The ultimate purpose of sponsor oversight is to act when required. Audits, meetings, and documentation are not always enough. Too many sponsors seem to be forgetting that they are the customer; one that’s paying a heavy price for services that can ultimately make or break them. Reset the industry balance with these 3 best practices.
Penelope Przekop is a is a biopharmaceutical quality assurance and corporate compliance executive consultant with global R&D and commercial PV expertise. During the early 2000s, she developed and oversaw the first global PV quality and compliance departments established for Wyeth as well as Johson & Johnson. Her work includes qualification and oversight of numerous PV vendors covering all aspects of clinical safety and post-marketed PV. Penelope has facilitated numerous PV regulatory inspections. She frequently leads and conducts PV mock inspections and provides in-depth PV training.
Read more from PDC’s teams of experts.
Include quality and customer satisfaction strategies and goals in all levels of the company. Relay and demonstrate the expectations, and then hold employees accountable. Everyone should know that the company’s commitment to quality is real; it’s not just pretty words on paper.
Include quality and customer satisfaction strategies and goals in all levels of the company. Relay and demonstrate the expectations, and then hold employees accountable. Everyone should know that the company’s commitment to quality is real; it’s not just pretty words on paper.
Senior biopharma executives can strategically ward off this storm’s potential impact to our industry provided they are fully informed.
Senior biopharma executives can strategically ward off this storm’s potential impact to our industry provided they are fully informed.
Over the last 10 years, the face of clinical research & development (R&D) and pharmacovigilance (PV) outsourcing has dramatically changed. What was a common industry scenario by 2010 — a full-scale operational pharma company utilizing both international and U.S.-based contract research organizations (CROs) to execute clinical investigator site monitoring and data management — has evolved into a new common scenario in 2019. More than ever, we see what I call a stick-figure pharma company (just the bones) utilizing vendors to execute as many of the required drug development processes as they possibly can. In fact, it’s not surprising to see a company using multiple vendors for the same process, such as regulatory reporting of expedited adverse event cases, investigator site monitoring, multiple types of auditing, and manufacturing. In my consulting work, I meet and interview numerous pharma employees at all levels who struggle when asked to explain how their stick-figure company connects with all the good clinical practice (GCP) and good pharmacovigilance (GVP) practice vendors in play.
Over the last 10 years, the face of clinical research & development (R&D) and pharmacovigilance (PV) outsourcing has dramatically changed. What was a common industry scenario by 2010 — a full-scale operational pharma company utilizing both international and U.S.-based contract research organizations (CROs) to execute clinical investigator site monitoring and data management — has evolved into a new common scenario in 2019. More than ever, we see what I call a stick-figure pharma company (just the bones) utilizing vendors to execute as many of the required drug development processes as they possibly can. In fact, it’s not surprising to see a company using multiple vendors for the same process, such as regulatory reporting of expedited adverse event cases, investigator site monitoring, multiple types of auditing, and manufacturing. In my consulting work, I meet and interview numerous pharma employees at all levels who struggle when asked to explain how their stick-figure company connects with all the good clinical practice (GCP) and good pharmacovigilance (GVP) practice vendors in play.
In clinical research, perhaps our oldest code we live by is the Hippocratic oath. Our industry is more complicated today than ever before, so how can we remain loyal to our shared code while also supporting the innovative solutions and approaches of the modern world?
In clinical research, perhaps our oldest code we live by is the Hippocratic oath. Our industry is more complicated today than ever before, so how can we remain loyal to our shared code while also supporting the innovative solutions and approaches of the modern world?