Via Federal Express IVARNING LETTER

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

Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations

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

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

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service

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

WARNING LETTER VIA FEDERAL EXPRES S

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service 4Y837cl

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

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

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

FDA Medical Device Regulations vs. ISO 14155

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

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

Investigator Roles and Responsibilities in Clinical Device Trials

SPONSOR-INVESTIGATOR ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES IN DEVICE TRIALS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 ( DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH& HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service

BIMO Program Update an operational perspective

Page 2- Alan Rapoport, M.D.

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

Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations

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

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

IMPORTANT NOTICE PLEASE READ CAREFULLY SENT VIA FEDEX AND INTERNET (Receipt of this notice is presumed to be May 7, 2018 date notice ed)

Chapter 48 - Bioresearch Monitoring

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL -~ Q December 14, 2005

WARNING LETTER CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

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

Notice of Initiation of Disqualification Proceeding And Opportunity to Explai n

BIMO SITE AUDIT CHECKLIST

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

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

Standard Operating Procedures

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

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

*Applicable to: Beaumont Health. Document Type: Policy

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

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

Public Input for Changes to Reportable Events Policy

CLOSE OUT VISIT REPORT (NO CRF TO MONITOR)

Good Clinical Practice: A Ground Level View

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

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

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

Document issued on: July 8, 2010

FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION COMPLIANCE PROGRAM GUIDANCE MANUAL PROGRAM

Essential Documents It s Not Just a Binder!

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

Regulatory Binder Checklist for FDA-Regulated Sponsor/Sponsor-Investigator Studies

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

IRB 04. Research Supported by the Department of Defense

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

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Reporting Serious Breaches in Clinical Research

IMPORTANT NOTICE PLEASE READ CAREFULLY SENT VIA FEDEX AND INTERNET

FDA Inspection Readiness

Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff Radiation Safety Considerations for X-Ray Equipment Designed for Hand-Held Use

REVISION: This revised Management Directive (MD) updates TSA MD , dated January 29, 2004.

4.2. Clinical Trial Monitor (or Monitor): The person responsible for monitoring the data on behalf of the sponsor or contract research organization.

AN OVERVIEW OF CLINICAL STUDY TASKS AND ACTIVITIES

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

Family Child Care Licensing Manual (November 2016)

University of Maryland Baltimore. Radiation Safety Procedure

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

U. S. ARMY MEDICAL RESEARCH ACQUISITION ACTIVITY GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR ASSISTANCE AWARDS TABLE OF CONTENTS. 1 May 2008

The Mammography Quality Standards Act Final Regulations Motion of Tube-Image Receptor Assembly

The Joint Legislative Audit Committee requested that we

4 L Food and Drug Administration

247 CMR: BOARD OF REGISTRATION IN PHARMACY 247 CMR 21.00: REGISTRATION OF OUTSOURCING FACILITIES. Section

MISSOURI. Downloaded January 2011

Guidance for Industry and Food and Drug Administration Staff

University of South Carolina. Unanticipated Problems and Adverse Events Guidelines

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

How to Prepare for Federal Inspections and What to Expect

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

Bristol Myers Squibb Holdings Pharma., Ltd.

Session 3 FDA Audits and Findings

Grambling State University Application for Human Subjects Review IRB Protocol. 1. Principal Investigator [Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial]

Doing Business As name (if applicable): 2. Mailing Address: (Street Address/City/State/Zip) 3. Physical Location: (Street Address/City/State/Zip)

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

The Mammography Quality Standards Act Final Regulations Quality Assurance Documentation

Postmarketing Drug Safety and Inspection Readiness

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

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

Radiologic Technology Program. Radiation Safety and Protection Program

INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OF RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS

UNIVERSITY PHYSICIANS OF BROOKLYN POLICY AND PROCEDURE

SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM POLICY

Checklist prior to recruiting first patient

managing or activities.

