DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service

Similar documents
Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations

WARNING LETTER. an both of which were sponsored by. (formerly ). The products

WARNING LETTER VIA FEDERAL EXPRES S

: study utilizing trieib)(4) b)(4) I I""-", _

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & Hl'NIAfV SERVICES Public Hcaffh Scn-ice WARNING LETTER

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service 3%3&4

. s%rwcu ~,+ *+ % %vd3a 7 Food and Drug Administration. Center for Devices and

Via Federal Express IVARNING LETTER

+.,m 7. yw ~ ~ & DEC FEDERAL EXPRESS

SPONSOR-INVESTIGATOR ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES IN DEVICE TRIALS

twj arid Cltug AJmiist : a tuxt --.,~ 9200 (:wpcuat : IlkJ Ko:.l, v ille A4Il

% *++V,m Food and Drug Administration WARNING LETTER

WARNING LETTER. the Form FDA-483 Inspectionai Observations. ~ e also presezl during this final discussion.

FDA Medical Device Regulations vs. ISO 14155

FDA Inspectional Process in Clinical Research An FDA Perspective. Annette Melendez, MPHsN Investigator Office of Biological Products Operations

... f%odand DrugAdministration via Federal Express 2098 Gaither Road

Investigator Roles and Responsibilities in Clinical Device Trials

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES WARNING LETTER. (b) (4) clinical investigation (Protocol entitled A Phase II, Multicenter,

NOTICE OF INITIATION OF DISQUALIFICATION PROCEEDINGS AND OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN (NIDPOE) LETTER

c+!!!! # -) NW DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH& HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration CBER Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested

Notice of Initiation of Disqualification Proceeding And Opportunity to Explai n

Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research Supervisory Responsibilities of Clinical Investigators

BIMO Program Update an operational perspective

BE-595M Homework Assignment Due: 3/3/08

Department of Defense Human Research Protection Program DOD INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT FOR INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) REVIEW (IAIR)

Page 2- Alan Rapoport, M.D.

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL -~ Q December 14, 2005

Dr. R. Sathianathan. Role & Responsibilities of Principal Investigators in Clinical Trials. 18 August 2015

4 ( DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH& HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service

STUDY INFORMATION POST-IRB APPROVAL FDA DEVICE (IDE) SPONSOR AND INVESTIGATOR RESPONSIBILITY (21 CFR 812)

Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations

Research Audits PGR. Effective: 12/04/2013 Reviewed: 12/04/2015. Name of Associated Policy: Palmetto Health Administrative Research Review

Chapter 48 - Bioresearch Monitoring

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

The SOP applies to all human subject research falling under the purview of the University of Missouri Institutional Review Board.

Public Input for Changes to Reportable Events Policy

General Administration GA STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR Sponsor Responsibility and Delegation of Responsibility

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service 4Y837cl

Changes to QSR. The table below provides a history of changes to FDA s Quality System Regulation (QSR)

WIRBinar. How to Survive an FDA Inspection. Upcoming Trainings: Contact Us: (360)

Solutions for GCP Compliance Challenges. September 23, 2015 Northwestern University IRB Brown Bag Session

Solutions for GCP Compliance Challenges

12.0 Investigator Responsibilities

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED. Ref: 06-HFD

Essential Documents It s Not Just a Binder!

Margaret Huber, RN, CHRC Compliance Consultant Office of Research Compliance

A Principal Investigator s Guide to Responsibilities, Qualifications, Records and Documentation of Human Research University of Kentucky

LOUIS STOKES CLEVELAND VA MEDICAL CENTER RESEARCH SERVICE Human Subject Protection Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION COMPLIANCE PROGRAM GUIDANCE MANUAL PROGRAM

I. Preamble: II. Parties:

DRAFT GUIDANCE This guidance document is being distributed for comment purposes only. Document issued on: August 5, 2008

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

FDA Inspection Readiness

AMENDED WARNING LETTER CIN

WARNING LETTER. Dear Dr. Wright : DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

1. Department of Defense (DoD) Human Subjects Protection Regulatory Requirements

Good Clinical Practice. Lisa de Blieck MPA CCRC Clinical Trials Coordination Center

Request to Use an External IRB as an IRB of Record

PROMPTLY REPORTABLE EVENTS

Record or Document Type Retention Period Relevant Legal Citation(s) IRB Records: Training Records;

