search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
DATA MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY &


globally with trial data privacy, expectations of privacy and what the future will bring.


What’s more important: privacy or human benefit from drug trials? This is really at the crux of all clinical trials data protection activities, and the guidance and regulatory responsibilities about them. Let’s engage in the following thought experiment. Alice is going in for an experimental drug


treatment for her perilous oncological condition. Alice’s husband Bob accompanies her. After signing her informed consent documents, Alice subjects to a blood sample and then immediately undergoes experimental therapy: 


During the course of the trial, Alice seems to have responded spectacularly well to therapy. The researchers want to unblind her data, and interrogate her blood data and physiological parameters. But the trial is still under way. Is she just a random spontaneous recovery? A response that could have been expected by chance within the trial? A true ‘super-responder’? None of those answers are immediately clear and peeking at the data will compromise the integrity of the scientific method applied to pharmaceutical trials.





Alternatively, let’s say that Alice perishes during the trial. The researchers are rushing to find meaning in anecdotal signals through the trial, where there is a strong compulsion to peek at the data. They have also been developing, in-parallel, a competitor treatment with a different drug delivery and want to use Alice’s prior blood sample to provide data to support their discovery, and development strategies. Because Alice consented to be treated, should they retest her blood for the new experimental therapy?


In the second case above, the answer is quite


clearly no, they cannot retest Alice’s blood for a secondary benefit if they only had consented from her for the first drug. It is Alice’s blood and she owns her data, and from the perspective of a bioethicist it cannot be retested without her permission – which she can no longer provide. In the first case, this is the very reason there is blinding and database protections, and database locking activities – to preserve the integrity of the clinical trial data. Breaching these principles of integrity for one data point is to compromise the universe of data that


exist across all trials. This is why data integrity is such an important topic in the industry – and such an oft- invoked 483 theme for FDA warning letters.


“A person’s health data is their data. No one else should be able to make decisions about them without their knowledge or permission. Nor should they be used or shared without their consent or permission.”


Whose data is it really? Some of this ‘ownership’ of data is what legislation like Healthcare Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and General Data Protection Regulation, EU (GDPR) are designed for. A person’s health data is their data. No one else should be able to make decisions about them without their knowledge or permission. Nor should they be used or shared without their consent or permission. But there are certainly global-scale cases, such as Google, which now has the health data of millions of citizens worldwide. It has it because of loopholes in collection practices, which occurred as they were administrating other healthcare data transfer activities in partnership with Ascension through Project Nightingale.


Outsourcing in Clinical Trials Handbook | 63


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120