Back to Journals » Drug Design, Development and Therapy » Volume 6

Why (not) go east? Comparison of findings from FDA Investigational New Drug study site inspections performed in Central and Eastern Europe with results from the USA, Western Europe, and other parts of the world

Authors Caldron P, Gavrilova, Kropf

Received 22 January 2012

Accepted for publication 25 February 2012

Published 27 March 2012 Volume 2012:6 Pages 53—60

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/DDDT.S30109

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 2


Paul H Caldron1, Svetlana I Gavrilova2, Siegfried Kropf3
1Midwestern University, Arizona College of Osteopathic Medicine, Glendale, AZ, USA; 2Mental Health Research Center of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation; 3Institute for Biometrics und Medical Informatics, Otto von Guericke University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany

Abstract: Since the mid-1990s, investigational sites in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) have been increasingly utilized by pharmaceutical companies because of their high productivity in terms of patient enrolment into clinical trials. Based on the FDA's publicly accessible Clinical Investigator Inspection List, we present an analysis of findings and outcome classifications from FDA inspections during Investigational New Drug (IND) studies and compare the results for the CEE region to those from Western European countries and the USA. Data from all 5531 FDA clinical trials inspections that occurred between 1994 (when the FDA first performed inspections in CEE) and the end of 2010 were entered into the database for comparative analysis. Of these, 4865 routine data audit (DA) inspections were analyzed: 401 from clinical trials performed in Western Europe, 230 in CEE, 3858 in the USA, and 376 in other countries. The average number of deficiencies per inspection ranged between 0.99 for CEE and 1.97 in Western Europe. No deficiencies were noted during 16.6%, 39.0%, and 21.5% of the inspections in Western Europe, CEE and USA, respectively. The percentages of inspections after which no follow-up action was indicated were 36.9% for Western Europe, 55.7% for CEE, and 44.3% for US sites. CEE was also the region with the lowest percentage of inspections that required official or voluntary action. On the basis of FDA inspection data, the high productivity of CEE sites appears to be accompanied by regulatory compliance as well as by data quality standards that are not inferior to those in Western regions.

Keywords: clinical trials, inspection, Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), data quality, deficiencies

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]