The Greenville Hospital System Office of Research Compliance and Administration HRPP Policies and Procedures

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

12.0 Investigator Responsibilities

USING SMART IRB AND SINGLE IRB REVIEW

Tufts Medical Center (Tufts MC) and Tufts University Health Sciences (TUHS) IRB Western IRB (WIRB) Submission Policy

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY

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

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

I. Scope This policy defines unanticipated problems and adverse events and establishes the reporting process and timeline.

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

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

BIMO SITE AUDIT CHECKLIST

University of Illinois at Chicago Human Subjects Protection Program Plan

IRB 101. Rachel Langhofer Joan Rankin Shapiro Research Administration UA College of Medicine - Phoenix

Human Research Protection Program Institutional Review Board

Utilizing the NCI CIRB

National Cancer Institute. Central Institutional Review Board. Standard Operating Procedures

Good Clinical Practice: A Ground Level View

University of Virginia Standard Operating Procedures for the Human Research Protection Program

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

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

(Insert additional Principal Investigators in the Comments section.) Co-Investigator Data Investigators Employee # School

The Queen s Medical Center HIPAA Training Packet for Researchers

FAQs March 12, 2012 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

CHAPTER 2 STUDY POLICIES

Genesis Health System. Institutional Review Board. Standard Operating Procedures

University of California, San Diego Human Research Protections Program Institutional Review Board Standard Operating Policies and Procedures

IRB 04. Research Supported by the Department of Defense

EMORY UNIVERSITY INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 7/01/2016

Setting up a CITI account for users not enrolled at or employed by Georgia Tech. Georgia Institute of Technology December 2016

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

Central Michigan University Standard Operating Procedures Human Research Protection Program

Study Start-Up SS STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR PRE-STUDY SITE VISIT (PSSV)

Office of Human Research Ethics/IRB Standard Operating Procedures

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

When a Single IRB Reviews for Multiple Sites:

Purpose: To provide policy and guidelines and helpful information for conducting research at Brooks

eirb Review Checklist

Request to Use an External IRB as an IRB of Record

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

Frequently Asked Questions. The CIRB is located at 168 Jalan Bukit Merah #06-08 Tower 3 Connection One Singapore

Standard Operating Procedures

University of South Carolina. Unanticipated Problems and Adverse Events Guidelines

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY PROCEDURES FOR THE REVIEW OF HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH LAST REVISION DATE 5/3/17

(Type inside gray boxes, cells will expand) A. EIGHT POINT CRITERIA for IRB Review

WIRB WIRB INITIAL REVIEW SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Effective Date: November 12, 2015 Policy Number: MHC_RP0306. Corporate Director, HRPP Institutional Official, HRPP

Investigator s Role and Responsibilities

Local VA VA ORD CSP Other VA ORD. IRB of Record Registration Number: IRB Operated by: Local VA Non-local VA Academic Affiliate VHA Central IRB

Guidelines for Review of Research Involving Human Subjects

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

ETHICAL AND REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS

FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY Public Health Services SECTION 1 OVERVIEW, APPLICABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Self-Monitoring Tool

Privacy Board Standard Operating Procedures

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

CTN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES GUIDE

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

University of Colorado Denver Human Research Protection Program Investigator Responsibilities for the Protection of Human Subjects

HonorHealth Research Institute. Investigator Manual. July 27, Version 3.0

University of Colorado Denver Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board (COMIRB) Policies and Procedures for the Protection of Human Subjects

Emory University Research Administration Services (RAS) Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

1.2.1 It is the policy of the University of Alabama that qualifying research may be reviewed using an expedited procedure.

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

Yale University Institutional Review Boards

Investigator Site File Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

Accelerated Translational Incubator Pilot (ATIP) Program. Frequently Asked Questions. ICTR Research Navigators January 19, 2017 Version 7.

Title: OFFICE OF SPONSORED PROGRAMS/IRB/ORIP COORDINATION

Title: Investigator Responsibilities. SOP Number: 1501 Effective Date: June 2, 2017

PROSpect The PRone and OScillation Pediatric Clinical Trial

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

Policy. Subject: Institutional Oversight of Assurance INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD POLICY NUMBER:

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

Section 11. Recruitment of Study Subjects (Revised 7/1/10)

BOSTON PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSION REGULATION BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY REGULATIONS

managing or activities.

