Steps and Slides of Implementing Global Standards Producing High Quality Programming Outputs Edition

Similar documents
October, Integration and Implementation of CDISC Standards

Conformance Rules how to follow and comply when specified by multiple sources?

CDISC Standards: Current and Future

From Standards that Cost to Standards that Save: Cost Effective Standards Implementation

SAS SUPPORT CDISC AND CLINICAL METADATA MANAGEMENT BILL GIBSON SAS HLS GLOBAL PRACTICE PRINCIPAL PRODUCT MANAGER

CDISC Standards: Summary

Evolving Regulatory Guidance on Submission of Standardized Data. James R. Johnson, PhD RTP CDISC User Network

Industrialized Clinical Data Standards Management Speed of automation, Power of accuracy and Transforming clinical data into business intelligence

CDISC Italian UN Aggiornamento/Attività

Standardize Study Data for Electronic Submission

Supporting A Data Review and Visualization Application With SDTM

CDISC Journal. Genzyme s GetSMART Program: Implementing Standards End-to-End

PharmaSUG Paper PO12

CDISC Journal. Current status and future scope of CDISC standards. By Rebecca D. Kush, President and CEO, CDISC. 1. Introduction

PharmaSUG Paper IB15

SDTM and SEND An Integrated View and Approach


DISCOVER DEFINE- XML PRACTICAL USES END-TO-END TODAY Mark Wheeldon CEO Formedix Bay Area User Group May 23, 2013

Roadmap for Managing Multiple CRO Vendors

SAS Drug Development in action: efficient standards libraries and study management modules together called CDmation.

CDISC Journal. Organizing and Accelerating the Clinical Research Process from the Beginning: The CDISC Protocol Representation Model and Toolkit

CDISC/TransCelerate Collaboration and TransCelerate work streams. -Clinical Data Standards -Common Protocol Template -esource

CDASH Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization

It s All About The RISK

Using SAS ETL Studio to Convert Clinical Trials Data to the CDISC SDTM Barry R. Cohen, Octagon Research Solutions, Wayne, PA

Harnessing the power of clinical data

SAS Life Science Analytics Framework

Implementation and Operation of CDISC ODM-based EDC by UMIN

MANAGING AND ANALYZING CLINICAL DATA MARK LAMBRECHT, PRINCIPAL INDUSTRY CONSULTANT, SAS BIAS MEETING, MARCH 14 TH 2014, MILAN, ITALY.

Clinical Data Standards & Automation

MANAGING AND INTEGRATING CLINICAL TRIAL DATA: A Challenge for Pharma and their CRO Partners

CDISC Controlled Terminology: Let s Speak the Same Language

INTRODUCING CLINIC AUTOMATION IN A PHASE I UNIT WITH END-TO-END E-SOURCE DATA PROCESSING

Biomarker Data Management in Clinical Trials: Addressing the Challenges of the New Regulatory Landscape

Data standardization and advancing regulatory science

CDISC Data Standards Validation

SAS End-to-End solutions in Clinical Trial Emma Liu, SAS R&D, Beijing, China

The Evolution of SDTM

DRIVING CLINICAL DATA STANDARDS BEYOND COMPLIANCE

Putting CDISC Standards to Work How Converting to CDISC Standards Early in the Clinical Trial Process Will Make Your CDISC Investment Pay

Optimizing Your Study Data Submissions to FDA Updates from CDER and CBER

CDISC Controlled Terminology: Let s Speak the Same Language. CDISC User Group Meeting March 12, 2009

ADB Consulting & CRO Inc.

