Drug sponsors should submit a “Race and Ethnicity Diversity Plan” early in clinical development that can be revisited and revised throughout a drug’s regulatory life to enhance diversity in clinical trials, the US Food and Drug Administration advises.
US FDA Calls For Clinical Trial Diversity Plan ‘As Soon As Practicable’ In Product Development
Draft guidance outlines Race and Diversity Plan that would reify some of FDA’s efforts to increase racial and ethnic diversity in clinical trials with a mechanism that is applicable from IND through approval.
More from Clinical Trials
• By
The EU Clinical Trials Information System has achieved primary registry designation in the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in a move that is expected to reduce regulatory burden for companies and help them lower compliance costs by aligning with publication requirements in medical journals.
• By
Newly published insights from a series of European Medicines Agency workshops can guide drug developers in designing development plans that meet the needs of both regulators and health technology assessment bodies.
• By
The new global GCP guideline, ICH E6(R3), enables researchers and clinical trial administrators to tailor their documentation processes, but also opens the door for more scrutiny during GCP inspections.
• By
The European Medicines Agency’s qualification of the AIM-NASH tool is said to signify a major advancement for clinical trials for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. The market size for MASH treatments is expected to grow substantially in the coming years.
More from R&D
• By
The European Medicines Agency’s qualification of the AIM-NASH tool is said to signify a major advancement for clinical trials for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. The market size for MASH treatments is expected to grow substantially in the coming years.
• By
As Indian CROs are bracing for new registration mandates, an expert panel at the IGBA’s 3rd Bioequivalence conference discusses the implications of non-compliance in bioequivalence studies.
• By
Experts working in the advanced therapy space say the US has less strict criteria for regulatory pathways for cell and gene therapies than the EU, particularly for products in early development.