• 대한임상약리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2000.04a
• /
• pp.44-60
• /
• 2000

• 대한임상약리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1994.05a
• /
• pp.9-9
• /
• 1994

• 대한임상약리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1992.11a
• /
• pp.17-17
• /
• 1992

• 대한임상약리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1996.05a
• /
• pp.77-92
• /
• 1996

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.165-206
• /
• 2018

Researchers, Institutional Bioethics Committee(IBC)/Institutional Review Board (IRB) members, Research Institutions that have multiple interests in relation to research should ensure that conflicts of interest(COI) do not arise in making professional judgments. In other words, according to the role that must be performed or the obligation to fulfill it, the primary interest, which must be considered or should be prioritized, should not be affected by the secondary interest. Therefore, standards and methods should be prepared so as to prevent and solve the problems of COI that have arisen, and the basic matters on standards and methods should be clearly defined in terms of the law and policy so that all parties such as Researchers can understand and follow them. In order to establish a more realistic legal policy, it is necessary to grasp the current situation. Therefore, I have reviewed results of the questionnaire survey and interview conducted for the administrative staff of IBC/IRB to confirm their opinions on legal policy problems related to COI and countermeasures for resolving them. Also, I have reviewed the main contents of issued by the US Department of Health and Human Services in order to assist in the preparation of domestic legal policy about conflicts of interest. Finally, I have analyzed the present state of domestic legal policy in relation to the Researcher's COI, the IBC/IRB member's COI, and Institutional COI and suggested way to improve it.

• The Journal of KAIRB
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.33-42
• /
• 2023

In the conduct of multicenter clinical trials, multiple reviews by multiple Institutional Review Board (IRB) result in unnecessary duplication of efforts, delays and increased expenses of the trials, placing unavoidable burdens on not only investigators and sponsors but also IRBs. During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic periods, as the need of multicenter clinical trials for its therapeutics and vaccines increased, a centralized IRB became more important than before in order to efficiently conduct the multicenter trials without unnecessary multiple reviews. Accordingly, government-supported central IBR as a new centralized IRB has launched to foster multicenter clinical trials while to avoid unnecessary reviews and delays and to reduce burdens of all stakeholders. However, there are still barriers to be overcome and problems to be solved in the central IRB. In this review, we introduce background and history of the central IRB and try to propose some strategies or solutions against the barriers and problems.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.125-144
• /
• 2016

All forms of Clinical trial should be fully equipped with protection systems for experimental subjects considering their uncertainty and various risks. Existing laws have some regulations in pharmaceutical affairs act and medical device act. Nonetheless, there is a limit to protect the subjects considering law objective to perform administration of medicine. Furthermore, the clinical trial on minor has no direct regulations in pharmaceutical affairs act, but prescribes certain portion in clinical trial assessment guideline on infants or medicine clinical trial management standard, however there is a limit because that is just recommendation not having legal effectiveness. The legislative solution would be possible for legal problems of clinical trial on minor by examining treatment system on minor in organ transplant act and clinical trial on minor in other foreign laws stronger than usual medical practice in terms of degree of human body invasion. I suppose that the control system of clinical trial being done focusing on the pharmaceutical affairs act, medical device act and other guidelines in existing laws system should be resolved by legislating 'trial subject protection law', in addition, this would be well balanced in organ transplant act on protection system of minor organ donors. Furthermore, the judgement on the consent ability and spontaneity in clinical trial on minor should be judged considering maturity and mentality of minor by clinical trial institutional review board based on legislative solution mentioned above.

• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.73-78
• /
• 2013

An institutional review board (IRB) should independently safeguard the right, safety, and well-being of all clinical trial subjects. It should consist of members who are qualified and experienced to review and evaluate the science, medical aspects, and ethics of the proposed trial. They have to pursue continuing efforts to improve the standards of review. The levels of review include the full board review, expedited review, continuing review, or exempt from review, while the levels of decision-making include approval, conditional approval, deferred approval, and disapproval. Investigators must follow the approved protocols and regulations honestly, and it is the IRB's mission to audit clinical trial sites as well.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.173-206
• /
• 2019

This research examines the characteristic of regulation on Japanese clinical research in recent years. First, Japan has had a severe punishment policy on research misconduct like Korea, but, in recent days, Japan has changed the direction of research ethics policy from restriction to research publicness securement by educational training, in addition, Act of Clinical Research, effected April 2018, has recruited excellent researchers, and then integrated clinical research and medicine clinical trial through raising transparency of funding and integrating ethics screening by mandating announcement on funding information of clinical research. Second, Japan has integrated and organized ethics guideline from dual system that consists of ethics guideline on dynamic research(here after, referred to as 「dynamic guideline」) and ethics guideline on clinical research(here after, referred to as 「clinical guideline」) to ethics guideline on medical research aimed at human(here after, referred to as 「integrated guideline」), thus, it complements repetition and deficit of ethics guideline needed in clinical research and dynamic research, and it has risk evaluation system for protecting human subjects, and also it clarifies the concept of 「invasiveness」, a preliminary consideration of evaluation. 「Evaluation issue of risk and profit」, common contents of international regulation related clinical research, is the method to check whether the research is designed appropriately or not, this is the method for Institutional Review Board to decide whether the risk on human subjects could be justified, and also this is the important standard for future human subjects to participate in clinical trial. Therefore, it is meaningful to define 「invasiveness」 concept, a preliminary consideration of risk evaluation for human subjects. This research examines Japanese clinical trial focusing on change of awareness on prevention of research misconduct, efficiency improvement of research through research screening and integration of human subjects, and clarification and extension of range of 「invasiveness」 concept, a preliminary of risk evaluation to protect human subjects.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.79-113
• /
• 2012

This study focuses on the protection of trial subjects, who participate in clinical trials for new drug. It takes long time to develop new drugs and the clinical trials are required. Usually, pharmaceutical company, which develop new drug, request a research institution(usually, hospital) to investigate the examination of security and side effects of new drug. The institution recruit trial subject to participate in the trials. The contract for clinical research of investigational new drug is concluded between the pharmaceutical company and the institution. This thesis studies the legal regulations for protection of participants of clinical research for new drug. In this respect the first matter of this study is to seek which relation between pharmaceutical firm and participants of clinical trials. Especially, there is a question which the trial subject is entitled to demand the pharmaceutical company which requested clinical trials the institution to supply the investigational new drug, after the contract for clinical trials had terminated or cancelled. This study take into account the liability of the pharmaceutical company to trial subject. Secondly, it is researched the roles and authority of Institutional Review Board(IRB). IRB is Research Ethics Committee of the institution, in which clinical trials for new drug are conducted. According to the rule of Korea good clinical practice(KGCP), IRB is the mandatory organization which is authorized to approve, secure approval or disapprove the clinical trials for investigational new drug in the institution. The important roles are the review of ethical perspective of trial research and the protection of trial subject. Thirdly, this paper focuses if the participants are to be paid for the participation for clinical research. This is ethical aspect of clinical trials. It is resonable that the participant is reimbursed for expenditure such as travels, and other expenses incurred in participation in trials. It is not allowed that the benefit of clinical trials is paid to trial subject. The payment should not function as financial inducements for participations of trials. Finally, the voluntary consent of the trial subject is required. The institution ought to inform the subject, who would like to participate in trials, and it ought to received informed consent in writing for subject. In this regard, it is matter that trial subject has ability of consent. It is principle that the subject as severely psychogeriatric patient has not ability of consent. However, it is required that not only healthy people but also patients are allowed to take part in clinical trials of new drug, in order to confirm which the investigation new drug is secure. Therefore there are cases, in which the legal representative of subject consent the participation of the trials. In addition, it is very important that the regulations concerning clinical trials of new drug is to be systematically well-modified. The approach of legal and political approach is needed to achieve this purpose.