Advanced workflow of review/consultation

Controlled Terminology

Breakout session notes CDISC UK Network Face to Face meeting June 23 rd 2015

BIOCLINICA CLINICAL DATA MANAGEMENT

CDASH 2.0. Berlin Éanna Kiely CDISC Engineer

Implementing Clinical Trial Data Standards

SEND Introduction CDISC User Group Meeting. Gitte Frausing. Principal Consultant Data Standards Decisions. Insight Interpretation Implementation

End-to-End Management of Clinical Trials Data

CDISC and Clinical Research Standards in the LHS

The Do's/Don'ts, An SDTM Validation Perspective. The should/shouldn't when explaining issues in the SDRG (Study Data Reviewer s Guide)

XClinical Software & Services Fast - Flexible - Focused

Preclinical Data Standardization Process for regulatory submission to U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Electronic Data Submission and Utilization in Japan

Authoring Considerations for Creating PhUSE Study Data Standardization Plan (SDSP) and CBER Appendix

Welcome to the American College of Toxicology s Webinar Series. We will begin at 11AM EDT

PhUSE Paper PP07. EPOCH in Reverse. Ann Croft, LEO Pharma, Hurley, UK

Data Standards for Population Pharmacokinetic Analysis (POPPK) and Non-Compartmental Analysis (NCA)

BIOMETRICS SERVICES ADVISORY DATA OFFICE UNBLINDING SECURE INDEPENDENT TEAM PROGRAM. ADaM TRAINER SAFETY SDTM COMPLIANT TA-EXPERTISE SDTM DATA

Leveraging of CDISC Standards to Support Dissemination, Integration and Analysis of Raw Clinical Trials Data to Advance Open Science

NEW AGILE CLINICAL TRIALS SUCH AS ADAPTIVE DESIGNS AND THE USE OF THE SAS LIFE SCIENCE ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK

PharmaSUG 2017 Paper DS14

Clinical Data in Business Intelligence

Specific pathologist responses for Standard for Exchange of Nonclinical Data (SEND)

Chapter 1. Pharmaceutical Industry Overview

The 5 Most Important Clinical SAS Programming Validation Steps Brian C. Shilling, Bogier Clinical & IT Solutions

Trial Summary: The Golden Gate towards a Successful Submission

High Quality or Poor Quality DB

ambiguous insights through HCL s R&D Transformation limit your business

Documentation and Accountability: Why Your SAS Programming Projects Can Benefit from Implementing a System Development Life Cycle (SDLC)

9th Annual SAS Health Care & Life Sciences Executive Conference

Electronic Health Records and Clinical Data Interchange Standards. Stephen E. Wilson, Dr.P.H., CAPT USPHS. Director. Division of Biostatistics III

Multifaceted aspects of metadata maximize efficiencies

Understanding IEC 62304

CLINICAL DATA MANAGEMENT

Japanese submission/approval from programming perspective

CDISC Tech Webinar Leveraging CDISC Standards to Drive Crosstrial Analytics; Graph Technology and A3 Informatics 26 OCT 2017

CDISC Production Standards Status & Plans

Case Study College of American Pathologists. All rights reserved. cap.org

Making PK Analysis Easier: The New ADaM Data Standard ADNCA

2016 Technical Update. August 2016

CDISC UK Network face to face Reading

THE INBOUND MARKETING HANDBOOK FOR FURNITURE MANUFACTURERS

CDISC Controlled Terminology across the Clinical Trial Continuum. Bay Area Implementation Network 6 March 2008

Risk-Based Approach to SAS Program Validation

The use of electronic Health Records in Clinical Research - The value of CDISC Standards

Approaches and Challenges in Implementing CDISC Standards DC DCISC User Group Meeting

Clinical Trials Roadmap: A Go-To-Market Guide for Probiotics

Meeting Minutes. CDISC-HL7 Stage I-B January 14-15, :00 am 12:30 pm (EST) HL7 Orlando, FL

Paper MA04. Greg Nelson ThotWave Technologies, Cary, North Carolina

Invisible Ink in GLP and GCP Research

Nice SUPPQUAL Variables to Have Beilei Xu, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ Changhong Shi, Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. Statistical Programing Expert Crohn s Disease Therapeutic Area User Guide. October 2018