Version 1.1, 6/30/2016 Guidance for Abbreviated IDE Requirements

Office of Human Research Office of Human Research Policy and Procedure Manual. Version: 4/4/18

Successful FDA Inspections at Investigative Sites for Clinical Trials of Drugs and Biologics

General Administration GA STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR Document Development and Change Control

SAINT AGNES MEDICAL CENTER CLINICAL RESEARCH CENTER Fresno, California. STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES Institutional Review Board

Document issued on: July 8, 2010

Department of Defense Human Research Protection Program AF ISSUED DOD INSTITUTIONAL AGREEMENT FOR INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD (IRB) REVIEW (IAIR)

University of South Carolina. Unanticipated Problems and Adverse Events Guidelines

Session 3 FDA Audits and Findings

*Applicable to: Beaumont Health. Document Type: Policy

Research Compliance Oversight in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Good Clinical Practice: A Ground Level View

510(k) Clinical Data Requirements: Current Status and Considerations for Clinical Studies

Postmarketing Drug Safety and Inspection Readiness

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

TITLE: Reporting Adverse Events SOP #: RCO-204 Page: 1 of 5 Effective Date: 01/31/18

Self-Monitoring Tool

Institutional Review Board Application for Exempt Status Determination

UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD REPORTING UNANTICIPATED PROBLEMS INCLUDING ADVERSE EVENTS

Investigator-Initiated Studies: When you re the Sponsor. Cheri Robert & Tammy Mah-Fraser

DANA-FARBER / HARVARD CANCER CENTER STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR HUMAN SUBJECT RESEARCH

BIMO SITE AUDIT CHECKLIST

QUALITY TIPS FOR CLINICAL SITES. Athena Thomas-Visel. Clinical Quality Consultant QUALITY TIPS FOR CLINICAL SITES

Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations

Medical Device Reporting for Manufacturers

NN SS 401 NEURONEXT NETWORK STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR SITE SELECTION AND QUALIFICATION

IRB Federal Regulations Comparison Table 4/24/01 as updated through 10/31/01

IRB 04. Research Supported by the Department of Defense

Interactive Review for Medical Device Submissions: 510(k)s, Original PMAs, PMA Supplements, Original BLAs, and BLA Supplements

Yale University Institutional Review Boards

Effective Date: 11/09 Policy Chronicle:

SECNAVINST E ONR Dec 2017 SECNAV INSTRUCTION E. From: Secretary of the Navy. Subj: HUMAN RESEARCH PROTECTION PROGRAM

Clinical Trial Quality Assurance Common Findings

Effective Date: April 2014 Revision: September 29, Executive Chair, Co-Chairs, NSHA REB Members, REB Office Personnel, Researchers.

:,-, WARNING LETTER. Mr. Jean Claude Mas Chief Executive Officer Poly Implants Protheses, Sa 337 Avenue De Bruxelles La Seyne, Sur Mer France

CLOSE OUT VISIT REPORT (NO CRF TO MONITOR)

Requests for Feedback and Meetings for Medical Device Submissions: The Q-Submission

HIC Standard Operating Procedure. For-Cause Audits of Human Research Studies

Documenting the Story of a Clinical Trial: Concept to CAPA. Lori T. Gilmartin Gilmartin Consulting LLC

DANA-FARBER / HARVARD CANCER CENTER POLICIES FOR HUMAN SUBJECT RESEARCH TITLE:

Transcription:

60-4 (v4 ( ~' DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service. Food and Drug Administration 9200 Corporate Boulevard el Rockville, Maryland 20850 MAY - 6 2008 VIA FEDERAL EXPRES S Merrill W. Reuter, M.D., Ph.D. Advanced Orthopaedics of South Florida 7625 Lake Worth Road Lake Worth, Florida 33467-253 4 Dear Dr. Reuter : WARNING LETTE R This Warning Letter is to inform you of objectionable conditions observed during the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspection conducted at your clinical site from December 13, 2007 to December 21, 2007 by an investigator from the FDA Florida District Office. The purpose of this ins ection was t o determine whether vnnrr activitie s ~wạ,.,; both snon,;or..-,.~.,.~.. and investigator in th e..., ~ designated herein as the b? and designated herein a s complied with addlicable federa l regulations. The~ -I are devices as that term is defined in section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), 21 U.S.C. 321(h). This letter also requests prompt corrective action to address the violations cited and discusses your written response dated January 30, 2008 to the noted violations. The inspection was conducted under a program designed to ensure that data and information contained in requests for Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE), Premarket Approval (PMA) applications, and Premarket Notification submissions (510(k)) are scientifically valid and accurate. Another objective of the program is to ensure that human subjects are protected from undue hazard or risk during the course of scientific investigations. Our review of the inspection report prepared by the district office revealed serious violations of Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (21 CFR) Part 812 -- Investigational Device Exemptions, Part 50 -- Protection of Human Subjects, and Section 520(g) (21 U.S.C. 360j(g)) of the Act. At the close of the inspection, the FDA investigator presented an inspectional observations Form FDA 483 for your review and discussed the observations listed on the form with you. The deviations noted on the Form FDA 483, your written response, and our subsequent review of the inspection report are discussed below :

Page 2 - Merrill W. Reuter, M.D., Ph.D. Failure to ensure proper monitoring of the investigation, obtain IRB review and approval, submit an IDE application to FDA, receive FDA approval of the IDE before beginning the investigation, and control devices under investigation 1 21 CFR 812.100, 21 CFR 812.110(a), 21 CFR 812.40 and 21 CFR 812.421. You acted as both sponsor and clinical investigator in the= ~~~ ~_.. ~~_~. and the~.~ As.,,...~,~ a sponsor, you are requtred to obtain a ne w IDE if a significant risk device that is appro~~oil fnr nnp ;ndication is intended to be used in a clinical study for a new indication. The devices under investigation are signi fi cant risk devices as defined by 21 CFR R 12 They are cleared by FDA to a s L ~.. j as._.. _ stated _. ~. in your protocols. Betore beginning investigations of these devices for these new indications, you were required, as sponsor, to submit IDE applications and obtain FDA-approved IDEs. 21 CFR 812.20(a), 21 CFR 812.40, and 21 CFR 812.42. In addition, as a sponsor, you are responsible for ensuring proper monitoring of the investigations and ensuring that IRB review and approval are obtained. 21 CFR 812.40 and 21 CFR 812.42. As a clinical investigator, you are responsible for ensuring that an investigation is conducted according to applicable FDA regulations, ensuring that IRB and FDA approval are obtained before allowing any subjects to participate, ensuring that informed consent is obtained in accordance with 21 CFR Part 50, and controlling devices under investigation. 21 CFR 812.100 and 21 CFR 812.110(a). Examples of your failure to adhere to these regulations include, but are not limited to, the following : 1. You conducted the. and~~ tt4y ~ ~ -~ro. without obtaining IRB and FDA approval. 2. Regarding the, you failed to obtain an FDAapproved investicational device exemntion (TT)Fl nri o r t n r o n d -tina this study in 2002. You, which is FDA-cleared to of the following subjects in 2002 :' 3. Regarding the you failed to obtain an FDAaporoved IDEqnrior to conductrnp this study in 2005. You implanted which is FDA-cleared t o aof the following subjects in 2005 :. There is no documentation that the` ~~~ ~device studies were monitore d............m.,~ a 4 in 2002 and 2005.

