Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Mar;90(3):321-3.
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000562.

Central institutional review board review for an academic trial network

Affiliations

Central institutional review board review for an academic trial network

Petra Kaufmann et al. Acad Med. 2015 Mar.

Abstract

Problem: Translating discoveries into therapeutics is often delayed by lengthy start-up periods for multicenter clinical trials. One cause of delay can be multiple institutional review board (IRB) reviews of the same protocol.

Approach: When developing the Network for Excellence in Neuroscience Clinical Trials (NeuroNEXT; hereafter, NN), the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) established a central IRB (CIRB) based at Massachusetts General Hospital, the academic medical center that received the NN clinical coordinating center grant. The 25 NN sites, located at U.S. academic institutions, agreed to required CIRB use for NN trials.

Outcomes: To delineate roles and establish legal relationships between the NN sites and the CIRB, the CIRB executed reliance agreements with the sites and their affiliates that hold federalwide assurance for the protection of human subjects (FWA); this took, on average, 84 days. The first NN protocol reviewed by the CIRB achieved full approval to allow participant enrollment within 56 days and went from grant award to the first patient visit in less than four months. The authors describe anticipated challenges related to institutional oversight responsibilities versus regulatory CIRB review as well as unanticipated challenges related to working with complex organizations that include multiple FWA-holding affiliates.

Next steps: The authors anticipate that CIRB use will decrease NN trial start-up time and thus promote efficient trial implementation. They plan to collect data on timelines and costs associated with CIRB use. The NINDS plans to promote CIRB use in future initiatives.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Wagner TH, Murray C, Goldberg J, Adler JM, Abrams J. Costs and benefits of the National Cancer Institute central institutional review board. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:662–666. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Menikoff J. The paradoxical problem with multiple-IRB review. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1591–1593. - PubMed
    1. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Research and Development VA Central Institutional Review Board (IRB) www.research.va.gov/vacentralirb. Accessed September 3, 2014.
    1. Flynn KE, Hahn CL, Kramer JM, et al. Using central IRBs for multicenter clinical trials in the United States. PLoS One. 2013;8:e54999. - PMC - PubMed
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Human subjects research protections: Enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. Fed Regist. 2011;76(143):44512–44531. [Proposed rules.] http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/anprm2011page.html. Accessed September 3, 2014.

Publication types

MeSH terms