CDISC Global Update. President and CEO, CDISC

Electronic Data Submission and Utilization in Japan

TransCelerate BioPharma, Inc. Clinical Data Standards Project. Dave Jordan Data Standards Project Leader

Disclaimers The views expressed are those of the presenter and not necessarily of the FDA With the FDA, as with the stock market, past performance is

Transcription:

Steps and Slides of Implementing Global Standards Producing High Quality Programming Outputs Edition David Izard, MS Terek Peterson, MBA Richard Addy, MS

CDISC ODM SDTM LAB CDASH ADaM PRM SEND Controlled Terminology 2 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

CDISC Acronyms - Decoded CDISC = Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium SDTM = Study Data Tabulation Model ADaM = Analysis Data Model SEND = Standard for the Exchange of Non-Clinical Data CDASH = Clinical Data Acquisition Standards Harmonization ODM = Operational Data Model LAB = Operational Data Model for Laboratory Data PRM = Protocol Representation Model MSG = Metadata Submissions Guideline BRIDG = Biomedical Research Integrated Domain Group SHARE = Shared Health and Clinical Research Electronic Library 3 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

CDISC Standards End to End 4 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Typical Process Flow? Create Individual Study SDTM Create Individual Study ADaM Create Individual Study TLFs Create Integrated SDTMs using pre-planned consistencies Create Integrated ADaM datasets focused on ISS/ISE Goals Produce ISS/ISE TLFs If only that was all there was to it 5 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

What Usually Happens 6 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Steps and Slides Steps: Helpful strategies, documents, and plans with the endpoint of a successful submission Slides: Pitfalls in processes or resistance 7 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Slides A Few Examples Not following the FDA s Study Data Technical Conformance Guide Not having a conversation with the FDA review division until ready to submit Selecting non-supported versions of standards (e.g., SDTM IG 3.1.1) Not following standard controlled terminology Leaving conformance checks to the end Using proprietary analysis datasets 8 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Steps Interpretation guides In Stream conformance checking Crosschecking macros Senior review Checklists Right tasks at the right time Automate completion of submission documents 9 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Steps Concrete Actions to Produce Quality Results Interpretation guides Consistent results across studies Considered decisions not rash ones In-Stream conformance checking Catch problems early often during initial programming Check items as they are updated not once and done Crosschecking macros Ensures deliverables are consistent with each other Senior review A submission is not created in a vacuum someone needs to look at the big picture An expert is more likely to catch subtle errors 10 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

In-Stream Conformance Checking Type Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Quality Macro Message Parent Domain Missing domain label The following variables are missing variable labels The following variables have labels with lengths greater the 40 characters The following variables in <domain> are permissible in the <version> IG and null. Verify that these variables should be included in domain. The following variables in <domain> are permissible in the <version> IG and null. Verify that these variables should be included in domain. Variable label does not match <version> IG defined variable label in the <domain> template. Verify that variable label is accurate. Variable is not defined in <version> IG <domain> template. Verify that variable should be included in domain. Check discrepancies for non-ascii characters. Non-ascii characters have been replaced with XX in COMPARE observations and control characters have been removed. Compare back with BASE to see where characters have been replaced. If it is not clear what is different, attempt viewing on unix to look for nonprintable characters Check ARM and ARMCD for accuracy and 1:1 relationship Check ACTARM and ACTARMCD for accuracy and 1:1 relationship Check EXTRT values for accuracy Both --DOSE and --DOSETXT populated for these subjects Negative values of --DOSE Missing --TRT for these subjects --OCCUR populated, but missing --PRESP for these subjects Missing --TERM for these subjects --TERM populated, but missing --DECOD Duplicating --SEQ values --STDY is greater than --ENDY. Confirm in raw data. SDTM cannot have study day values of 0. Make sure program is compensating for these values Reduce the number of warnings and errors late in the process Can be customized to look for data quality items Should be seamless in the programming process Comprehensive, but not too much. Balanced 11 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Steps Concrete Actions to Produce Quality Results Checklists Ensures none of the many, many steps are overlooked Spreads expertise and provides roadmaps Useful in project management and accountability Right tasks at the right time A task is not complete until the deliverable is checked don t move on to the next step of a process until you know you are on sound footing Automate completion of submission documents In-house tools or using tools such as OpenCDISC/Pinnacle21 Enter data once avoid cut and paste errors Information only needs to be updated in a single location Streamlines the process and reduces time and effort 12 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Checklists, Checklists, Checklists Ensure quality deliverables when tasks can be objectively confirmed as correct Makes sure none of the many, many steps required to generate a deliverable are overlooked Reminders for more experienced personnel and roadmaps for the less experienced Promotes consistency across projects and submissions 13 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern Provides accountability and aids in project management

