Wednesday, May 07, 2008

THE NEXT DIMENSION COMPANY


IntelliPharmaCeutics represents a success story like no other. Since its inception in 1998, the company has become a key global player in the pharmaceutical market. Through flourishing business relations with some of the world’s largest and most demanding clients, IntelliPharmaCeutics continues to exceed expectations.

IntelliPharmaCeutics is at the forefront of the design and the development of controlled release drugs. The core drug delivery technology employed by IntelliPharmaCeutics is the patented HYPERMATRIX technology which is a revolutionary drug delivery platform. Utilizing this technology, our scientists are able to provide life cycle management or new chemical entity delivery system solutions for virtually any small molecule. By recognizing that the key to remaining at the forefront of technological know-how requires housing the best and brightest corporate and scientific minds, IntelliPharmaCeutics will continue to make history in its unprecedented growth and delivery in the global pharmaceutical market

more

Friday, April 25, 2008

An Insider’s Look into the Corruption of Clinical Trials

The Human Injury of Lost Objectivity: An Insider’s Look into the Corruption of Clinical Trials
April 25, 2008By Dan AbshearcloseDan Abshear Name: Dan AbshearSite: See All Articles by Author (3)About: Mr. Abshear recently divorced himself from "big pharma" after working for three of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world for over a decade. In addition to a freelance writer, he also a healthcare consultant and advocate for a few organizations.Leave a Comment
If I were to rate the corruptive tactics performed by big pharmaceutical companies, the intentional corruption of implementing fabricated and unreliable results of clinical trials would be at the top of the list. Pharmaceutical companies manipulate the trials they sponsor because of their power to control others involved in the process largely absent of regulation. This is a matter of requiring authenticity and, more importantly, assuring the safety of the public health.

more

Thursday, April 24, 2008

Vedic Lifesciences collaborates with Amarex Clinical Research in India and US Markets


Vedic Lifesciences

Posted on: 23 May 07
April 2007 - Mumbai: An agreement was signed between the Mumbai-based CRO, Vedic Lifesciences and Amarex, LLC, a clinical research organization headquartered at Germantown, MD, USA, early this year to collaborate on Clinical Development and Regulatory Affairs services for botanical drugs in the U.S. and India. Kazem Kazempour, President & CEO, Amarex Clinical Research LLC was upbeat about the collaboration potential and offered: “Amarex’s focus on Phase 1 through Phase 4 clinical development is nicely complemented by Vedic’s pre-clinical development services and their focus on botanical compounds.” Mukesh Kumar head of Safety and Regulatory Affairs at Amarex added: “Amarex’s growing involvement with botanical drug development is a good fit with Vedic’s special expertise with such compounds. It is clear that having an Asian partner will provide certain advantages to our clients’ drug development needs.” Jayesh Chaudhary, Director & CEO, Vedic Lifesciences Pvt Ltd added, “Having completed over 2 dozen studies for compounds in recent years, Vedic has carved out a special niche in the Nutraceutical and Phytomedicine space. New regulations (year 2003) from FDA on Botanical Drugs give us an expanded opportunity in the U.S. market, and the agreement with Amarex greatly enhances Vedic’s access to the U.S. market and elsewhere outside Asia”. As per a recent report by McKinsey, the Indian clinical research industry is slated to reach a market size of $1.5B by the year 2010. Reliable estimates for Botanical Drug research are not readily available, however, since establishment of the 2003 regulations, there have been over 270 IND filings with FDA for Botanical Drug Products, which is already resulting in significant new expenditures on research services. Contacts: www.amarexcro.com / www.vediclifesciences.com For more information:http://Editor's Details Jayesh ChaudharyVedic Lifesciences.http://www.vediclifesciences.comjayesh@ayuherbal.com

more

How to Conduct Clinical Research in India



Introduction:
The Clinical Research industry in India is about a decade old. The business has however gained momentum in the last three to four years. Now that India has subscribed to the TRIPS agreement and recognizes product patents, it is expected that the effect of this will be that the multinational industry will be more inclined to conduct clinical trials here, as the level of protection from generic copies has increased. This development should also stimulate more innovation within India’s own pharmaceutical industry as new molecules discovered will be protected.


The clinical research industry is touted by experts to be the next big outsourcing boom. The potential and pitfalls of India as a favored clinical trial destination is the subject numerous discussions in the Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research fraternity. Most articles on the subject focus on how India is an irresistible target for the Pharmaceutical and Biotech industry to conduct clinical trials.


Of course, not everyone shares this enthusiasm. Critics warn that venturing into India may be a risky prospect for Sponsors fraught with ethical issues. I shall however steer clear of this debate and attempt to provide via this article the framework within which clinical trials in India are conducted. I hope it will serve as road map to sponsors who are possibly - with much trepidation - considering taking the plunge and finding out if India truly lives up to its claims.


The key areas of concern to the foreign Sponsor while considering performing clinical trials in India are 1. Regulatory procedures 2. Functioning of Ethics Committees3. Informed Consent process4. Quality of Investigators5. Hospital Infrastructure


I have provided below a summary of each of these areas and attempted to highlight the difference in procedures as compared to those in the west.1. Regulatory Procedures: The Central Regulatory agency known as the DRUGS CONTROLLER GENERAL (INDIA) or the DCGI is responsible for all procedures related to New Drugs including Clinical Trial Application, Registration, and Import & Export.

All clinical trial applications are submitted to the DCGI office for approval. The documents required as part of the clinical trial application are detailed in Form 44 under Schedule Y of the Drugs and Cosmetic Act. Permission to conduct trials is granted in approximately 3 months from the time of submission. The approval process takes longer if the DCGI’s office decides to refer the application for expert feedback to agencies such as the Indian Council of Medical research (ICMR). If the drug falls under the category of “genetically engineered” or “biologics” then the application is passed through to the Department of Biotechnology (DBT) and is reviewed by the Genetic Engineering Approval committee (GEAC). This approval process usually take anywhere between 5-6months.


