Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Crit Rev Toxicol ; 40(10): 893-911, 2010 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20854192

RESUMEN

The public health and environmental communities will face many challenges during the next decade. To identify significant issues that might be addressed as part of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute (HESI) scientific portfolio, an expert group of key government, academic, and industry scientists from around the world were assembled in 2009 to map the current and future landscape of scientific and regulatory challenges. The value of the scientific mapping exercise was the development of a tool which HESI, individual companies, research institutions, government agencies, and regulatory authorities can use to anticipate key challenges, place them into context, and thus strategically refine and expand scientific project portfolios into the future.


Asunto(s)
Salud Ambiental/legislación & jurisprudencia , Directrices para la Planificación en Salud , Prioridades en Salud/tendencias , Salud Pública/tendencias , Toxicología/tendencias , Academias e Institutos , Gobierno , Humanos , Industrias , Medición de Riesgo/tendencias
2.
Clin Trials ; 6(5): 430-40, 2009 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19846894

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Safety Planning, Evaluation and Reporting Team (SPERT) was formed in 2006 by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. PURPOSE: SPERT's goal was to propose a pharmaceutical industry standard for safety planning, data collection, evaluation, and reporting, beginning with planning first-in-human studies and continuing through the planning of the post-product-approval period. METHODS: SPERT's recommendations are based on our review of relevant literature and on consensus reached in our discussions. RESULTS: An important recommendation is that sponsors create a Program Safety Analysis Plan early in development. We also give recommendations for the planning of repeated, cumulative meta-analyses of the safety data obtained from the studies conducted within the development program. These include clear definitions of adverse events of special interest and standardization of many aspects of data collection and study design. We describe a 3-tier system for signal detection and analysis of adverse events and highlight proposals for reducing "false positive" safety findings. We recommend that sponsors review the aggregated safety data on a regular and ongoing basis throughout the development program, rather than waiting until the time of submission. LIMITATIONS: We recognize that there may be other valid approaches. CONCLUSIONS: The proactive approach we advocate has the potential to benefit patients and health care providers by providing more comprehensive safety information at the time of new product marketing and beyond.


Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/organización & administración , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/métodos , Recolección de Datos/métodos , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos/prevención & control , Proyectos de Investigación/normas , Administración de la Seguridad/organización & administración , Productos Biológicos/efectos adversos , Investigación Biomédica/normas , Protocolos Clínicos , Ensayos Clínicos como Asunto/normas , Descubrimiento de Drogas/organización & administración , Humanos , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Administración de la Seguridad/normas , Vacunas/efectos adversos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...