Review of Modifications/Amendments to Previously Approved Research

IV.12

 

 

Review of Modifications/Amendments to Previously Approved Research

 

 

Previous Page

Objective

The Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (CPHS) reviews all requests for modification/amendments to previously approved research, and this Policy/Procedure describes the process by which the CPHS reviews modification/amendments submitted for approval.

 

Policy/Procedure

I.        The Principal Investigator (PI) may not implement any modifications/amendments to research without approval by the CPHS, except to avert or minimize apparent immediate hazard to the participant. Such action must be promptly reported to the CPHS.

 

II.     The PI must submit the modification/amendment via the Internet Research Information System (iRIS).

 

A.     The exact text changes of an amendment may be incorporated into a revised version of the protocol or other document.

1.      Modifications to the informed consent form (ICF) should take into account both prospective research participants and research participants already enrolled in the study.  New findings developed during the course of the research which may affect a participant’s willingness to continue participation must be provided to the participant in a letter of notification, an addendum to the initial consent document, or by re-consenting the participant using the modified ICF.  All such revised documents must be approved by the CPHS.

 

B.     Modification/amendment to research involving prisoners must go to the full committee for review.

 

C.     For research that was initially determined to be exempt, any proposed or anticipated changes must be submitted to the CPHS for approval prior to initiation of the change. The research proposal will then be evaluated for appropriate IRB review, as defined in HRP PP IV.06.

D.     For those modifications to research that are identified as qualifying for expedited review:

 

1.      The IRB coordinator shall assign the requested modification to an Expedited Reviewer (Reviewer). All previous information regarding the research is in iRIS for the Reviewer to access.

2.      If the Reviewer determines that the modification does not qualify for expedited review, the request shall be returned to the IRB Coordinator to be assigned to the full committee to review and take action on.

3.      The Reviewer shall review the modification/amendment

4.      The Reviewer will take the following actions on the requested modification/amendment:

a)      Approve

b)      Approve pending modifications

c)      The reviewer may not disapprove the change, but instead return the request to the IRB coordinator to be assigned to a full committee for review.

5.      All modifications approved by expedited review (minor changes) must be reported to CPHS   #1 & #2 by placing them on the next agenda.

 

E.      For those modifications that must go to a full convened meeting:

1.      The IRB coordinator shall determine the chairman of the subcommittee that initially reviewed the study and assign it to that person (or to one of the other subcommittee members if possible, if the chairman is not available) as the Primary Reviewer.

2.      The assigned Primary Reviewer and all members of the CPHS shall be provided the request for modification via iRIS. All previous information regarding the research is in iRIS for the members to access to determine whether the modified research continues to fulfill the criteria for approval.

3.      The Primary Reviewer shall review the requested modifications/amendments and shall indicate any issues/clarification and make a recommendation to the committee..

4.      After receiving the information and recommendation the CPHS shall review and discuss the request.

5.      Should the ICF require revision the CPHS may request that participants currently in the study be reconsented. Should this request be made it shall be included as a provision in the approval letter to the PI.

6.      The CPHS shall determine whether participants who have completed research involvement might be affected, and/ or might need to be recontacted and provided with additional information. This determination should be based on new information regarding a change to the risk/benefit ratio that would possibly affect the participant’s welfare. Should it be determined that the participants must be recontacted, it shall be a provision in the approval letter to the PI.

7.      When the CPHS reviews a modification request that involves prisoners, at least one voting member must be present at the CPHS meeting who is a prisoner, or a prisoner representative with appropriate background and experience to serve in that capacity.

 

F.      The proposed modification shall have one of the following actions taken.

1.      Approved

2.      Approved Pending

3.      Disapproved

 

III.The outcome of the review shall be provided to the PI via iRIS.

 

 

Applicable Regulations and Guidelines

21CFR 50 ( http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/21cfr50_04.html )

21CFR 56( http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/21cfr56_04.html )

38CFR 16 ( http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/38cfr16_04.html )

45CFR 46 ( http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_04/45cfr46_04.html )

ICH E6 ( http://www.ich.org/MediaServer.jser?@_ID=482&@_MODE=GLB )

Return to Policies and Procedures Home Page

Updated 5/2007, Report broken links