As per current regulations, Phase I trials for molecules discovered “outside” India are not permitted. Exceptions are made only when the drug being tested is of “relevance” to the health problems in India or if it is a repeat phase I study. Phase II and Phase III trials can be conducted in parallel with the trials in the rest of the world as long as data from earlier phases is submitted with the application.


Along with the clinical trial application, an application for Import License is made by completing Form 12 of Schedule Y. The application should accurately quantify the drugs imported accompanied with appropriate justifications for the quantities imported. An import license number is issued about 2 weeks after the clinical trial approval is provided. This import license number should appear on all the individual subject drug supplies.


If biological samples need to be shipped out of India, an application for export needs to be made to the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT)
The Central Drugs Standard Control Organization first issued the Indian Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines in year 2001. These guidelines were subsequently amended and made the law in the year 2005. Not many countries can boast of this achievement. These guidelines can be readily downloaded from the website cdsco.nic.in.

There are also elements in Indian GCP that are not included in other GCP Guidelines, these include the following:
Research on Special Groups (Paediatrics, or Pregnancy),
The role of a foreign sponsor. A foreign sponsor may hand over responsibility to a CRO, and this transfer of responsibility must be documented. However, the sponsor is ultimately responsible for the drug and the trial


Clinical Trials on vaccines, contraceptives, surgical procedures/medical devices, diagnostic products and herbal remedies.
The Guidelines also include specific details about the format for submitting data for rDNA based vaccines, diagnostics and other biologicals.


Indian GCP is modified in the following sections in comparison to ICH-GCP:
Protocol- QC/QA methods, Finance and Insurance
Ethics Committee- Composition
Informed consent
Compensation for participation
Sponsors need to be aware of each of these differences and ensure adherence to Indian guidelines at all times.


2. Ethics committees: Almost every large hospital in India has an Institutional Ethics Committees attached. These committees are formed in line with requirements of the GCP guidelines. Submissions for approvals are made as per the format requested by the Ethics Committee. At a minimum, the documents submitted to committee are Protocol and Investigator Brochure including all amendments, Informed Consent Forms along with translations as well as details of payment or compensation to subjects, if any.Approval is received in maximum of six to eight weeks following submissions. Most ethics committees usually charge a fee of approximately 200 US$ or 170 Euros. Some ethics committees chose to provide conditional approval until regulatory approval is received. Once regulatory approval is received, a full approval is provided in a matter of few days.


In a reflection of the increasing number of clinical trials being performed in India, several Independent Ethics Committees have begun functioning in the last couple of years. Sponsors usually approach the Independent Ethics Committees when they need to work with potential investigators with a private practice that not attached to a Hospital or Institution


The regulatory and Ethics Committee approval process usually takes place in parallel. However, some Sponsors prefer to provide at least one Ethics Committee approval at the time of submitting the application to the regulatory authorities.


3. Informed Consent Process: Ever since the recent BBC documentary on clinical trials in India, the issue of informed consent has come under even more scrutiny than ever before. The “guinea pig” theory has been widely discussed in the national media as well. Illiteracy as well as the possibly blind acceptance of the doctor’s advice amongst semi-urban and rural populations naturally raises sponsors’ concerns about how truly “informed” the informed consent process is in India. A recent issue of the journal CRFocus published by the Institute of Clinical Research carried an article on this very topic. The authors who are auditors and have audited studies all across the globe concluded that that the informed consent process carried out in India is probably as good or bad as anywhere else in the world.


Most clinical trials are carried out in urban and semi-urban areas where the population is generally literate. India has a population of over 1 billion, and there are many languages spoken throughout the country. One source I found listed 387 living languages! The informed consent and patient information leaflet therefore need to be translated into the local languages.

Any informed consent document is translated into a minimum of at least 8-10 regional languages. Being a multi-lingual society, most site staff are conversant with the languages in which the Informed Consent Document is provided to the site. The Informed Consent Document is always explained verbally in a regional language the subject is most comfortable with. In cases where the subject is illiterate, the subject is asked to return with a relative who is literate and can serve as the Legally Acceptable Representative during the informed consent process. If the subject is illiterate, a thumbprint impression is obtained in the Informed Consent Form; it is also accompanied by signatures of the Legally Acceptable Representative, an independent witness and the site staff conducting the entire informed consent process. As per the Indian guidelines, the subject can refuse to allow his biological material to be stored and used for future evaluations. The Indian GCP guidelines clearly define the content and format of the Informed Consent document and must be adapted for all clinical trials being performed in India.


4. Investigators: India has the second largest pool of qualified doctors, (after the USA) and probably over 500 investigators who have been GCP-trained and have the experience of participating in clinical trials. It is anticipated that India will need to double this figure in the next 2 years in order to deal with expected load of clinical trials to be performed in India.


Sponsors and CROs will invariably have to expand this database by approaching investigators who lack GCP awareness or have no prior experience. However, based on my personal experience these novice investigators more than make up for their lack of knowledge and experience with sheer enthusiasm and commitment and have been known to perform as well if not better as the sites with experience.


In any case, most sponsors ensure that the investigator and site staff undergo basic GCP training prior to the start of a study. Doctors in India are very well conversant in English and familiar with the standards and practice of Western Medicine. Besides the obvious financial reasons, an opportunity to participate in global trials, possibilities of authorship in journals international repute as well as the ability to provide patients with free treatment are some of the driving factors for investigators to participate in clinical trials.

Access to latest treatment options and generous grant by sponsors by way of expensive equipments are compelling reasons as well.


5. Hospital Infrastructure: Most hospitals and Institutions have the minimum requirements necessary for a clinical trial to be undertaken. Specific equipment required for the study is usually provided by the sponsor and remains at site post-study as an institutional grant. Based on the requirements of the study the sponsor may need to provide the site with necessary equipment such as a refrigerator or deep freezer. At a minimum, a cupboard to store the study documents exclusively is requested by most sites.