Page 3 - Merrill W. Reuter, M.D., Ph.D. 5. There are no device accountabilitv records to show which investigational device was used in which subject for ;.- ~4 y R RR ~y device studies. Your written response states that prior to this work on the device studies, all of the research performed by your office had been done with corporate sponsors who prepared IDE applications and helped you stay on track record-wise. Your response acknowledges that you failed to obtain FDA approval before in ;tintino hnth that you failed to obtain IRB approval before initiating the ' You contend that you did obtain IRB approval before initiating th e but that you cannot to date locate documentary proof of such approval. Your response also acknowledges that, for both studies, you were negligent in your recordkeeping, monitoring, and device accountability. Your response states that you take full responsibility for your breach of FDA protocol in conducting th e studies and that with any future studies undertaken you will contact the FDA to ensure that you submit all required forms and documentation. Your response also states you will know what is required of you and will do it, including adopting the responsibilities of the sponsor if applicable, and you will know the responsibility of the IRB. Your response is inadequate in that contacting the FDA may be a first step ; however, you need a corrective action plan that includes training, as you are responsible for knowing and following the regulations pertinent to your activities as a sponsor/investigator in FDA-regulated studies. Please provide copies of policies, procedures, and training with expected completion dates that are being developed and implemented to prevent the recurrence of these violations in future clinical studies. Failure to ensure that informed consent is obtained in accordance with 21 CFR Part 50 121 CFR 50.27(a) and 21 CFR 812.1001. Although you had written consent forms for the~ M udies and most subjects signed them, the forms were not IRB-approved. In addition, subject or the subject's legally authorized representative did not sign and date the written,inforrned consent form prior, of the investigational device on Therefore, you did not obtain valid informed consent for all subjects enrolled in th e studies. Your written response states you will ensure that the nurses who erroneously signed the consent form as witnesses of verbal consent will have a complete understanding of all FDA regulations regarding the signing of written informed consent forms. As an investigator, you are ultimately responsible for ensuring that no subject is involved in research unless legally effective informed consent is obtained. Also, while it is important that your nurses understand how to properly document informed consent, obtaining the subject's signature is only one part of the consent process. You and your staff should be aware of the entire informed consent process. Your response is also inadequate in that you did not describe a corrective and preventive action plan. Please provide copies of

Page 4 - Merrill W. Reuter, M.D., Ph.D. procedures and training with expected completion dates that are being developed and implemented to prevent the recurrence of these violations in future clinical studies. Your written response references Form FDA 1572 "Statement of Investigator." Please note that Form 1572 is used for clinical trials involving FDA-regulated drugs and biologics. For device studies, a sponsor shall obtain a signed investigator agreement from all clinical investigators part icipating in the study. 21 CFR 812.43(c). Your written response states that the, CFO in cc,n q nttation with the medical executive board, authorized the and that an IRB approved the, You stated that you relied on the medical board and the 1KB to alert you to your responsibilities and to ensure that proper procedures were followed. You also stated that because of your lack of understanding in getting proper IRB approval, you failed to maintain documentation of IRB correspondence and to prepare and submit reports (unanticipated adverse device effects and progress) to the IRB. The regulations in 21 CFR Part 812 describe sponsor responsibilities as well as those of investigators. IRB responsibilities are spelled out in 21 CFR Part 56, Institutional Review Boards. These three sets of responsibilities overlap to ensure appropriate conduct of clinical studies and the protection of the rights and welfare of participating subjects. Therefore, though the IRB involved in your study may have been remiss in fulfilling its responsibilities, you are still held responsible for knowing and following the regulations pertinent to your activities as a sponsor/investigator in FDAregulated studies. The violations described above are not intended to be an all inclusive list of problems that may exist with your clinical study. It is your responsibility as a sponsor/investigator to ensure compliance with the Act and applicable regulations. Within fifteen (15) working days of receiving this letter, please provide written documentation of the additional actions you have taken or will take to correct these violations and prevent the recurrence of similar violations in current or future studies for which you are the clinical investigator. In addition, please provide a complete list of all clinical trials in which you have participated for the last five years, including the name of the study and test article, the name of the sponsor, the number of subjects enrolled, and the current status of the study. Failure to respond to this letter and take appropriate corrective action could result in the FDA taking regulatory action without further notice to you. In addition, FDA could initiate disqualification proceedings against you in accordance with 21 CFR 812.119. You will find information to assist you in understanding your responsibilities and planning your corrective actions in the FDA Information Sheets Guidance for Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Investigators, which can be found at http://www.fda.7ov/oc/ohrt/irbs/. Any submitted corrective action plan must include projected completion dates for each action to be accomplished. Send your response to : Attention: Doreen Kezer, MSN, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and

Page 5 - Merrill W. Reuter, M.D., Ph.D. Radiological Health, Office of Compliance, Division of Bioresearch Monitoring, 9200 Corporate Boulevard, HFZ-311, Rockville, Maryland 20850. A copy of this letter has been sent to the Florida District Office, 555 Winderley Place, Suite 200, Maitland, FL 32751. Please send a copy of your response to that office. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Doreen Kezer by telephone at (240) 276 0125 or via e-mail at doreen.kezer&fda.hhs.& v Timothy A l 061hfAvski Directo r Office of Compliance Center for Devices and Radiological Health