In this episode, Edye Edens and Darshan Kulkarni discuss the evolving landscape of IRB oversight in 2024, including the roles of HRPP, AAHRPP, and OHRP, and the need for greater federal agency involvement. They also cover the impact of new guidance, the Trump administration, and the FDA's relationship with IRBs.

We discuss: 

1. The FDA’s Finalized Guidance on Decentralized Clinical Trials (DCTs):
 The recent FDA guidance formalizing decentralized elements in clinical trials raises critical questions for Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). While DCTs have existed for years, the official guidance now provides a framework for utilizing healthcare providers (HCPs), remote modalities, and flexible patient engagement. IRBs must consider:

• Approval Implications: How decentralized elements affect risk-based assessments and informed consent.
• Data Validity: Whether varying patient experiences impact trial control and data integrity.
• Protocol Design: Increased complexities in evaluating sponsor protocols that integrate hybrid or decentralized approaches.

2. Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs):
 IRBs are components of broader HRPPs, which also encompass research compliance, conflict of interest management, and quality auditing. Accreditation bodies like AAHRPP (gold standard for HRPPs) demand higher standards, which could necessitate additional adjustments to align with FDA guidance.

3. Regulatory Overlap and Harmonization Challenges:
 IRBs must navigate overlapping jurisdiction from the FDA and other entities like the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP). The lack of harmonized regulations between these agencies creates confusion for researchers and inefficiencies in clinical trial oversight.

4. FDA Audits and Oversight of IRBs:
 While the FDA does not directly regulate IRBs, it audits them and issues warning letters or Form 483 observations. IRBs must remain vigilant about FDA compliance, especially with decentralized elements becoming more common.

5. Decentralization’s Efficiency Debate:
 There is no blanket conclusion about whether decentralized trials increase efficiency or diversity. IRBs must assess the appropriateness of decentralized approaches on a case-by-case basis, particularly for complex studies like oncology trials or early-phase research requiring hospital stays.

6. Calls for Streamlining Oversight:
 There is growing discussion about reducing redundancy across regulatory bodies to enhance efficiency and lower costs for patients. However, skepticism remains about whether eliminating overlap would ensure adequate protection for trial participants.

7. Future Considerations:

• Adaptation: IRBs must adapt to increased DCT submissions while maintaining rigorous risk-based evaluations.
• Consistency: Balancing flexibility in decentralized models with the need for consistent oversight practices.
• Policy Evolution: Ongoing dialogue on whether accrediting bodies like AAHRPP or agencies like OHRP should develop complementary guidance to align with FDA standards.

In 2024, IRBs face a critical moment to address these challenges while ensuring that decentralized innovations do not compromise participant safety or trial integrity.

Support the show