In most hospitals, patient records are maintained with the medical records department. During the course of the study, these records are maintained with the study staff for the sake of convenience. Following the closure of the study, the original source documents are returned to the medical records department and photocopies of the source documents are placed with rest of the study documents such as Case Report Forms and Informed Consent document. These documents are not archived in the true sense of the word but rather stored in a secure locked metal cupboard for the required duration.


As opposed to the norm in the west, the pharmacies in the hospital do not play any role in the management and dispensing of study drug supplies. This activity is always managed by the study staff.


In general, the privately owned and run hospitals are better equipped as compared to government-run hospitals. However, it is the government hospital, which receives the bulk of the patient population. Sponsors should aim for careful balance of private, semi-private and government institutes while choosing sites in India.


With data generated to GCP standards, the quality of clinical trial data generated in India is on par with the rest of the world. The US FDA last year successfully audited two sites in Southern India and reported no serious findings. Clinical trials outsourced to India have so far performed well. The need of the hour is a collaborative effort the by the industry and regulators to position India as a global player in the field by ensuring quality in every aspect of clinical research.

more

Thursday, April 17, 2008

4 phases of clinical trial

What is a clinical trial?

A clinical trial (also clinical research) is a research study in human volunteers to answer specific health questions. Carefully conducted clinical trials are the fastest and safest way to find treatments that work in people and ways to improve health. Interventional trials determine whether experimental treatments or new ways of using known therapies are safe and effective under controlled environments. Observational trials address health issues in large groups of people or populations in natural settings.

What are the phases of clinical trials?

There are 4 phases of clinical trial

Phase I trials

Researchers test a new drug or treatment in a small group of people (20-80) for the first time to evaluate its safety, determine a safe dosage range, and identify side effects.

Phase II trials

The study drug or treatment is given to a larger group of people (100-300) to see if it is effective and to further evaluate its safety.

Phase III trials

The study drug or treatment is given to large groups of people (1,000-3,000) to confirm its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug or treatment to be used safely.

Phase IV trials

Post marketing studies delineate additional information including the drug's risks, benefits, and optimal use.

Why Are Clinical Trials Important?

more

Contract research organization

A Contract Research Organization (CRO) is an organization that offers clients a wide range of pharmaceutical research services. In the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations state that a CRO is "a person [i.e., a legal person, which may be a corporation] that assumes, as an independent contractor with the sponsor, one or more of the obligations of a sponsor, e.g., design of a protocol, selection or monitoring of investigations, evaluation of reports, and preparation of materials to be submitted to the Food and Drug Administration." [21 CFR 312.3(b)]
Services offered by CROs include: product development and formulation, clinical trial management (preclinical through phase IV), central laboratory services for processing trial samples, data management services for preparation of an FDA New Drug Application (NDA) or an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA), and many other complementary services. CROs can offer their clients the experience of moving a new drug from its conception to FDA marketing approval without the drug sponsor having to maintain a staff for these services, which often have limited duration. [1]
Contents
1 Outsourcing in Clinical Research
2 Reasons for outsourcing to contract research organizations
3 CRO market size and growth
4 Shortcomings of CROs
5 Differences between a CRO and eCRO
6 Contract Research Organizations
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
//
more

ANVISA audit


ANVISA-Torchbearer of surveillanceThursday, July 28, 2005 08:00 IST Our Bureau, MumbaiThe National Health Surveillance Agency was established by Law 9.782, of January 26, 1999. Designated under a special regime, ANVISA is an independently administered, financially-autonomous regulatory agency, with security of tenure for its directors during the period of their mandates. It is managed by a 5-member Collegiate Board of Directors.ANVISA is linked to the Ministry of Health, under a Management Contract. Structure of the National Health Surveillance Agency is comprised of Collegiate Board of Directors, Advisory Center for Strategic Management, Social and Institutional Communication Advisory Nucleus, Office of the Attorney, Internal Affairs Office, Office of the Ombudsman, Advisory Council, Committee for Management of Sanitary Surveillance Information System, Committee for Policy on Human Resources for Sanitary Surveillance, Sector Committee for Processes and Debureaucratization, Committee for Decentralization of Sanitary Surveillance Actions, Audit Office, Advisory Office for Decentralization of Sanitary Surveillance Actions, Advisory Office for Institutional Relations, General Office of Administrative and Financial Management, General Office of Blood, other Tissues, Cells and Organs, General Office of Cosmetics, General Office of Drugs, General Office of Economic Regulation and Market Monitoring, General Office of Foods, General Office of Health Services Technology, General Office of Inspection and Control of Inputs, Drugs and Products, General Office of International Relations, General Office of Knowledge and Documentation Management, General Office of Laboratories of Public Health, General Office of Medical Devices Technology, General Office of Ports, Airports and Borders, General Office of Sanitizing Products and General Office of Toxicology. The purpose of the agency is to foster protection of the health of the population by exercising sanitary control over production and marketing of products and services subject to sanitary surveillance. The latter embraces premises and manufacturing processes, as well as the range of inputs and technologies concerned with the same. In addition, the agency exercises control over ports, airports and borders and also liaises with the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and foreign institutions over matters concerning international aspects of sanitary surveillanceANVISA is also concerned with epidemiological surveillance and vector inspection activities and the registration of immunobiologicals, insecticides, drugs and other strategic inputs.Key Jobs " to coordinate the National System of Health Surveillance" to carry out studies and research" to establish norms regarding restrictions on contaminants, toxic waste, disinfectants, heavy metals and other materials which constitute a health risk" to intervene on a temporary basis in the administration of manufacturing entities financed, subsidised or maintained at public expense" to administer and collect the Health Surveillance Inspection Fee " to authorise the operation of manufacturing, distribution and importing " to give assent to the import and export of the products listed in the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency " to grant product registration permits " to grant and to withdraw GMP certificates " to demand on the basis of specific rules the accreditation by the National System of Weights and Measures, Standards and Industrial Quality (SINMETRO)" to proscribe, as a health surveillance measure, manufacturing plants and those premises involved in the management in the event of violation of the relevant legislation" to cancel the operating permits in the event of violation of the relevant legislation " to coordinate the health surveillance activities carried out by quality control laboratories " to set up, coordinate and monitor toxicological and pharmaceutical surveillance systems" to take the lead in revising the pharmacopoeia" to run an ongoing and permanent information system to integrate whole range of health activities" to monitor and audit state, district and municipal bodies
NPPA notification dated March 28, 2008 fixing/revising prices of 227 formulation pack
THE MEDICAL DEVICES REGULATION BILL 2006
New Drug Approvals Updated upto June 2007
US FDA New Approvals Updated Upto January 2008
Pharma Patent Applications Published In INDIA


more

-->
FORTHCOMING EVENTS
International
Domestic -->
CHRONICLE PHARMABIZ SPECIALS
Forthcoming
Past

