Ariadna Recasens, Lin Li, Liane Ioannou, Elysia Greenhill, David Attwood, Bruce Ross Cheek, Jacqueline Lesage, Helen Madgwick, Tracy Walker, John Zalcberg, Charles Pilgrim
{"title":"胰腺癌全国伦理临床试验的治理审批所面临的障碍和阻碍。","authors":"Ariadna Recasens, Lin Li, Liane Ioannou, Elysia Greenhill, David Attwood, Bruce Ross Cheek, Jacqueline Lesage, Helen Madgwick, Tracy Walker, John Zalcberg, Charles Pilgrim","doi":"10.1111/ans.19296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Backgrounds: </strong>Streamlined, expedited clinical research is fundamental to rapidly test, translate and implement novel treatments into routine care to improve patient outcomes. The National Mutual Acceptance (NMA) scheme was designed to expedite the ethics approval process, however, growing concerns exist about the fragmented time-consuming governance process needed to actually commence clinical research in Australia. This study reports hurdles and barriers encountered while seeking governance approval for the SCANPatient trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SCANPatient is a nationwide multi-centre trial comparing standard narrative radiological reporting of CT scans for suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. with an alternative structured approach. SCANPatient was approved by a national Human Research Ethics Committee under the NMA. The documents, time, costs and platforms required to obtain governance approval and open the trial at 30 participating hospitals were analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Wide variation exists in research governance office (RGO) requirements for local approval, resulting in extra costs (>$117 000), delays of up to 4 months in commencing the trial at some participating sites, unplanned adjustment of the study design, and ultimately the loss of several potential sites. There were inconsistencies among RGOs minimum requirements and processes across jurisdictions and sites, with delays in obtaining approval signatures, time-consuming processes, differing platforms used to submit governance reviews and inflexibility of RGO processes all contributing to delays in progressing the trial and obtaining governance approval.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current governance process is time- and cost-consuming and undermines the NMA scheme's efforts to streamline the clinical trials review process.</p>","PeriodicalId":8158,"journal":{"name":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Barriers and hurdles delaying governance approval for an ethically approved nationwide clinical trial in pancreatic cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Ariadna Recasens, Lin Li, Liane Ioannou, Elysia Greenhill, David Attwood, Bruce Ross Cheek, Jacqueline Lesage, Helen Madgwick, Tracy Walker, John Zalcberg, Charles Pilgrim\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ans.19296\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Backgrounds: </strong>Streamlined, expedited clinical research is fundamental to rapidly test, translate and implement novel treatments into routine care to improve patient outcomes. The National Mutual Acceptance (NMA) scheme was designed to expedite the ethics approval process, however, growing concerns exist about the fragmented time-consuming governance process needed to actually commence clinical research in Australia. This study reports hurdles and barriers encountered while seeking governance approval for the SCANPatient trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>SCANPatient is a nationwide multi-centre trial comparing standard narrative radiological reporting of CT scans for suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. with an alternative structured approach. SCANPatient was approved by a national Human Research Ethics Committee under the NMA. The documents, time, costs and platforms required to obtain governance approval and open the trial at 30 participating hospitals were analysed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Wide variation exists in research governance office (RGO) requirements for local approval, resulting in extra costs (>$117 000), delays of up to 4 months in commencing the trial at some participating sites, unplanned adjustment of the study design, and ultimately the loss of several potential sites. There were inconsistencies among RGOs minimum requirements and processes across jurisdictions and sites, with delays in obtaining approval signatures, time-consuming processes, differing platforms used to submit governance reviews and inflexibility of RGO processes all contributing to delays in progressing the trial and obtaining governance approval.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The current governance process is time- and cost-consuming and undermines the NMA scheme's efforts to streamline the clinical trials review process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ANZ Journal of Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ANZ Journal of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.19296\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.19296","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Barriers and hurdles delaying governance approval for an ethically approved nationwide clinical trial in pancreatic cancer.
Backgrounds: Streamlined, expedited clinical research is fundamental to rapidly test, translate and implement novel treatments into routine care to improve patient outcomes. The National Mutual Acceptance (NMA) scheme was designed to expedite the ethics approval process, however, growing concerns exist about the fragmented time-consuming governance process needed to actually commence clinical research in Australia. This study reports hurdles and barriers encountered while seeking governance approval for the SCANPatient trial.
Methods: SCANPatient is a nationwide multi-centre trial comparing standard narrative radiological reporting of CT scans for suspected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. with an alternative structured approach. SCANPatient was approved by a national Human Research Ethics Committee under the NMA. The documents, time, costs and platforms required to obtain governance approval and open the trial at 30 participating hospitals were analysed.
Results: Wide variation exists in research governance office (RGO) requirements for local approval, resulting in extra costs (>$117 000), delays of up to 4 months in commencing the trial at some participating sites, unplanned adjustment of the study design, and ultimately the loss of several potential sites. There were inconsistencies among RGOs minimum requirements and processes across jurisdictions and sites, with delays in obtaining approval signatures, time-consuming processes, differing platforms used to submit governance reviews and inflexibility of RGO processes all contributing to delays in progressing the trial and obtaining governance approval.
Conclusion: The current governance process is time- and cost-consuming and undermines the NMA scheme's efforts to streamline the clinical trials review process.
期刊介绍:
ANZ Journal of Surgery is published by Wiley on behalf of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons to provide a medium for the publication of peer-reviewed original contributions related to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of surgery and related disciplines. It also provides a programme of continuing education for surgeons. All articles are peer-reviewed by at least two researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.