ETHICAL AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

Roles & Responsibilities of Investigator & IRB

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

Transcription:

DEPARTblENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Serwce NW - 7 2003 Food and Drug Admmistratron Center for Devices and Radiological Health 2098 Galther Road RockwIle. Maryland 20850 Via Federal Express IVARNING LETTER Wesley Kinzie, M.D. 1401 Spanos Court, Suite #lol Modesto, California 95355 Dear Dr. Kinzie: The purposes of this Warning Letter are to inform you of the objectionable conditions found during a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspection conducted at your clinical site, to discuss your written response, dated June 24, 2003, to the deviations noted, and to request a prompt reply with regard to your corrective actions. The inspection took place during the period of April 28 through May 8, 2003, and was conducted by Mr. Carl Lee, an investigator from FDA s San Francisco District Office. was to determine if your activities as a clinical investigator vestigational study of thfl ith applicable FDA regulations: These products are devices as defined in section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The inspection was conducted under a program designed to ensure that data and information contained in requests for Investigational Device Exemptions (IDE) applications, Premarket Approval (PMA) applications, and Premarket Notification (5 1 O(k)) submissions 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 re\+ew of the inspection report submitted by the district office revealed serious Golatlons of requirements of Title 2 1) Code of Federal Regulations (2 1 CFR), Part 8 12 - Investigational Device Exemptions and Part 50 - Protection of Human Subjects, and Section 520(g) of the Act. You receij ed a Form FDA 483, Inspectional Observations. at lhe conclusion of the inspection that llsted the de\?ations 11ored and these obser\ ations were discussed with you. The deviations noted on the Form FDA 483 and our subsequent re\.le\\ of the inspection report, as \vell as \ our response to the FoIm FDA 483 items are discussed below. The de\.iations noted include:.

Page 2 -Wesley E. Kinzie, M.D. 1. Failure to follow the Investigator s Agreement, Investigational Plan and applicable FDA regulations; failure to ensure that informed consent is obtained in accordance with part 50 (21 CFR 812.100 and 812.110) In order to protect the rights, safety, and welfare of subjects under an investigator s care, CIs are required to ensure that investigations are conducted according to the following: the signed agreement, the Investigational Plan, and applicable FDA regulations. 2 1 CFR 812.100, 812. I 1 O(b). The Cl must also comply with any conditions of approval imposed by the IRB or FDA. 21 CFR 812.1 1 O(b). The CI must also ensure that informed consent is obtained in accordance with part 50 and 21 CFR 812.100. You failed to ensure that applicable FDA regulations were followed. Specifically, 21 CFR 56.108(a)(4) and.56.109(b) re q uire that IRBs review and approve changes to the initially approved them tern Investigational l&km and protocol. The inspection revealed that the study was conducted under a revised Investigational Plan dated October 2002 and a revised protocol dated May 2002. The revised Investigational Plan and protocol was not submitted to the institutional review board (IRB). You also failed to ensure that informed consent was obtained in accordance with part 50, and to follow the InvestIgational Plan, which Includes the informed consent form. (See 21 CFR 812.25(b)). On June 26,2001, the IRB disapproved the revised June 15: 2001 Informed Consent Form. On July 31, 2001, the IRB approved the revised July 25,2001 Informed Consent Form. The revised June 15,2001 and July 5,200l Informed Consent Forms were utilized at your clinical site to obtain informed consent from study subjects. Eighteen study subjects signed the June 15,200l or July 5,200l Informed Consent Form which had not been approved by the IRB. as required by 21 CFR 50.27(a). Another part of the Investigational Plan is the study protocol. (See 2 1 CFR 812.25(b)). You did not follow the protocol and as a result, three study subjects an- who did not meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria were included in the study. Also, implantation with the investigational device, required by the study protocol. was not always performed at the times specified by the protocol. Suhjccts N and#did not ~-ece~\ e the in\.cstigational device at the requ1redm weeks or y calendar days time period from the pre-operative evaluation to operation. Jn addition: mjmediate post-operative e\,aluations for subjects and lb sceeded protocol timeframes.