-->
CORPORATE
Company Profiles

-->
Pharma Stocks
NPIL's Wellquest CRO Audit by ANVISA, Brazil
Mumbai November 28, 2003: Wellquest is an independent clinical research division of Nicholas Piramal. Wellquest is a professional, state-of-the-art Contract Research Organisation (CRO) compliant with international regulatory norms of Good Clinical Practices (GCP). It has been accredited by the DCGI for clinical research studies.Wellquest has been operational for three years. During this period several Indian and international pharmaceutical companies have conducted successful audits. Wellquest has carried out pivotal Bioequivalence (BE) studies for submission to regulatory bodies in UK, Europe, South Africa, Australia and Latin America. Wellquest dossiers have been approved by UK-MHRA and Brazil-ANVISA. In fact, the Brazilian regulatory body ANVISA (Agency National for Vigilance Sanitaire) now makes it mandatory that all CROs be pre-approved before any study is conducted with them for Brazilian submission. Wellquest was the first Indian CRO to undergo such a facility audit (from 20th to 24th November) by ANVISA under its new guidelines. ANVISA audit was highly successful and would certify Wellquest as an accredited center of ANVISA in India. Wellquest has conducted over 20 studies for different sponsors for registration in Brazil. Another eight studies are currently in various phases of execution. Besides ANVISA, eight other international clients/regulatory bodies are currently auditing Wellquest.

more


ANVISA's General Competencies The Regulations of the National Health Surveillance Agency endow the Agency with the following competencies:
to coordinate the National System of Health Surveillance;
to foster and carry out studies and research in line with the Agency's range of agreed functions;
to establish norms and standards regarding restrictions on contaminants, toxic waste, disinfectants, heavy metals and other materials which constitute a health risk;
to intervene on a temporary basis in the administration of manufacturing entities financed, subsidised or maintained at public expense, as well as in that of service providers and/or those manufacturers which produce materials on an exclusive or strategic basis for the Brazilian market, as set forth in specific legislation [ covered by Article 5 of Law 6.437, dated 20 August 1977, based upon the text of Article 2 of Law 9.695, dated 20 August 1998];
to administer and collect the Health Surveillance Inspection Fee [in accordance with Article 23 of Law 9.782 of 26 January 1999];
to authorise the operation of manufacturing, distribution and importing firms concerned with the products detailed in Article 4 of the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency [Decree 3029 dated 16 April 1999];
to give assent to the importation and exportation of the products listed in the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency [Decree 3029, dated 16 April 1999];
to grant product registration permits in accordance with the norms ascribed to the Agency's area of activity;
to grant and to withdraw certificates of good manufacturing practice;
to demand on the basis of specific rules the accreditation by the National System of Weights and Measures, Standards and Industrial Quality (SINMETRO), or the certificate of authorisation issued by the same body, of institutions, products and services subject to health surveillance, according to their category of risk;
to proscribe, as a health surveillance measure, manufacturing plants and those premises involved in the management, importation, storage, distribution and sale of health related products and services in the event of violation of the relevant legislation, or on account of their constituting a likely health risk ;
to prohibit the manufacture, importation, warehousing, distribution and marketing of products and inputs in the event of any violation of the relevant legislation or because such products and services constitute a likely health risk ;
to cancel the operating permits, including special permits, of companies in the event of violation of the relevant legislation or because of an impending health risk ;
to coordinate the health surveillance activities carried out by laboratories comprising the official network of health and hygiene quality control laboratories;
to set up, coordinate and monitor toxicological and pharmaceutical surveillance systems;
to take the lead in revising, and periodically bringing up to date, the pharmacopeia;
to run an ongoing and permanent information system with the aim of integrating it into the whole range of health activities, with priority placed upon those information activities concerned with epidemiological surveillance and out-patient and hospital care;
to monitor and audit state, district and municipal bodies comprising the National System of Health Surveillance, including the official health quality control laboratories;
to coordinate and carry out quality control in respect of goods and products listed in Article 4 of the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency [Decree 3.029 of 16 April 1999], through a variety of analytical procedures provided for in health legislation or through the implementation of specifically defined health quality control programmes;
to foster and develop staff resources for the National System of Health Surveillance and to carry out domestic and international technical cooperation activities;
to summonse offenders and apply the penalties foreshadowed in law;
to monitor the prices of medical drugs, items of equipment, components, inputs and health services;
the Agency can delegate in accordance with a decision by the Collegiate Directorate, to the Federal District, the States, and Municipalities the execution of certain activities falling within its remit, with the exception of those covered by Article 3, sub-section 2, of the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency;
the Agency can advise upon, or complement or supplement activities by the Federal District, by the States or municipalities, in the area of health inspection;
epidemiological surveillance and vector inspection activities in respect of ports, airports and border crossing points shall be carried out by the Agency acting in accordance with the technical and normative guidance of the epidemiological and environmental divisions of the Ministry of Health;
the Agency can delegate to the appropriate body within the Ministry of Health the execution of those functions set forth in Article 3 of the Statute of the National Health Surveillance Agency [Decree 3.029 of 16 April 1999] in respect of medical out-patient and hospital services covered by Article 4 , sub-sections 2 and 3 of the Statute. Note that the text of Article 3 under reference was redrafted by Decree 3.571 of 21 August 2000.
the Agency shall carry out its activities fully in accordance with the guidelines established by Law 8.080 of 19 September 1990 in order to ensure continuation of the process of decentralisation of activities for the Federal District, States and municipalities, while observing the restricitions set forth in Article 3, sub-section 2, of the Statute. Decentralisation will only be given effect providing the respective State, District and Municipal Health Councils grant their respective approval;
the Agency can dispense with the registration of immunobiologicals, insecticides, drugs and other strategic inputs when acquired through international or multilateral organisations for use by the Ministry of Health and its associated organs in the course of public health programmes.
The Minister of Health can determine that certain activities within the remit of the Agency be carried out in specific circumstances which involve a public health risk.
Regulating, controlling and inspecting products and services which involve risks to public health are within the proper remit of the Agency.
The following are goods and products subject to health control and enforcement:
Medical drugs for human use, their active substances and other related inputs, processes and technologies;
Foods, including drinks, bottled waters and their inputs, packaging, food or drink additives, levels of organic pollutants, residues of pesticides and veterinary drugs;
Cosmetics, personal hygiene products and perfumes;
Cleaning products for sanitisation, disinfection or disinfestation in domestic, hospital and public premises;
Kits, reagents and inputs to be used for diagnosis;
Medical-hospital, odontological, haemotherapic, and laboratory and imaging equipment and materials;
Immunobiologicals and their active substances, blood and blood products;
Organs, human and animal tissue for use in transplants or reconstructions;
Radioisotopes for in vivo diagnostic use, radiopharmaceuticals and radioactive products for use in diagnosis and therapy;
Cigarettes, cigarillos, cigars and any other type of smoking product, derived or not from tobacco;
Any products which involve the possibility of risk to health obtained as the result of genetic engineering, by any other procedure or submitted to sources of radiation.
Services subject to health inspection and enforcement are as follows:
Those involving routine or emergency out-patient care, hospitalisation, diagnostic and therapeutic support services, as well as those services which involve employment of new technology;
Physical installations, equipment, technologies, premises and procedures used in connection with every phase of the production of goods and products subject to health inspection and enforcement, including the final disposal of their respective waste matter.
Notwithstanding the rules and regulations outlined above, the Agency can include other products and services of interest in the control of risks to public health within the remit of the National Health Surveillance Agency.