PARTNERS HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC

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

EXEMPT RESEARCH. 1. Overview

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

Ask the Experts Panel

DO I NEED TO SUBMIT FOR THIS?... & OTHER FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS. March 2015 IRB Forum

Institutional Review Board (previously referred to as Human Participants Research Board) Updated January 2004

"Getting Your Protocol Through the IRB"

REQUEST TO ACCESS EXISTING MEDICAL RECORDS, CHARTS OR DATABASES FOR RESEARCH

Study Responsibilities. Choose all that apply. f. Draw/collect laboratory specimens

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) Research and Development Office

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

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

Changes to the Common Rule

Commonwealth Health Research Board ("CHRB") Grant Guidelines for FY 2014/2015

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

RESEARCH SUPPORTED BY A DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) COMPONENT

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

Biomedical IRB MS #

CREATION AND SUBMISSION OF AGREE TO PARTICIPATE

SUNY Upstate Medical University GUIDELINES & POLICIES

New Study Submissions to the IRB

UT Southwestern Medical Center Human Research Protection Program Policy, Procedure and Guidance Documents

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

Summary of the Common Rule Changes

Transcription:

The Greenville Hospital System Office of Research Compliance and Administration HRPP Policies and Procedures Title: Western Institutional Review Board (WIRB) HRPP Policy No. 33.02 Effective Date: May 2012 Revised: May 2013 1.0 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the federal regulations on human subjects research (45 CFR 46, the Common Rule), the Institutional Review Board (IRB was created. Greenville Hospital System (GHS) maintains a Federalwide Assurance (FWA) with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), which requires that all human subjects research, whether funded or not, be conducted at or on behalf of the institution be reviewed and approved by an IRB prior to initiating a research study. As an alternative model of IRB review, proposed research protocols which will be conducted at GHS and meet specified criteria may be submitted to the Western Institutional Review Board (WIRB) for review and approval. GHS will be responsible for selecting which industry sponsored studies will be submitted to the WIRB. A negotiated Agreement between GHS and WIRB is on record, and GHS is assured that WIRB is qualified to review local research pursuant to the Program by Greenville Hospital System and Western Institutional Review Board to Assure WIRB Knowledge of Local Research Context found in Exhibit A of the Agreement. 2.0 OBJECTIVES The objective of this SOP is: 2.1 Describe the documentation requirements and submission procedures for eligible proposed research protocols requesting that WIRB serve as the IRB of record for research involving human subjects. 2.2 Outline the process of approval for submission to WIRB by the Office of Research Compliance and Administration (ORCA). 2.3 Identify the documentation and review responsibilities of the GHS for WIRB-approved protocols. 3.0 SCOPE These policies and procedures apply to principal investigators conducting human subjects who have requested centralized IRB review by WIRB. 4.0 POLICIES AND ASSOCIATED PROCEDURES 4.1 Eligibility Requirements of Proposed Research Protocols 4.1.1 In order to utilize the WIRB services, the proposed research protocol must meet several criteria: 4.1.1.1 The protocol must meet the NIH definition of a clinical trial. 4.1.1.2 The protocol must be industry-sponsored and must have been

designed and written by the industry sponsor. 4.1.1.3 The industry sponsor must hold all INDs/IDEs for the protocol, where applicable. 4.1.1.4 The protocol must be a Phase II/III/IV clinical trial designed to evaluate prospectively the safety and/or effectiveness of new drugs, devices, or biologics. 4.1.1.5 The GHS investigator has not previously submitted the study to a GHS IRB. 4.1.1.6 The GHS IRB charges a one-time fee of $1000.00 for the processing of industry-sponsored protocols submitted to the Western IRB for review. The contract agreement will include this fee to be paid to the GHS by the sponsor. 4.1.2 The following protocols are not eligible for review by WIRB: 4.1.2.1 Investigator-initiated clinical trials regardless of funding; 4.1.2.2 Protocols receiving funds from a federal or other not-for-profit funding agency; 4.1.2.3 Protocols with industry sponsors who refuse to pay commercial and local IRB fees; 4.1.2.4 Studies involving special local, social, economic, political, or cultural concerns, including but not limited to xenotransplantation, gene transfer, and/or embryonic stem cells; 4.1.2.5 Protocols requiring emergency use/review; 4.1.2.6 Protocols involving medical devices, including those subject to HUD/IDE regulations; 4.1.2.7 Protocols requiring review and approval by the GHS Biosafety Committee (e.g. the study involves recombinant DNA); 4.1.2.8 Research requesting waivers of informed consent and authorization; or 4.1.2.9 Research involving children. 4.2 Division of Responsibilities Between the GHS IRB and WIRB 4.2.1 The following division of responsibilities is based on the premise that the