Automate completion of submission documents: data definition file (define.xml) Automating extraction of Page numbers on the define.xml from acrfs for Origin column Move away from manual entry to increase quality Can be done via inhouse macro(s) Tools may be purchase that automate 14 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Building Steps to Avoid Slides Know the requirements Start with the end in mind Know the preferences Have a plan Develop consistent and thorough processes Build systems 15 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Know the Requirements: FDA Guidance 16 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Start with the End in Mind: Example Data Integration Plan (DIP) Summary document that highlights how individual studies will be harmonized Provides additional information beyond what is available in the integration specifications Highlights key activities performed in the integration 17 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Know the Preferences: One example Study Data Reviewer s Guide (SDRG) Use the PhUSE standard templates and completion guidelines Create a company SDRG interpretation guide Checklists for Completion and Review Standard responses for conformance issues 18 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern Find ways to automate the creation of sections from other reports or metadata

Have a Plan: Study Data Standardization Plan (SDSP) Plan for describing the data standardization approach for all studies and integrations The plan will be used in communication with FDA to assist in identifying potential data standardization issues as the preparations are made for the submission The plan can be used to communicate with FDA at a moment s notice the historical, current, and planned information about the development of the compound and indication 19 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern Creates a High Quality data centric focus across the organization

Develop consistent and thorough processes: Quality SDTM domain & define.xml process Assuming your organization has a sound validation methodology and programming processes Start with Checklists to fill in Quality gaps Evaluate if that training program and checklist is really a needed Work Instruction (WI) Periodically review templates tied to SOPs/WIs to ensure they are up-todate with the evolving standards 20 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern Communicate often, Train, and Document

Build Systems Do It Yourself or Buy It Off the Shelf? Do It Yourself Flexible Can be tailored on a case by case basis Potentially easier to insert into established process flows Off the Shelf Quick Consistent look and feel Maintenance and support are shifted to the provider Requires expertise Requires development Requires maintenance Potential bottleneck for support what happens if key support personnel are sick, on vacation, or have competing priorities? May be difficult to integrate with current processes Can be difficult to customize May not do everything 21 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Summary Remember the goal is to get drugs, biologics and devices to market quicker with ultimate patient safety in mind As a bare minimum, your organization must have a sound validation methodology and solid programming processes High quality clinical data submission deliverables assist FDA reviewers in support of actual review activities They reduce the need for post-submission Requests for Information/Data resubmission A manual process might work best for one company with checklists where automated systems/tools work best for another There are no short cuts with quality 22 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern

Questions? Contact Information David Izard, MS - Senior Director, Clinical Data Standards - David.Izard@Chiltern.com - (484) 467-8790 Richard Addy, MS - Senior Statistical Programmer/Analyst - Richard.Addy@Chiltern.com - (919) 909-0477 Terek J. Peterson, MBA - Senior Director, Global Statistical Standards - Terek.Peterson@Chiltern.com - (484) 560-8960 23 Proprietary & Confidential. 2016 Chiltern