more

Friday, April 11, 2008

unscrupulous manufacturers of herbal medicines and nutraceuticals

Ayurveda manufacturers wary of Food Bill
P.T. Jyothi Datta
Mumbai , April 23
WHY are ayurvedic product manufacturers wary of the proposed Integrated Food Bill? Well, herb-based products based on insufficient stability and efficacy tests may find their way into the local markets in the guise of a nutraceutical or a food-supplement.
And worse, they will promise the benefits of ayurveda, caution representatives with ayurvedic companies.

Making a strong case for clarity between ayurvedic products and nutraceuticals, an old hand with the ayurveda segment said: Ayurvedic products should be kept outside the purview of the Food Bill. Nutraceuticals, on the other hand, should be classified as food.

An ayurvedic product is based on the "grantha"; it has to go through the rigeurs of manufacturing and testing before getting approvals from the Ayurvedic directorate for marketing the drug locally.

The worry is that unscrupulous manufacturers may use herbs or rely on traditional ayurvedic knowledge to develop a product.

They will then market it as food, to circumvent the stringent processes of a regular ayurveda product, an industry representative apprehends.

This way, they also rob the traditional knowledge segment of its credit, he points out.
"Food supplements should also not be allowed to make curative claims or claims that it can treat a particular disease," points out Mr Pulin Shroff, Managing Director of Charak Pharma.

A host of pharma companies and corporates flush with funds are looking at the nutraceuticals segment, an estimated $1 billion market globally. No authentic figures are available for the local market, but companies such as Nicholas Piramal, Dabur, Parry's, Ranbaxy and Cipla already have or harbour plans to get into the segment.

With copycat drugs outlawed by the recent Patents Amendment Act 2005, domestic pharma companies are looking for avenues to sustain their sales.
And nutraceuticals is one such money-spinner, observes a representative with a Fast Moving Consumer Goods company that has an ayurvedic cosmetic line.

Given the ground realities, ayurvedic industry representatives have presented their case to the Ministry of Health to ensure that the equity of the traditional segment does not get eroded by unscrupulous manufacturers. Genuine nutraceutical products, however, can make ayurvedic claims, but they must be able to substantiate it, an ayurvedic manufacturer adds.

Underlining the need for clarity in the law, he said, in the US there is the Dietary Supplements and Health Education Act 1994 that defines labelling, functional claims and manufacturing practices.

Any health or curative claim needs to be cleared by a drug authority, he said.
Changes in the US law allowed specific nutraceuticals to make broad health claims, but no disease claims, says Charak's Mr Shroff.

For instance, a Trifla can only say, "aids in digestion," he said.
Japan has the Functional Food for Specific Use directive, allowing 26 ingredients that can make health claims. And in Europe, it is unclear how the Functional Food directive will view health claims.

With a host of imported and domestic food-supplements already in the Indian market, ayurvedic manufacturers fear that consumers may opt for the contemporary nutraceutical, sold on the promise of an ayurvedic claim, rather than an ayurvedic product itself.

more

EVIDENCE FOR CONTAMINATION OF HERBAL ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION PRODUCTS WITH PHOSPHODIESTERASE TYPE 5 INHIBITORS .

Regulation renovation: new European regulations on nutrition and health claims will likely make differentiation difficult and investment necessary.

Monday, March 24, 2008

SIRO


Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)
Since its inception in 1996, SIRO has come a long way in terms of the experience it has garnered and the Standard Operating Procedures it has established across all functions within its organization.
Being a wholly Indian CRO, SIRO has relied on its own experience and the experts on its advisory board to craft its SOPs and bring them to a level where they have cleared sponsor audits across all projects with no major findings.
SIRO released the new updated version of its SOPs in early 2006, which is the 8th version since inception.


SOPs for each function are prepared by different functional groups using guidelines established by the SIRO Clinical Quality Assurance group. Intensive training on SOPs to all new and existing employees is delivered periodically. Along with training, tools and metrics for monitoring and evaluating compliance across functions have allowed SIRO to maintain and indeed to raise the bar on the quality of output in all the services it offers to its customers.

more


US - India axis opens up in bio/pharma development services

Monday, March 17, 2008

European Directive Information

Regulatory Information

EU Directive on Good Clinical Practice 2005/28/ECThe principles of GCP laid down in Articles 2 to 5 of the GCP Directive 2005/28/EC are essentially the same as the International Conference on Harmonisation's ('ICH') principles for GCP. Official Document
New EU legislation comes into forceAll EU member states had to implement the provisions of the new EU pharmaceutical directives into their national legislation on 30th October. Official Document
Revised EU Clinical Trials Guidance (Revision 2) now availableRevision 2 of the Detailed guidance for the request for authorisation of a clinical trial on a medicinal product for human use to the competent authorities, notification of substantial amendments and declaration of the end of the trial as required by Article 9 (8) of Directive 2001/20/EC has been updated. Official Document
ICH/GCP Guidelines
E6 Good Clinical Practice - ICH April 1996Last Version of ICH/GCP Guidelines Official Document
Data Protection Rules
Official Website related to the European Data Protection Directives and lawsAll about this item here. Official Document
European Data Protection Directive 95/46/ECThe text of the Directive 95/46/EC here. Official Document
Status of implementation of Directive 95/46 in all the state members Important to issue country specific informed consents. Official DocumentTop Previous Home
more

Thursday, February 28, 2008

more information on CRO

Our goal is to provide the visitors with a global information on clinical research and, more specifically, to be an opened worldwide window on the world of the vendors and the service providers working in the clinical research field.

go here

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Launch of the Indian Clinical Trial Registry

The Clinical Trial Registry - India (CTRI), the first such initiative in Asia, was launched by Dr. N.K. Ganguly, Director General, Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) on 20th July 2007 at the ICMR Headquarters, New Delhi. The Registry has been developed by ICMR in collaboration with the World Health Organization and the Department of Science & Technology. The launch was attended by Dr. S.J. Habayeb, WHO Representative to India, Mrs S.M Khan from the Department of Science & Technology, Dr. M Venkateswarlu, Drug Controller General India, Dr. Arvind Pandey, Director National Institute of Medical Statistics (ICMR), Dr. Vasantha Muthuswamy, Sr DDG (ICMR) along with other scientists and dignitaries.

In his welcome address, Dr. Pandey outlined the need for the Registry and the process of its development. A unique identification number will be provided by the registry which would be useful for identification and publication of trial results. Dr. Habayeb released the first CTRI bulletin on this occasion. In his remarks, he said that this effort will provide accountability, transparency and information sharing among stakeholders.

Clinical trial registries already exists in countries like US, UK and Australia, with this launch, India too has joined this global effort towards making clinical trials more transparent. He congratulated India for this timely step of launching the CTRI.

Mrs Khan joined the other dignitaries in emphasizing the need for a clinical trails registry in India and lauded the team at ICMR for its efforts for undertaking such an effort. She hoped that in coming time, the CTRI would achieve its objective of becoming a Primary Register for South / South East Asia. As a regulator, Dr. Ventakeswarlu expressed immense satisfaction on establishment of the registry. He emphasized its usefulness to the regulator, especially in absence of complete information on clinical trial and offered all assistance for this important initiative.

Prof. Ganguly traced the genesis of the project and express gratitude for the support received from WHO and DST for this vital effort. He shared the efforts at ensuring that the registry is managed by a neutral body, supported by a Steering Committee, Technical Working Group and a Monitoring Committee. The registry would strive to protect the interest of all sections including researchers and community. He emphasized that clinical data may not be publishable unless trails are registered. The function closed with a vote of thanks by Dr. Muthusamy.


more

Saturday, February 02, 2008

List of CROs in India

India is fast emerging as a favoured destination for clinical trials by global pharmaceutical and biotech companies that are looking for partnerships or setting up new operations. The major companies involved in Clinical research in India have a wide range of services to offer. Thus, the industry needs to know the companies operating in this field.

The directory of Clinical Research Companies in India is the answer to it and has been prepared as a ready-reckoner for use by the industry globally pharma and biotech companies, contract research companies, funding organisations and others.

It has been compiled, considering the companies involved in clinical research and support services. As it is an emerging market and also as most of the companies may not be listed on stock exchangers, the list may not be comprehensive. The directory covers more than 60 companies and each profile includes vital information like description of the company, name of Director/CEO, and contact details. The details have been obtained from published sources like the respective websites of the companies.

All the companies are listed in alphabetical order.Customers who bought this item also bought
BioMed Outsourcing Report-Outsourcing Preclinical and Clinical Services, Emerging OpportunitiesDSL Worldwide DirectoryThe Corporate Directory of US Public Companies 2008Indias Energy Sector (2005-2010)IEEMA Members Directory- 2004Construction Machinery Industry in IndiaSourcing Auto Components - Destination IndiaIndia Transport & Logistics 2005

more

more

more

LIST OF CROs and CRAs country wise

MPPhase > CRA & CRO Database
This page gives access to the MPPhase.com CRA & CRO DATABASE
1) International CRO Companies... click here
2) Local CRO Companies and Freelance CRASelect a Region and a Country where you are looking for a freelance CRA or a local CRO:


West Europe
AustriaBelgiumCroatiaCyprusDenmarkGermanyGreeceFinlandFranceIrelandItalyThe NetherlandsNorwaySpainSwedenSwitzerlandTurkeyUnited Kingdom & Scotland
East & Central Europe
BulgariaCroatiaCzech RepublicEstoniaHungaryLatviaLithuaniaPolandRomaniaRussiaSerbiaSlovakiaSloveniaUkraine
North America
CanadaUSA
Central & South America
ArgentinaBrazilChileMexicoPeruUruguay
North & South Africa
EgyptSouth AfricaTunisia
Middle East
Gulf StatesIranJordanLebanonSaudi ArabiaSyria
Asia
ChinaHawaiiIndiaIndonesiaJapanMalaysiaPhilippinesSingaporeThailand

more

LIST OF MAJOR CROs WORLDWIDE
Accutest Pvt. Ltd (I), Ahmedabad, Pune, Mumbai, India
Aarti industries ltd, Mumbai, India
Accovion GmbH, Eschborn, Germany
Addstat Leipzig, Germany
Allphase Clinical Research
AMRI (Albany Molecular Research, Inc.)
Anaclim
AnaSpec
Arianne
[4]
BAP Health Outcomes Research
BASi
BRT - Burleson Research Technologies, Inc.
Cancer Research And Biostatistics (CRAB), Seattle, WA
Cardiosec Erfurt, Germany
Celera Translations - Clinical Research Specialist
Cetero Research
CHEMBIOTEK
Chiltern
Clinetica Biosciences International
Clinpharm, Germany
Cmed
Covance
CROMAR Contract Research organization Maroc
CRS Clinical Research Services Germany
DR. RIETHMÜLLER M/R/S GmbH
Encorium
Emissary
Gleneagles CRC Pte Ltd
GVK BIO
Health Decisions
Icon Clinical Research
INC Research
Integrated Research Inc. Canada
Integrity Medical Group, Pennsylvania
Intertek ASG, Manchester, UK
Iris Pharma - ophthalmology
IPRC
JANIX
JSS Medical Research, Canada
Kendle
KKS Halle, Germany
KKS Leipzig, Germany
KKS Dresden, Germany
Medelis - oncology
Medpace
Molecular Diagnostic Services, Inc. San Diego, CA
MDS Pharma Services
NEPTUN-Cro
Nucleus Network - Australia
PAREXEL International
Pharmaceutical Product Development (PPD)
PRA International
Prologue
Prolytic, Germany
PSI Co Ltd
Omega-CRO
Quintiles
Sanmour Pharma, Mumbai, India
Scandinavian CRO
Spaulding Clinical
Synarc
Synteract
Tandem Labs
Target Health Inc
TCG Lifesciences Ltd, India
TKL Research, Inc, New Jersey, USA
Toxikon
Vedic Lifesciences
Wolfe Laboratories, Inc
Wuxi Pharmatech, Shanghai, China
XenoBiotic Laboratories, Inc

more

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

Contract Research Organizations (CROs)



Contract Research Organizations (CROs) are independent contractors that offer their services to pharmaceutical companies, including medical writing—usually the preparation of regulatory documents, and clinical trial protocols.Many biotech and pharma companies are now outsourcing all their medical writing instead of doing it in-house. See for example this news article about the giant Pharma company, Pfizer:

"All of Pfizer's data management is now outsourced, along with many other related functions such as data entry, monitoring, statistics and medical writing, said Thomas Verish, Pfizer's senior director of Development Operations, revealed at the recent Drug Information Association conference in Vienna."No wonder CROs are hiring so many medical writers. If you are just launching your medical writing career, a CRO is a good place to start. There you can be exposed to different types of writing and obtain valuable experience.


Dr Arun Bhatt, leading expert in clinical research

Dr Arun Bhatt, leading expert in clinical research and president of the Mumbai-based ClinInvent Research Pvt Ltd will be answering readers' queries on Good Clinical Practices (GCP) in this monthly column.

Send in your queries at: mailto:editorial@saffronmedia.in

Epidemiology studies have to follow ethical requirements - (December 06, 2007) New
All amendments need EC approval - (November 04, 2007)
Regulatory and Ethics Committee approval isnecessary before sending IP to the site - (October 04, 2007)
Indian GCP guidelines have a section on devices - (September 06, 2007)
ICH guidelines mention COA should be in sponsor's file - (August 02, 2007)
All clinical trials require EC approval - (July 05, 2007)
Audit certificate is issued when required, not mandatory - (June 07, 2007)
Sponsor cannot use retrospective data directly - (May 03, 2007)
DCGI approval is required for expanded access programme - (April 05, 2007)
Sponsor can use data after getting permission from EC - (March 01, 2007)
It is not prudent to have QA-auditor as member secretary of the study - (February 01, 2007)
Who qualifies to chair an Ethics Committee - (January 04, 2007)
EC has to get all required documents including investigators' CV - (December 07, 2006)
Informed consent from an illiterate person- (November 02, 2006)
GCP ethical guidelines need to be followed for cosmetic trials- (October 05, 2006)
BA/BE will be influenced by disturbances in patient's body functions- (August 31, 2006)
Pregnancy: A serious adverse event - (August 03, 2006)
Role of quality assurance in clinical research - (July 06, 2006)
Indian GCP aims greater protection to subjects - (June 01, 2006)
Therapeautic equivalence, not BE for biogenerics, inhalers - (April 06, 2006)
Protocols are same for clinical trials and BA/BE - (March 02, 2006)
Report serious cases of ADR within 15 days - (February 02, 2006)


more

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Control of Clinical trials in india

AUTHORITY TO CONTROL CLINICAL TRIALS IN INDIA

Thursday, December 06, 2007

India To Host 30% Of Global Clinical Research By 2020

India is expected to host 30% of the world's contract research within the next 10-15 years, driven by the attractions of low cost and high quality standards, says the India Brand Equity Foundation, IBEF.
Source: Jobs4dd.com Ltd

more

Saturday, December 01, 2007

Guidance for Industry Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of the Commissioner (OC) May 2007 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations

