| Homepage | Imprint |
|
||
 |
Institutional Review BoardAn institutional review board/independent ethics committee(IRB/IEC) is an appropriately constituted groupthat has been formally designated to review and monitor biomedicaland behavioralresearchinvolving humansubjects. In accordance with FDAand HHSregulations, an IRB has the authority to approve, require modifications in (to secure approval), or disapprove research. In the United States, IRBs are mandated by the Research Act of 1974, which defines IRBs and requires them for all research that receives funding, directly or indirectly, from what was the Department of Health, Education, and Welfareat the time, and is now the Department of Health and Human Services(HHS).
Naming and Composition"IRB" is a generic term used by the Food and Drug Administration(FDA) and HHS. Each institutionthat establishes an IRB may use whatever name it chooses. Regardless of the name chosen, the IRB is subject to the FDA's IRB regulations when studies of FDA-regulated products are reviewed and approved. Originally, IRBs were committeesat academic institutionsand medical facilitiesto monitor research studies involving human subjects, primarily to minimize or avoid ethicalproblems. Today the majority of IRB reviews are done by for-profit organizations. Purpose and UseIRBs are most commonly used for studies in the fields of medicineand psychology. The purpose of an IRB reviewis to assure, both in advance and by periodic review, that appropriate steps are taken to protect the rights and welfare of humans participating as subjects in a research study. To accomplish this purpose, IRBs review research protocols and related materials (e.g., informed consent documents and investigator brochures) to ensure protection of the rights and welfareof human subjects of research. ResponsibilitiesAccording to ICH GCP an IRB/IEC should safeguard the rights, safety, and well-beingof all trial subjects. Special attention should be paid to trials that may include vulnerable subjects. The IRB/IEC should obtain the following documents: trial protocol(s)/amendment(s), written informed consent form(s) and consent form updates that the investigator proposes for use in the trial, subject recruitment procedures (e.g., advertisements), written information to be provided to subjects, Investigator's Brochure (IB), available safety information, information about payments and compensation available to subjects, the investigator's current curriculum vitae and/or other documentation evidencing qualifications, and any other documents that the IRB/IEC may need to fulfill its responsibilities. The IRB/IEC should review a proposed clinical trialwithin a reasonable time and document its views in writing, clearly identifying the trial, the documents reviewed and the dates for the following:
According to ICH GCP the IRB/IEC should consider the qualifications of the investigator for the proposed trial, as documented by a current curriculum vitae and/or by any other relevant documentation the IRB/IEC requests. According to ICH GCP the IRB/IEC should conduct continuing review of each ongoing trial at intervals appropriate to the degree of risk to human subjects, but at least once per year. The IRB/IEC may request more informationthan is outlined in paragraph 4.8.10 be given to subjects when, in the judgment of the IRB/IEC, the additional information would add meaningfully to the protection of the rights, safety and/or well-being of the subjects. When a non-therapeutic trial is to be carried out with the consent of the subject's legally acceptable representative (see 4.8.12, 4.8.14), the IRB/IEC should determine that the proposed protocol and/or other document(s) adequately addresses relevant ethical concerns and meets applicable regulatory requirements for such trials. Where the protocol indicates that prior consent of the trial subject or the subject's legally acceptable representative is not possible (see 4.8.15), the IRB/IEC should determine that the proposed protocol and/or other document(s) adequately addresses relevant ethical concerns and meets applicable regulatory requirements for such trials (i.e., in emergency situations). The IRB/IEC should review both the amount and method of payment to subjects to assure that neither presents problems of coercion or undue influence on the trial subjects. Payments to a subject should be prorated and not wholly contingent on completion of the trial by the subject. According to ICH GCP (good clinical practice) the IRB/IEC should ensure that information regarding payment to subjects, including the methods, amounts, and schedule of payment to trial subjects, is set forth in the written informed consent form and any other written information to be provided to subjects. The way payment will be prorated should be specified.
External links
This article incorporates text from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which is in the public domain. Categories: Experimental design| Pharmacology| Clinical research
|