WIRB s primary function is initial and continuing review of human subject research protocols and that the GHS IRB s primary function is determination of eligibility for submission to WIRB and limited local oversight. 4.2.2 The responsibilities of the WIRB are to: 4.2.2.1 Perform initial reviews of proposed research protocols, identify and discuss any issues, and make a final decision of approval or disapproval of the protocol. 4.2.2.2 Carry out continuing reviews and reviews of serious adverse events, protocol amendments, DSMB reports, subject complaints/allegations, and any other documents submitted by the PI for all GHS protocols reviewed by WIRB. 4.2.2.3 Notify the GHS IRB that WIRB has accepted review of proposed research protocols, and provide the GHS IRB with copies of all approvals and denials, including initial reviews, continuing reviews, and reviews of serious adverse events, protocol amendments, DSMB reports, subject complaints/allegations, and any other documents submitted by the PI. 4.2.2.4 Maintain relevant communication with the PI regarding all approvals and denials regarding the protocol. 4.2.2.5 Maintain a Board membership that satisfies the requirements of 45 CFR 46, 21 CFR 56 and provides special expertise as needed from Board members or consultants to adequately assess all aspects of each protocol including local context issues. 4.2.3 The responsibilities of the GHS IRB are to: 4.2.3.1 Determine eligibility of proposed research protocols for review by WIRB based on the criteria listed in Section 4.1 above. 4.2.3.2 Submit initial submission documents for all eligible protocols to WIRB for review and approval. 4.2.3.3 Ensure that all investigators and staff are properly qualified and meeting GHS IRB standards for eligibility to conduct research, including but not limited to human subjects protection training and collection and maintenance of conflict of interest disclosure forms. 4.2.3.4 Review all WIRB decisions regarding approvals and denials, continuing reviews, adverse events, protocol amendments, and all other reviews for local considerations, and take any necessary actions to address those local considerations.

4.3 Review and Approval Process 4.3.1 The local institution PI or designee will complete all required IRB documentation from the GHS IRB website. The local institution PI or designee will then submit all required documentation related to the protocol for review to the Office of Research Compliance and Administration (ORCA) via electronic submission. 4.3.1.1 Documentation should include, but is not limited to: 4.3.1.1.1 GHS Application for Protocol Review by WIRB; 4.3.1.1.2 GHS Request for Submission Form to WIRB; 4.3.2.1.3 WIRB Initial Submission Form or Investigator Submission Form for Multi-Center Protocols; 4.3.2.1.4 Curriculum vitae (CVs) for all investigators 4.3.2.1.5 IRB application materials including but not limited to research protocol, informed consent statement, authorization form, drug brochure, advertisements and solicitation scripts, if applicable; 4.3.2.1.6 Verification that the protocol has been approved by the Scientific Review Committee, Radiation Safety Committee, as applicable; and /or 4.3.2.1.7 Documentation of completion of all GHS IRB requirements (e.g., the passing of CITI training; coinvestigator acknowledgements and PI eligibility). 4.3.1.2 The PI and research staff should note that the informed consent form(s) which are submitted with the protocol must conform to GHS IRB and WIRB approved language and standard statements. 4.3.1.2.1 Local additions to the informed consent template dealing with contact information shall be added. 4.3.1.2.2 WIRB may also request substitutions or additions in the informed consent template, particularly to facilitate comprehension by the local population, as long as the proposed changes do not alter the meaning of the content. 4.3.2 Upon receipt of required documentation, GHS IRB staff will review the application for eligibility of review by WIRB. 4.3.3 Notification of WIRB review eligibility will be communicated to the PI within 3 business days of initial submission.