation applied and practices of hygiene inspections of passenger ships in the EU Member States (MS) and European Free Trade Association countries.MethodsTwo questionnaires were composed and disseminated to 28 countries. A total of 92 questionnaires were completed by competent authorities responsible for hygiene inspections (n = 48) and the creation of legislation (n = 44); response rates were 96%, and 75.9%, respectively.ResultsOut of the 48 responding authorities responsible for hygiene inspections, a routine programme was used by 19 (39.6%) of these to conduct inspections of ships on national voyages and by 26 (54.2%) for ships on international voyages. Standardised inspection forms are used by 59.1% of the authorities. A scoring inspection system is applied by five (11.6%) of the 43 responding authorities. Environmental sampling is conducted by 84.1% of the authorities (37 out of 44). The inspection results are collected and analysed by 54.5% (24 out of 44) of the authorities, while 9 authorities (20.5%) declared that they publish the results. Inspections are conducted during outbreak investigations by 75% and 70.8% of the authorities, on ships on national and international voyages, respectively. A total of 31 (64.6%) and 39 (81.3%) authorities conducted inspections during complaint investigations on ships on international and on national voyages, respectively. Port-to-port communication between the national port authorities was reported by 35.4% (17 out of 48) of the responding authorities and 20.8% (10 out of 48) of the port authorities of other countries.ConclusionThis study revealed a diversity of approaches and practices in the conduct of inspections, differences in the qualifications/knowledge/experience of inspectors, the legislation applied during inspections, and the lack of communication and training among many EU countries. An integrated European inspection programme involving competent expert inspectors in each EU Member States and special training for ship hygiene delivered to crew members and inspectors would help to minimize the risk of communicable diseases. Common inspection tools at a European level for hygiene inspection practices and port-to-port communication are needed.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the readiness to implement the Falsified Medicines Directive (FMD) by community pharmacies in England. Eight secondary objectives were assessed.SettingCommunity/retail pharmacies.ParticipantsWe invited pharmacists from 501 pharmacies to complete a survey. Non-contractors, non-pharmacists or pharmacists practising abroad were excluded. We randomly selected addresses, ensuring that they were nationally representative.InterventionsWe mailed the survey in October 2018 with a single follow-up in January 2019. Respondents were invited to provide self-reported answers. A prepaid self-addressed envelope was provided. We received favourable ethical approval.Results102 responses (20.44% response rate) were received. Readiness to implement was poor: 4 (3.9%) said very much, while 40 (39.2%) said not at all and 29 (28.4%) said not really. Increased workload and reduced profitability were anticipated, accompanied with improved patient safety. Prevalence of 'substandard and falsified (SF) medical products' was estimated at 1%-5%, with erectile dysfunction at greatest risk of falsification. Different packaging would raise suspicions. Five (4.9%) had identified SFs (p<0.001 one-sample binomial test). Of these, three (2.9%) informed the medicines agency. None had been involved in any public health campaigns. Confidence and self-efficacy was low. Strategies to reduce SFs reaching the public are described. Pharmacist's role in combating SFs was elucidated. SFs were identified in deprived areas 4 (9%) more often than in affluent areas 1 (2%).ConclusionsMany pharmacies are not ready to implement FMD, potentially not capturing anticipated benefits of the directive, with greatest risk of harm in deprived area. We further validated a confidence scale. Limited public health campaigns may result in a lack of awareness among pharmacy professionals and patients. Limited awareness of technologies to identify falsified medicines exist, though further training is welcome. A worrying trend of under-reporting maybe prevalent. A larger sample study using this survey would be valuable.

Project description:Glutamate carboxypeptidase II (GCP-II) is a brain metallopeptidase that hydrolyzes the abundant neuropeptide N-acetyl-aspartyl-glutamate (NAAG) to NAA and glutamate. Small molecule GCP-II inhibitors increase brain NAAG, which activates mGluR3, decreases glutamate, and provide therapeutic utility in a variety of preclinical models of neurodegenerative diseases wherein excess glutamate is presumed pathogenic. Unfortunately no GCP-II inhibitor has advanced clinically, largely due to their highly polar nature resulting in insufficient oral bioavailability and limited brain penetration. Herein we report a non-invasive route for delivery of GCP-II inhibitors to the brain via intranasal (i.n.) administration. Three structurally distinct classes of GCP-II inhibitors were evaluated including DCMC (urea-based), 2-MPPA (thiol-based) and 2-PMPA (phosphonate-based). While all showed some brain penetration following i.n. administration, 2-PMPA exhibited the highest levels and was chosen for further evaluation. Compared to intraperitoneal (i.p.) administration, equivalent doses of i.n. administered 2-PMPA resulted in similar plasma exposures (AUC0-t, i.n./AUC0-t, i.p. = 1.0) but dramatically enhanced brain exposures in the olfactory bulb (AUC0-t, i.n./AUC0-t, i.p. = 67), cortex (AUC0-t, i.n./AUC0-t, i.p. = 46) and cerebellum (AUC0-t, i.n./AUC0-t, i.p. = 6.3). Following i.n. administration, the brain tissue to plasma ratio based on AUC0-t in the olfactory bulb, cortex, and cerebellum were 1.49, 0.71 and 0.10, respectively, compared to an i.p. brain tissue to plasma ratio of less than 0.02 in all areas. Furthermore, i.n. administration of 2-PMPA resulted in complete inhibition of brain GCP-II enzymatic activity ex-vivo confirming target engagement. Lastly, because the rodent nasal system is not similar to humans, we evaluated i.n. 2-PMPA also in a non-human primate. We report that i.n. 2-PMPA provides selective brain delivery with micromolar concentrations. These studies support intranasal delivery of 2-PMPA to deliver therapeutic concentrations in the brain and may facilitate its clinical development.

Dataset Information

GCP inspections in Germany and Europe following the implementation of the Directive 2001/20/EC.

Background

Methods

Results and conclusions

Publications

GCP inspections in Germany and Europe following the implementation of the Directive 2001/20/EC.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets