Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study

Recent NIH policy stipulates that multi-site studies must use a single or IRB (Institutional Review Board) in order to streamline the review process while maintaining standards for human subjects protection. The Western States Node of the Clinical Trials Network (CTN) used a single IRB for protocol...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ceilidh Nichols, Lynn E. Kunkel, Robin Baker, Eve Jelstrom, Megan Addis, Kim A. Hoffman, Dennis McCarty, P. Todd Korthuis
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2019-06-01
Series:Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865418301273
id doaj-060fa90a77bb4b3e9c136c3f0824e61c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-060fa90a77bb4b3e9c136c3f0824e61c2020-11-24T20:49:03ZengElsevierContemporary Clinical Trials Communications2451-86542019-06-0114Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network studyCeilidh Nichols0Lynn E. Kunkel1Robin Baker2Eve Jelstrom3Megan Addis4Kim A. Hoffman5Dennis McCarty6P. Todd Korthuis7Oregon Health & Science University-Portland State University School of Public Health Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USAOregon Health & Science University-Portland State University School of Public Health Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USAOregon Health & Science University-Portland State University School of Public Health Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USA; Corresponding author. Oregon Health and Science University – Portland State University, School of Public Health, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USA.The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, 401 N Washington St # 700, Rockville, MD 20850, USAKaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, 1730 Minor Ave, Ste. 1600, Seattle, WA 98101, USAOregon Health & Science University-Portland State University School of Public Health Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USAOregon Health & Science University-Portland State University School of Public Health Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd., CSB669, Portland, OR 97239-3088, USADepartment of Medicine, Section of Addiction Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, OR, 97239-3088, USARecent NIH policy stipulates that multi-site studies must use a single or IRB (Institutional Review Board) in order to streamline the review process while maintaining standards for human subjects protection. The Western States Node of the Clinical Trials Network (CTN) used a single IRB for protocol CTN-0067, a clinical trial testing the use of an opioid antagonist (extended-release naltrexone) versus opioid agonists (buprenorphine or methadone) for opioid use disorders among individuals living with HIV. This case study discusses the processes and challenges associated with use of a single IRB. These lessons are also informed by other single IRB experiences within the CTN. The intention of the NIH single IRB policy is to facilitate efficient IRB processes. Advanced planning and transparent communication, however, are critical to avoid stalling IRB approval and protocol implementation. Research teams need to account for local IRB willingness to cede to a single IRB and understand the variations in interpretations of abbreviated reviews. In order to facilitate the effective use of single IRBs, recommendations include assigning staff at each study site for IRB submission coordination and interaction with the lead site IRB staff, training investigators and key regulatory staff on expectations for working with single IRBs, dedicating a regulatory specialist at the lead site to manage the process, developing a communication plan, and supporting the development of strong working relationships with local regulatory staff and the single IRB. The CTN experiences with single IRBs may provide insights for other investigators. Keywords: Institutional Review Boards, Single IRB, Clinical trial regulations, NIH IRB regulationshttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865418301273
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ceilidh Nichols
Lynn E. Kunkel
Robin Baker
Eve Jelstrom
Megan Addis
Kim A. Hoffman
Dennis McCarty
P. Todd Korthuis
spellingShingle Ceilidh Nichols
Lynn E. Kunkel
Robin Baker
Eve Jelstrom
Megan Addis
Kim A. Hoffman
Dennis McCarty
P. Todd Korthuis
Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
author_facet Ceilidh Nichols
Lynn E. Kunkel
Robin Baker
Eve Jelstrom
Megan Addis
Kim A. Hoffman
Dennis McCarty
P. Todd Korthuis
author_sort Ceilidh Nichols
title Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
title_short Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
title_full Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
title_fullStr Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
title_full_unstemmed Use of single IRBs for multi-site studies: A case report and commentary from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study
title_sort use of single irbs for multi-site studies: a case report and commentary from a national drug abuse treatment clinical trials network study
publisher Elsevier
series Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
issn 2451-8654
publishDate 2019-06-01
description Recent NIH policy stipulates that multi-site studies must use a single or IRB (Institutional Review Board) in order to streamline the review process while maintaining standards for human subjects protection. The Western States Node of the Clinical Trials Network (CTN) used a single IRB for protocol CTN-0067, a clinical trial testing the use of an opioid antagonist (extended-release naltrexone) versus opioid agonists (buprenorphine or methadone) for opioid use disorders among individuals living with HIV. This case study discusses the processes and challenges associated with use of a single IRB. These lessons are also informed by other single IRB experiences within the CTN. The intention of the NIH single IRB policy is to facilitate efficient IRB processes. Advanced planning and transparent communication, however, are critical to avoid stalling IRB approval and protocol implementation. Research teams need to account for local IRB willingness to cede to a single IRB and understand the variations in interpretations of abbreviated reviews. In order to facilitate the effective use of single IRBs, recommendations include assigning staff at each study site for IRB submission coordination and interaction with the lead site IRB staff, training investigators and key regulatory staff on expectations for working with single IRBs, dedicating a regulatory specialist at the lead site to manage the process, developing a communication plan, and supporting the development of strong working relationships with local regulatory staff and the single IRB. The CTN experiences with single IRBs may provide insights for other investigators. Keywords: Institutional Review Boards, Single IRB, Clinical trial regulations, NIH IRB regulations
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451865418301273
work_keys_str_mv AT ceilidhnichols useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT lynnekunkel useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT robinbaker useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT evejelstrom useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT meganaddis useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT kimahoffman useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT dennismccarty useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
AT ptoddkorthuis useofsingleirbsformultisitestudiesacasereportandcommentaryfromanationaldrugabusetreatmentclinicaltrialsnetworkstudy
_version_ 1716806963188203520