Small to midsize pharmaceutical or biotech companies (small pharma) are enjoying the best of times. However, from a quality systems perspective, it could be the worst of times. Many have weak quality systems, are not following global regulatory authority regulations and/or guidance, or lack the level of documentation required to reconstruct every aspect of clinical trials.
Adverse events (a suspected reaction to the API or to the API in combination with prescribed medicines or environmental factors) are, naturally, a challenging situation for patients in a clinical trial and may, in rare cases, become severe or even fatal. For sponsors, contract research organizations (CROs), and logistics partners, early notification and accurate information is vital to understanding and responding to a suspected adverse event. What happens if the patient goes off protocol and turns to social media?
Achieving inspection readiness means that during all stages of a clinical trial, a regulatory inspector would be able to walk into the building and reconstruct the trial using only the documents and metadata present in the trial master file (TMF). Although the concept of an inspection-ready TMF may be simply described, inspection readiness is not easily achieved. The failure to achieve an inspection-ready TMF continues to be an area of growing risk for the clinical research industry.
A range of factors — including small patient populations, complex manufacturing processes, and lack of specialized expertise — are positioned to both drive up costs and require new options for stakeholder engagement and risk sharing along the development pathway. New approaches in development are needed to support the next generation of novel drugs on the horizon.
The clinical trials enterprise has long assumed that when it comes to ensuring trial quality, data is king and more is better. Not only was it considered essential to gather detailed data on every aspect of a clinical trial, but that data had to be double-entered, checked, queried, cleaned, and validated.
Much of the focus these days, especially after the release of ICH E6(R2), has been on how Sponsors can better monitor and oversee the performance of their CRO partners. This discussion, and resulting effort, around CRO oversight is worthwhile and useful, but too often it is narrowly focused on metrics. A holistic approach to successfully partnering with CROs is needed, starting with the initial assessment of outsourcing drivers all the way through to trial completion.
Advancements in biosensor technology are becoming increasingly common in the consumer space, with wrists adorned with Fitbits or similar devices, clothing embedded with “intelligent” fibers, and personal safety devices seen in healthcare facilities across the nation. Our culture is increasingly accustomed to tracking health metrics through smartphones and simple recreational wearables. In the pharmaceutical space, we are now seeing where success in the consumer segment can translate to value-adds for clinical trials.
“Researching and developing new, life-changing medicines is best when done collaboratively. Today’s announcement from the NIHR [National Institute for Health Research] sets out clear standards for how the pharmaceutical industry should work with patients to develop better vaccines and medicines.”
The Deloitte Center for Health Solutions recently interviewed 43 biopharmaceutical industry stakeholders to explore where the industry sees value and opportunities for using digital technologies in the clinical development process; understand reasons behind the relatively slow pace of digital adoption; and uncover strategies to overcome barriers and accelerate the use of digital in clinical trials. This is the first of two articles that shares interview findings and insights published in the new Deloitte Center for Health Solutions report Digital R&D: Transforming the future of clinical development.