Life Sciences Accelerated R&D Services The Science of Getting Products to Patients Faster Study Data Standardization Plan Use Case Experience Dave Izard.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Communicating with Standards Keeping it Simple Pamela Ryley Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. September 29, 2006.

Advertisements

SDMX in the Vietnam Ministry of Planning and Investment - A Data Model to Manage Metadata and Data ETV2 Component 5 – Facilitating better decision-making.

Quick tour of CDISC’s ADaM standard

Pharmaceutical Development and Review Process Rev. 10/21/2014 APGO Interaction with Industry: A Medical Student Guide.

Study Data Standardization Plan Kick0ff Meeting 23 July 2014.

Data Management: Documentation & Metadata Types of Documentation.

© 2008 Octagon Research Solutions, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 1 PhUSE 2010 Berlin * Accessing the metadata from the define.xml using XSLT transformations.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) prepared by some members of the ICH Q9 EWG for example only; not an official policy/guidance July 2006, slide 1 ICH Q9.

Food and Drug Administration Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research The Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Web Seminar Series presents:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH Working with FDA: Biological Products and Clinical Development IND Case Studies.

Accenture Accelerated R&D Standards Metadata Management – version control and its governance Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 01/28/2015 We help our Clients.

Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.

ACRIN 6698 Diffusion-weighted MRI Biomarkers for Assessment of Breast Cancer Response to Neoadjuvant Treatment: An I-SPY 2 Trial Substudy Presented by:

Configuration Management Managing Change. Points to Ponder Which is more important?  stability  progress Why is change potentially dangerous?

How to process data from clinical trials and their open label extensions PhUSE, Berlin, October 2010 Thomas Grupe and Stephanie Bartsch, Clinical Data.

Vertex and CDISC / MBC / 12March Vertex and CDISC Accomplishments and Strategy 12 March 2008 Lynn Anderson Associate Director Statistical Programming/Biometrics.

CTEP, NCI Adverse Event Reporting Programmatic & Workflow Processes Prepared by: Ann Setser May 24, 2010.

1CDISC 2002 RCRIM – Standard Domains Agenda NCI Presentation Standard Domains Working Group Goals Introduction to FDA Information Model (FIM) Discussion:

Overview and feed-back from CDISC European Interchange 2008 (From April 21 st to 25 th, COPENHAGEN) Groupe des Utilisateurs Francophones de CDISC Bagneux.

Investigational New Drug Application (IND)

Chapter 6 : Software Metrics

SUMMIT ON CANCER CLINICAL TRIALS - V Dilimmas and Complexities of Compassionate Use.

Configuration Management (managing change). Starter Questions... Which is more important?  stability  progress Why is change potentially dangerous?

From the Lab to Market Unit 3.04 Understanding Biotechnology research & Development.

HL7 RCRIM Meeting: 9 January 2007 CDISC-RCRIM Vocab Update: Related CDISC Terminology Projects Bron Kisler, CDISC Terminology Program Director

Strategies for Preparing for Meetings with FDA Susan M. Mondabaugh, Ph.D. Vice President, Regulatory Affairs Hurley Consulting Associates Ltd. Chatham,

Quality assurance / Quality control system for the Greek GHG emissions inventory Yannis Sarafidis, Elena Georgopoulou UNFCCC Workshop on National Systems.

Driving value through Standardization – Industry Challenges and Best Practices Henry Levy, partner-Life Sciences R&D European Lead.

Facility Reporting v. 1.0 Managing Clinical Staffing Reports on the Illinois Outcomes Website May 20, 2009.

1 Data Warehouses BUAD/American University Data Warehouses.

Dave Iberson-Hurst CDISC VP Technical Strategy

Using Secondary Research to Define Research Problems.

Back Translation Summary Back translation and reconciliation services give you additional quality and accuracy assurance for your most sensitive translation.

SAE data entry: Clinical versus Pharmacovigilance standards Daniel Becker Solvay Pharmaceuticals Hannover, Germany T:

Delayed Discharges Definition & Data Recording Manual Updated version June 2010 Dot Jardine, NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Anne Stott, ISD Colin Gardiner,

Research based, people driven CDISC ADaM Datasets - from SDTM to submission CDISC Experience Exchange and ADaM Workshop 15 Dec 2008 Zoë Williams, LEO Pharma.

Privacy vs. Confidentiality.  IRB review of privacy and confidentiality protections is required under the Common Rule and the FDA regulations, as well.

Unified Case Management Treatment Plan Training June 2008.

vMR – Virtual Medical Record

© 2012 Health Level Seven ® International. All Rights Reserved. HL7 and Health Level Seven are registered trademarks of Health Level Seven International.

Research Study Data Standards Standards for research study data for submission to regulatory authorities Standard development divided into three parts:

Copyright © 2015, SAS Institute Inc. All rights reserved. Future Drug Applications with No Tables, Listings and Graphs? PhUSE Annual Conference 2015, Vienna.

