Impact of Parenteral hydration in a BE study [Study As­sess­ment]

posted by ElMaestro  – Denmark, 2019-11-15 22:51 (1708 d 14:41 ago) – Posting: # 20810
Views: 2,922

Hi,

thanks for telling this story.
I would consider it a potentially serious issue. Did the PI or delegates note anything about protocol deviations or AEs necessitating parenteral fluids?
If no, then I'd say here a big issue (big as in major or critical).
I would collect immediately (copies of):
  1. The delegation logs
  2. Source docs for AEs and PDs, and any forms documenting the administration of the fluids and the reason for doing so.
  3. CRFs
And I would note down for posterity in writing, if written docs (in the form of PDs or AEs) do not exist just in case you worry about post-hoc back-dating of documentation.

I am not so worried about the BE proof itself, but about the ethics, just like Hötzi points out. The sponsor is in a serious regulatory/ethical and possible legal limbo if a subject has, say, a case of fever and septicemia after the parenteral administration (this will likely end up as a discussion where the trial insurer and the doctor's / clinic's insurer are pointing at each other, and the subjects will accordingly suffer).

Pass or fail!
ElMaestro

Complete thread:

UA Flag
Activity
 Admin contact
23,112 posts in 4,858 threads, 1,644 registered users;
86 visitors (0 registered, 86 guests [including 14 identified bots]).
Forum time: 14:33 CEST (Europe/Vienna)

Statistics means you never have to say you’re certain.    David L. Streiner

The Bioequivalence and Bioavailability Forum is hosted by
BEBAC Ing. Helmut Schütz
HTML5