Page 3 - Wesley E. Kinzie, M.D You failed to comply with the signed Investigator s Agreement, as required by 21 CFR 812.11 O(b). The Investigator s Agreement requires you to report any deviations to the reviewing IRB, the sponsor and FDA. In addition, all non-emergency deviations from the FDA approved Investigational Plan require- from FDA, the sponsor and the appropriate IRB. You did not report the exceeded timeframes to any of these entities or have FDA approval. 2. Failure to include all elements of informed consent (21 CFR 50.25) A review of one hundred percent of the Informed Consent Forms at your study site revealed that you failed to include all of the elements of informed consent as required by Federal regulations concerning the Protection of Human Subjects. The Informed Consent Forms (revised June 15,2001; July 5.2001; and May 15,2002) did not include all of the study procedures. The May 15,2002 revised Informed Consent Form did not disclose contact information for research related injury or questions. The basic elements required of informed consent are set forth in 21 CFR 50.25(a) and include requirements for a description of the procedures to be followed, and contact information for research-related injury and questions. 3. Failure to maintain accurate, complete, and carrent records (21 CFR 812.140(a)); failure to comply with the signed Investigator s Agreement (21 CFR 812.110(b)) You failed to maintain complete and accurate study records as required by 8 12.140(a). The following documentation was missing from the study records: l all records of receipt and disposition of investlgntional device, as required by 21 CFR 812.140(a)(2). records of each subject s case history and exposure to the device, as required by 2 1 CFR 812.140(a)(3), including 0 pre/post-operative x-ray reports o x-ray reports for 6 and 12 month study visits evised, signed and dated Infonned Consent Form (July 5, c Severai C XZ Repel-t Forms (C RFs). 1-01. c\ample, C KF 3 \\ as missing from five out of fifteen subject records; CRF 8 for immediate post-operative e\ a~unt~on \! as missing from four out of fifitcn subject records; subject Brccord contained no CRF S for the pre-operative evaluation:- Irecord conrained no CRF 8 for 6 month stud> \.isit e\.nluation.

Page 4 - Wesley E. Kinzie, M D. In your recordkeeping, you also failed to comply with the signed Investigator s Agreement, as required by 21 CFR 8 12.1 I O(b). The Investigator s Agreement requires you to maintain a study monitoring visit log record, and to maintain all study records for a minimum o fp years after completion of the study, suspension date or longer. Your files did not contain documentation of the on-site pre-study visit by the monitor. We do not intend the list of deviations noted above to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies that may have existed in your clinical study. It is your responsibility as a CT to ensure that your Investigation is conducted in accordance with the signed investigational agreement, the Investigational Plan, and applicable FDA regulations. Your written response, dated June 24, 2003, acknowledges the deviations noted on the FDA 483 and states, in most cases, that corrections will be implemented in the future. However, it does not adequately address each of the Form FDA 483 items. You do not specify what steps you are taking and how you wiil prevent future deviations. It is important for CIs to understand that unless the physical safety of a subject demands otherwise, treatment of study subjects must adhere to the requirements of the Investigational Plan. During the close-out discussion, you acknowledged to Mr. Lee that you do not have an adequate understanding of your responsibility to maintain device accountability records. To assist you, please refer to the complete guidance in the FDA Information Sheets, Guidance for Institutional Review Boards and Clinical Investigators, on the Internet at www.fda.,~ov/oc/ohrt/irbs/faqs.html#clinicalinvesti,~ations. Enclosed to assist you in better understanding of your responsibilities as a CI are copies of 2 I CFR Parts 50, 56, and 812. These documents also are available electronically at www.access.ppo.aov/nara/cfr. Part 812 describes your responsibilities as a CI of an investigational device and Part 50 includes what is required to protect the welfare of study subjects. Part 56, Institutional Review Board, covers the responsibilities of IRBs and what an IRB expects from you as a CI, as well as their responsibilities to you. JVithin fifteen (15) working days of receipt of this letter. you JmJst provide this office with wntten documentation of the specific steps \ ou ha1.e taken to correct these violations and bring your study actlvitles into compliance with FDA regulations and to prevent recurrenceif similar violations. Please send this infonnation to the Food and DJ-119,4~lministJ-ation. Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Office of Compliance. Division of Bioresenrch b~ojlitoj-ijig, PI-ogram Enforcement Branch II (HFZ-3 12), 2094 Gaither Road. Rockville, Maryland 20850. Attention: Linda Godfrey. In addition, please provide a list of your current investigational studies and include the name oflhe study sponsor and the elate of IRB appro\,nl. FalluI-e 10 Irespond to this letter and to take appropriate con-ectll e action could result in enforcement xt~on Irithout. further notice. In addition. FD.4 could initiate disqualification proceedings in accordance 1\1t11 21 C Fii SlZ.1 i ).

Page 5 - Wesley E. Kinzie, M.D A copy of this letter has been sent to FDA s San Francisco District Office, 143 1 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda, California 94502. We request that a copy of your response be sent to that office. Tf you have any questions you may contact Linda Godfrey at (301) 594-4723, ext. 134. Enclosures cc: (purged copies) Office of Compliance Center for Devices and Radiological Health Institutional Review Board PresrdentKEO -