1 Session 2 Expanded Clinical Trials Registry Deborah A. Zarin, M.D. NLM Accomplishments Impact to Date Specific Data Element Issues.

CTD Dossier Preparation K. Srikantha Reddy Sr

1  Power plant costs are key factors in energy market policy decisions Key assumptions in the EIA NEMS model Input factors to all energy economic models.

How Good is Your SDTM Data? Perspectives from JumpStart Mary Doi, M.D., M.S. Office of Computational Science Office of Translational Sciences Center for.

Research Documentation Betty Wilson, CIP, MS Senior Compliance Manager MU IRB Lori Wilcox, EdD Director of Academic Compliance, Corporate Compliance.

Briefing Documents. Presentation Overview What is a BD BD preparation process Tips 2.

Clinical Trials.

NEMSIS Version2  NEMSIS Version 3. Purpose of NEMSIS Version 3 Improve Data Quality  –Schematron Enhance performance assessment  – Incorporation of.

-- Presentation from PWG -- Profile ID Assignment and Annual Review Process November 17, 2005.

An agency of the European Union Guidance on the anonymisation of clinical reports for the purpose of publication in accordance with policy 0070 Industry.

Low Cost/Low Risk Improvements

T3/Tutorials: Data Submission

Dave Iberson-Hurst CDISC VP Technical Strategy

SUMMIT ON CANCER CLINICAL TRIALS - V

MAINTAINING THE INVESTIGATOR’S SITE FILE

Pre-Investigational New Drug (pre-IND) Meeting with FDA

Investigator of Record – Definition

Beyond regulatory submission - Standards Metadata Management Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 06/17/2015 We help our Clients deliver better outcomes, so.

Accenture Accelerated R&D Standards Metadata Management – version control and its governance Kevin Lee CDISC NJ Meeting at 01/28/2015 We help our Clients.

Data Warehouse.

In-Depth Report from Optimizing Data Standards Working Group

Investigator of Record – Definition

Investigator of Record – Definition

Approaches to Implementing in Your Organization

MAINTAINING THE INVESTIGATOR’S STUDY FILE

Quality Risk Management ICH Q9 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Safety Analytics Workshop – Computational Science Symposium 2019

Utilizing of Platform Clinical Trial to Help Make Faster Decisions

Presentation transcript:

Life Sciences Accelerated R&D Services The Science of Getting Products to Patients Faster Study Data Standardization Plan Use Case Experience Dave Izard May 14, 2015

Client Use Case for Study Data Standardization Plan PreNDA Meeting Briefing Package for NCE –First discussion of clinical data details w/ PreNDA meeting Thirteen Studies –10 phase 1 (7 early, 3 recent) –1 phase 2 –1 phase 3 –1 phase 3 extension Compound purchased from another company following 1 st phase 1 study © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 2

Goals for Study Data Standardization Plan Convey standards utilized at study level for clinical studies Rationalize reason for limited legacy conversion Rationalize decision for limited / no pooling of data © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 3

Section 2 – List of Studies (2.2 Clinical Studies) Study Status –No formal definitions available for planned, ongoing & completed –Agency decisions made based on concrete study start date –Sponsor wanted “Study Start Date” and “Study End Date” with available check boxes of “planned” & “actual”, coupled with a formal agency definition for “Study End Date” in order to use this table © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 4

Section 2 – List of Studies (2.2 Clinical Studies) Study Design / Trial Blinding Schema / Diagnosis Group / Indication Type / Study Type –Protocols & CSRs already written using company / industry conventions –No desire or willingness to restate these items using controlled terminology after the fact –Concern about potential requirement to write this way in the future © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 5

Section 2 – List of Studies (2.2 Clinical Studies) Submit Study Datasets –Decision to submit study datasets is independent of the characteristics of a study –A simple “yes/no” response is of limited value Multiple submissions for ongoing studies? Submission w/ CSR vs. SPA vs. NDA vs. 120DSU © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 6

Section 4 vs. Table Ultimately Produced © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 7

Section 4 vs. Table Ultimately Produced © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 8

Section 4 vs. Table Ultimately Produced © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 9 CRF annotation standards need to be taken into consideration… Data definition file standards could be different across data types…

Section 4 vs. Table Ultimately Produced © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 10

Section 4 vs. Table Ultimately Produced © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 11 Does this add value? Transparent rationale for use of legacy standards…

Observations © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 12 Should probably remove hard version of Study Data TCG from this section of document…

Observations This table only holds the information pertaining to the data utilized to support the original CSR Any assets created as the result of legacy conversion for other purposes are documented in a separate table © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 13

Observations Need to add context (e.g., Tabulation Data, Adverse Event Coding) between Study Identifier & Expected Standard © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 14

Study Data Standardization Plan No mention of if / how / when pools will be developed, submitted and potentially updated over time No mention of if / how / when individual studies will be submitted and potentially updated over time © 2015 Accenture All Rights Reserved. 15 Observations Actions to Consider Get FDA buy in that pooled data standardization should be recorded in this same document Separate standardization versus submission strategy