Date post: | 30-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | vladimir-reyes |
View: | 26 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Office for Human Research Protections
1
Updating the Common Rule Governing Human Subjects
Research Protections
Jerry Menikoff
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
22
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this presentation and those of the presenter and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Health and Human Services or any subdivision thereof.
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
333
I. Background
• Twenty years have passed since the “Common Rule” was adopted
• Nature of research activities has changed dramatically.
• Multi-site studies; genomics; internet and information technology
• Time to update the Common Rule: goal of improving protections for subjects, while making the rules function more effectively
• Thus, an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
444
I. Background
• Current rules on secondary use of data:• If stripped of identifiers, no human
subject, thus not subject to these rules.• Can even keep one-way link to original
data source, and collect new information• Genomic data is not per se identifiable• No consent needed under those
scenarios• Even if a study uses “human subjects,” it
can still be found exempt from needing to follow these rules.
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
6666
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
Goal is to better target time and effort spent on reviewing a study to the risk of the study.
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
777
II. Ensuring Risk-Based ProtectionsCurrent framework has tiers of review:
• Review by a convened IRB — Studies with greater than minimal risk
• Expedited review –commonly single IRB reviewer
• Exempt --six categories exempted from IRB review altogether
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
88888
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
• Currently, no specific standards for protecting privacy and confidentiality
• IRBs currently must, where appropriate, determine that there are adequate protections
• New standards for data security and information protection that would apply to appropriate studies
• IRB would no longer be responsible for reviewing this aspect of protocols
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
99999
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
• Convened IRB Review — Only change: continuing review not required if only analyzing data or collecting new data from standard clinical follow-up
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
1010101010
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
Eligibility for Expedited Review:• Regular updates to list of research activities
that qualify for expedited review • Presumption that a study which includes
only activities on the list is a minimal risk study and should receive expedited review (reviewer option to send to convened IRB)
• Considering whether a study eligible for expedited review should be required to meet all of the current criteria for IRB approval
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
1111111111
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
Eliminating Continuing Review of Expedited Studies
• Default -- no continuing review for studies that qualify for expedited review
• Reviewer could make a specific determination (with justification) that continuing review is appropriate for a study
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
1212121212
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
• Streamlining Documentation Requirements for Expedited Studies
• Templates for protocols and consent forms
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
131313131313
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
Revising and expanding current exempt category:
• No longer fully “exempt”—adhere to data security rules, some consent rules
• Requiring brief registration form to be filed with institution
• Research could generally begin immediately after filing
• Eliminate current routine review of almost all exempt studies; audit some to verify qualification
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
141414141414
II. Ensuring Risk-Based Protections
Expansions of “exempt” categories:• Surveys conducted with competent adults
would qualify, even if “risky” identifiable data• Perhaps a new category for social and
behavioral research involving specified types of benign interventions that are known to involve virtually no risk to subjects
• “Secondary” research with existing biospecimens and data would qualify, even if identifiers retained; consent rules
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
1616161616161616
III. Streamlining IRB Review of Multi-site Studies
• Mandating that all domestic sites in a multi-site study rely upon a single IRB as their IRB of record for that study.
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
1818181818181818
IV. Improving Informed Consent
Goal is to produce consent forms that do a much better job in informing prospective subjects by:
• Prescribing how information should be presented in consent forms
• Providing more specifics about content that should be in the forms, and about what should not be in them (vs. in appendix)
• Reducing institutional “boilerplate”
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
191919191919191919
IV. Improving Informed Consent
• Written consent for biospecimens collected after effective date
• Open-ended standard consent form for giving consent to broad future use
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
V. Strengthening Data Protections To Minimize Information Risks
20
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
212121212121212121
V. Strengthening Data Protections To Minimize Information Risks
• As mentioned earlier: new data security protections that would apply to research involving identifiable information
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
222222222222222222
V. Strengthening Data Protections to Minimize Information Risks
• Common Rule definition of when data is “identifiable” would be harmonized with definition in HIPAA Privacy Rule
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
24242424242424242424
VI. Data Collection To Enhance System Oversight
• Create a web-based portal for investigators to submit safety data and automatically have it delivered to appropriate agencies
• Harmonize safety reporting guidance across all Federal agencies
• Central repository
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
2626262626262626262626
VII. Extension of Federal Regulations
• Require domestic institutions that receive some Federal funding from a Common Rule agency for research with human subjects to extend the Common Rule protections to all research studies conducted at their institution.
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
VIII. Clarifying and Harmonizing Regulatory Requirements and Agency Guidance
27
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
2828282828282828282828
VIII. Clarifying and Harmonizing Regulatory Requirements and Agency Guidance
Request for Comments
How do differences in guidance from different agencies either strengthen or weaken protections for human subjects or the ability to conduct research?
• Should these differences be reduced?
Offi
ce fo
r H
uman
R
esea
rch
Pro
tect
ions
How to find the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking:
www.hhs.gov/ohrp
Click the big blue button!
Check out the 1,100 comments!
29