Who should Attend it?
Middle and Junior level medical Microbiologists,
Clinical Pathologists, Biochemists, Pharmacologists,
Molecular Biologists, Internists, Pediatricians,
Postgraduate in any medical pharmacy or nursing discipline,
Laboratory Managers with postgraduate qualification and
laboratory scientists processing samples for clinical
trials.
How to Register?
The seats will be restricted to 50 only and participants
will be registered on the first come-first served basis
only.
Registration Fee: |
Introduction:
Good laboratory practice regulations (GLP) became part of
the regulatory landscape in the latter part of the seventies
in response to malpractice in research and development (R&D)
activities of pharmaceutical companies and contract
facilities used by them. The malpractice included some cases
of fraud, but by far the most important aspect of poor
practice was the lack of proper management and organization
of studies used to complete regulatory dossiers. The
investigations of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
in the toxicology laboratories in the USA demonstrated a
lack of organization and poor management which, it was
decided, could only be dealt with by imposing regulations.
These regulations are the GLP regulations. First the US FDA,
then the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
instituted GLP regulations, and eventually many nations of
the world followed suit.
GLP (OECD):
In 1981, the OECD also published GLP Principles and these
have now dominated the international scene – so far 30
countries (the member states of the OECD) have signed
agreements that make the OECD GLP Principles binding on
them. This effectively makes the OECD Principles an
international text.
The intent of GLP was to regulate the
practices of scientists working on the safety testing of
prospective drugs. With the obvious potential impact on
consumers and patients recruited for clinical trials, the
safety of drugs became a key issue and GLP was seen as a
means of ensuring that scientists did not invent or
manipulate safety data and a means of ensuring that GLP
compliant studies are properly managed and conducted.
Hence GLP became the champion of the
consumer, the regulatory safeguard, the guarantee that the
safety data were being honestly reported to the registration
or receiving authorities as the basis of a decision whether
or not to allow a new drug onto the market. GLP was imposed
on the industry by regulatory authorities, in the same way
as good manufacturing practice (GMP) had been before, and
good clinical practice (GCP) was to be afterwards.
GCP:
The history of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) statute traces
back to one of the oldest enduring traditions in the history
of medicine: The Hippocratic Oath. As the guiding ethical
code it is primarily known for its edict to do no harm to
the patient. However, the complexities of modern medicine
research necessitate a more elaborate set of guidelines that
address a Physician’s ethical and scientific
responsibilities such as obtaining informed consent or
disclosing risk while involved in biomedical research.
Good Clinical Practice is a set of
guidelines for biomedical studies which encompasses the
design, conduct, termination, audit, analysis, reporting and
documentation of the studies involving human subjects. The
fundamental tenet of GCP is that in research on man, the
interest of science and society should never take precedence
over considerations related to the well being of the study
subject. It aims to ensure that the studies are
scientifically and ethically sound and that the clinical
properties of the pharmaceutical substances under
investigation are properly documented. The guidelines seek
to establish two cardinal principles: protection of the
rights of human subjects and authenticity of biomedical data
generated.
Most laboratories in the clinical
research arena, however, do not fall under the oversight of
any government regulatory authority. Often, in areas outside
of Europe, Australia, and North America, there is no
regulatory body devoted to laboratory science. In the areas
where regulation exists, the targeted laboratories are
either strictly “clinical” or “research” oriented. This type
of scenario presents difficulties in discerning which
regulations apply to laboratories engaging in clinical
research.
GCLP:
GCLP is a relatively new approach to laboratory guidance
which has been adopted by some European quality
associations. The GCLP concept possesses a unique quality,
as it embraces both the research/pre-clinical and clinical
aspects of Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). It is becoming
widely recognized that consistent GCLP application is
paramount in the success of any clinical trial. In most
cases, clinical trial data is largely laboratory in nature
to include study endpoints and participant safety data.
Hence, if this laboratory data is called into question due
to inconsistent practices, an entire trial effort could be
deemed as a failure. As a precautionary element, and to
ensure the sponsor’s confidence in the good quality of data
produced by any laboratory performing study testing, NIH has
overseen the development of GCLP standards which encompass
applicable portions of 21 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
part 58, or GLP; and 42 CFR part 493, or the Clinical
Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA). These regulations
were intended to ensure the quality and integrity of safety
data, allow accurate reconstruction of experiments, allow
for safe, quality products, and allow data to be comparable
regardless of where generated. These guidelines also help
assure sponsors and regulatory agencies that all data
submitted are a true reflection of the results obtained
during a study and that this data can be relied upon when
making risk and/or safety assessments. Due to the ambiguity
of some parts of these regulations, these GCLP standards
also include guidance from other organizations and
accrediting bodies, such as the College of American
Pathologists (CAP) and The International Organization for
Standardization (ISO), which better define the intent of
GCLP that is presently undefined by a single regulatory
body. By recognizing these standards as the minimum
requirements for externally funded laboratory operations,
the expectation is that GCLP compliance will ensure that
consistent, reproducible, auditable, and reliable laboratory
results that support clinical trials will be produced in an
environment conducive to study reconstruction.
|
Dr. VM Katoch, |
Secretary to Government
of India & DG-ICMR |
Dr Surinder Singh |
DCGI, Government of
India |
Prof YK Gupta. |
HOD, Department of
Pharmacology, AIIMS |
Dr. Ashok Rattan |
SRL Ranxay, Gurgaon |
Dr. Sarman Singh |
Professor of Clinical
Microbiology, AIIMS |
Dr. Surender Kumar |
Department of
Pharmacology, AIIMS |
Dr. Vyas Shingetgeri,
|
SRL Ranxay, Gurgaon/
Bombay |
Dr Nilanjan Saha |
SRL Ranxay, Gurgaon/
Bombay |
Dr Vijay Batra |
SRL Ranxay, Gurgaon/Bombay |
Dr. AK Mukhopadhyay |
Head, Laboratory
Medicine, AIIMS |
Dr Satish Bhatia |
Fortis Clinical
Research Group |
Dr Maria Borges, |
Fortis Clinical
Research Group |
Mr Nandan Rao, |
Fortis Clinical
Research Group |
Dr Aparna |
Fortis Clinical
Research Group |
|