Online event
Online Event, null

This webinar will discuss the role of the ethics committee, the trial sponsor and investigator in providing an adequate Informed Consent (IC). It will discuss challenges and practical limitations in ensuring your informed consent is GCP compliant.
Why Should You Attend:

The purpose of this course is to explore the divergent perspectives and practical limitations of the ethics committee, sponsor, and investigator as the basis for this continuing and troubling GCP non compliance observation. No one in the clinical research field intends to provide inadequate Informed Consent. We will discuss a case study that includes findings/observations. The GCP non-compliance challenges in this system of shared responsibility will be presented.

This course is not a regulatory review of the regulations or guidance on informed Consent. This course will ask questions about the roles of the clinical research entities who share the responsibility to implement adequate voluntary informed consent- the process. The divergent perspectives of the sponsor, investigator, and ethics committee lead each to sometimes very different determinations of compliance. There are, for many of these questions, not any obvious correct answers. Your comments and questions will hopefully enable each course participant to reach their own conclusions.

At the closure of this course- We will discuss, time permitting, a case where the sponsor and ethics committee did not want to know about investigator failure to provide adequate informed consent- what happened and the surprising outcome will be presented.

Areas Covered in this Webinar:

The inspectional focus on adequate informed consent, the document and the process.
What GCP is and is not.
The regulatory/ethical priority of clinical research.
Declaration Of Helsinki
Belmont Report
The role of the sponsor, investigator, and ethics committee in this process of implementing voluntary informed consent.
The communication interactions between these entities that enables/disables the protection of the study subjects.
The practical limitations of each entity in the system to achieve regulatory expectations of compliance.
The divergent perspectives of each entity in the system that compromise the regulatory expectations of performance.
How to anticipate these risk factors.
How to conduct clinical trials that proactively address these risk factors.
The inspectional documentation objectives.
How current inspectional requirements exceed the regulations or guidance on this topic.
Required documentation at the investigator site, ethics committee, and sponsor.
The value of SOP as “due diligence”.
The value of the protocol “due diligence”.
Definition of first study related procedure.
Implementation of IC prior to the first study related procedure.
The role of the 1572, delegation of authority form, associated staff training and documentation thereof.
Who is qualified to implement the IC process at the investigator site.
What is an adequate IC process- who, what, where, when.
How, when, and where to report GCP deviations in the IC process.
Actions that the regulatory agency expect as a result of these reports of deviations.
The regulatory enforcement risk, liability, and exposure of the ethics committee, the investigator, and the sponsor for GCP noncompliance in implementing voluntary informed consent.

Who Will Benefit:

Ethics Committee members
Regulatory Affairs
Clinical Research Associates

Official Website:

Added by complianceonlinecom on November 5, 2012