Guidance for Industry Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations
Additional copies are available from:
Office of Training and Communication Division of Drug InformationCenter for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) (Tel) 301-827-4573
http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/index.htm or Office of Communication, Training and Manufacturers AssistanceCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research http://www.fda.gov/cber/guidelines.htm(Tel) 800-835-4709 or 301-827-1800or Office of Communication, Education, and Radiation ProgramsDivision of Small Manufacturers, International, and Consumer AssistanceCenter for Devices and Radiological Health
http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ggpmain.htmlEmail: dsmica@fda.hhs.govFax: 240.276.3151(Tel) Manufacturers and International Assistance: 800.638.2041 or 240.276.3150or Office of Food Additive SafetyCenter for Food, Safety and Applied Nutrition(Tel) 301-436-1200http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/guidance.html
or Communications Staff, HFV-12 Center for Veterinary Medicine (Tel) 240-276-9300
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/guidance/published or Good Clinical Practice ProgramsOffice of the Commissioner U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Office of the Commissioner (OC) May 2007

Contains Nonbinding Recommendations

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1
II. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................... 2
III. SCOPE ............................................................................................................................... 3
IV. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................. 3
A. Study Protocols ..............................................................................................................................3
B. Standard Operating Procedures...................................................................................................3
C. Source Documentation and Retention..........................................................................................4
D. Internal Security Safeguards ........................................................................................................4
1. Limited Access ................................................................................................................................4
2. Audit Trails .....................................................................................................................................4
3. Date/Time Stamps ............................................................................................................................5
E. External Security Safeguards .......................................................................................................5
F. Other System Features..................................................................................................................6
1. Direct Entry of Data ........................................................................................................................6
2. Retrieving Data...............................................................................................................................6
3. Dependability System Documentation .............................................................................................6
4. System Controls ...............................................................................................................................6
5. Change Controls ..............................................................................................................................7
G. Training of Personnel....................................................................................................................7DEFINITIONS .............................................................................................................................. 8REFERENCES............................................................................................................................. 9APPENDIX A..............................................................................................................................


Guidance for Industry1
Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Investigations

This guidance represents the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) current thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the public. You can use an alternative approach if the approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations. If you want to discuss an alternative approach, contact the FDA staff responsible for implementing this guidance. If you cannot identify the appropriate FDA staff, call the appropriate number listed on the title page of this guidance.


I. INTRODUCTION
This document provides to sponsors, contract research organizations (CROs), data management centers, clinical investigators, and institutional review boards (IRBs), recommendations regarding the use of computerized systems in clinical investigations. The computerized system applies to records in electronic form that are used to create, modify, maintain, archive, retrieve, or transmit clinical data required to be maintained, or submitted to the FDA. Because the source data2 are necessary for the reconstruction and evaluation of the study to determine the safety of food and color additives and safety and effectiveness of new human and animal drugs,3 and medical devices, this guidance is intended to assist in ensuring confidence in the reliability, quality, and integrity of electronic source data and source documentation (i.e., electronic records).
This guidance supersedes the guidance of the same name dated April 1999; and supplements the guidance for industry on Part 11, Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures — Scope and Application and the Agency's international harmonization efforts4 when applying these guidances to source data generated at clinical study sites.

1 This guidance has been prepared by the Office of Critical Path Programs, the Good Clinical Practice Program, and the Office of Regulatory Affairs in cooperation with Bioresearch Monitoring Program Managers for each Center within the Food and Drug Administration.2 Under 21 CFR 312.62(b), reference is made to records that are part of case histories as “supporting data”; the ICH E6 Good Clinical Practice consolidated guidance uses the term “source documents.” For the purpose of this guidance, these terms describe the same information and have been used interchangeably.

3 Human drugs include biological drugs.
4 In August 2003, FDA issued the guidance for industry entitled Part 11, Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures-Scope and Application clarifying that the Agency intends to interpret the scope of part 11 narrowly and to exercise enforcement discretion with regard to part 11 requirements for validation, audit trails, record retention, and record copying. In 1996, the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) issued E6 Good Clinical Practice: Consolidated Guidance.


FDA's guidance documents, including this guidance, do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe the Agency's current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in Agency guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required.

II. BACKGROUND
There is an increasing use of computerized systems in clinical trials to generate and maintain source data and source documentation on each clinical trial subject. Such electronic source data and source documentation must meet the same fundamental elements of data quality (e.g., attributable, legible, contemporaneous, original,5 and accurate) that are expected of paper records and must comply with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. FDA's acceptance of data from clinical trials for decision-making purposes depends on FDA's ability to verify the quality and integrity of the data during FDA on-site inspections and audits. (21 CFR 312, 511.1(b), and 812).

In March 1997, FDA issued 21 CFR part 11, which provides criteria for acceptance by FDA, under certain circumstances, of electronic records, electronic signatures, and handwritten signatures executed to electronic records as equivalent to paper records and handwritten signatures executed on paper. After the effective date of 21 CFR part 11, significant concerns regarding the interpretation and implementation of part 11 were raised by both FDA and industry. As a result, we decided to reexamine 21 CFR part 11 with the possibility of proposing additional rulemaking, and exercising enforcement discretion regarding enforcement of certain part 11 requirements in the interim.

This guidance finalizes the draft guidance for industry entitled Computerized Systems Used in Clinical Trials, dated September 2004 and supplements the guidance for industry entitled Part 11, Electronic Records; Electronic Signatures – Scope and Application (Scope and Application Guidance), dated August 2003. The Scope and Application Guidance clarified that the Agency intends to interpret the scope of part 11 narrowly and to exercise enforcement discretion with regard to part 11 requirements for validation, audit trails, record retention, and record copying. However, other Part 11 provisions remain in effect.

The approach outlined in the Scope and Application Guidance, which applies to electronic records generated as part of a clinical trial, should be followed until such time as Part 11 is amended.

5 FDA is allowing original documents to be replaced by copies provided the copies are identical and have been verified as such (See, e.g., FDA Compliance Policy Guide # 7150.13). See Definitions section for a definition of original data.



III. SCOPE
The principles outlined in this guidance should be used for computerized systems that contain any data that are relied on by an applicant in support of a marketing application, including computerized laboratory information management systems that capture analytical results of tests conducted during a clinical trial. For example, the recommendations in this guidance would apply to computerized systems that create source documents (electronic records) that satisfy the requirements in 21 CFR 312.62(b) and 812.1