TY - JOUR
T1 - Improving academic leadership and oversight in large industry-sponsored clinical trials
T2 - TheARO-CRO model
AU - Goldenberg, Neil A.
AU - Spyropoulos, Alex C.
AU - Halperin, Jonathan L.
AU - Kessler, Craig M.
AU - Schulman, Sam
AU - Turpie, Alexander G.G.
AU - Skene, Allan M.
AU - Cutler, Neal R.
AU - Hiatt, William R.
PY - 2011/2/17
Y1 - 2011/2/17
N2 - Standards for clinical trial design, execution, and publication have increased in recent years. However, the current structure for interaction among the pharmaceutical sponsor funding a drug or device development program, the contract research organization (CRO) that typically assists in executing the trial, regulatory agencies, and academicians, provides inadequate leadership and oversight of the development process. Conventional academic steering committees are not provided with the independent infrastructure by which to verify statistical analyses and conclusions regarding safety and efficacy. We propose an alternative approach centered on partnerships between CROs and university-based academic research organizations (AROs). In this model, theAROtakes responsibility for processes that address journal requirements and regulatory expectations for independent academic oversight (including oversight of Steering Committee and Data and Safety Monitoring Board activities), whereas the CRO provides infrastructure for efficient trial execution, site monitoring, and data management. The ARO engages academic experts throughout the trial process and minimizes conflicts of interest in individual industry relationships via diversification of sponsors, agents, and therapeutic areas.Although numerous models can be entertained, theARO-CRO model is uniquely structured to meet the demand for greater assurance of integrity in clinical trials and the needs of each stakeholder in the process.
AB - Standards for clinical trial design, execution, and publication have increased in recent years. However, the current structure for interaction among the pharmaceutical sponsor funding a drug or device development program, the contract research organization (CRO) that typically assists in executing the trial, regulatory agencies, and academicians, provides inadequate leadership and oversight of the development process. Conventional academic steering committees are not provided with the independent infrastructure by which to verify statistical analyses and conclusions regarding safety and efficacy. We propose an alternative approach centered on partnerships between CROs and university-based academic research organizations (AROs). In this model, theAROtakes responsibility for processes that address journal requirements and regulatory expectations for independent academic oversight (including oversight of Steering Committee and Data and Safety Monitoring Board activities), whereas the CRO provides infrastructure for efficient trial execution, site monitoring, and data management. The ARO engages academic experts throughout the trial process and minimizes conflicts of interest in individual industry relationships via diversification of sponsors, agents, and therapeutic areas.Although numerous models can be entertained, theARO-CRO model is uniquely structured to meet the demand for greater assurance of integrity in clinical trials and the needs of each stakeholder in the process.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79951820739&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1182/blood-2010-09-308858
DO - 10.1182/blood-2010-09-308858
M3 - Short survey
C2 - 21068436
AN - SCOPUS:79951820739
SN - 0006-4971
VL - 117
SP - 2089
EP - 2092
JO - Blood
JF - Blood
IS - 7
ER -