#Clinical Trial Data Services

[clivaldatabase]

Clinical Chemists in Early Phase And Bioequivalence Studies

The world of pharmaceutical clinical trials is a complex ecosystem where science meets strict regulatory guidelines to bring safe and effective drugs to the market. Among the many specialists involved in this process, clinical chemists play a vital role—especially in early phase and bioequivalence (BE) studies. These phases are critical in the drug discovery & development pipeline, requiring precise, analytical minds to generate and interpret data accurately.

[zenovelsworld]

Ensure your clinical trials are always prepared for regulatory inspections. Zenovel provides expert GCP auditing services, helping you achieve and maintain compliance, minimize risks, and validate data integrity for seamless inspections.

[cro-services]

Biostatistics Help in Medicine at Clinfinite Solutions

Introduction

In the world of medicine, numbers are very important. They help doctors, scientists, and researchers understand diseases, medicines, and treatments. This study of numbers in healthcare is called biostatistics. Biostatistics helps in finding out if a medicine works, how a disease spreads, and how many people are getting better. Clinfinite Solutions uses biostatistics to help in research and make sure that medicines and treatments are safe and helpful.

What is Biostatistics?

Biostatistics is the use of numbers and math to study health and medicine. Scientists collect a lot of information from patients, hospitals, and medical studies. They then use biostatistics to understand this information.

For example, if a new medicine is being tested, scientists will collect data on how many people feel better after taking it. If most people get better, the medicine is good. But if many people get sick after taking it, the medicine is not safe. This is how biostatistics helps in making better decisions in healthcare.

Biostatistics is also used to study diseases. If a new disease is spreading, scientists use numbers to find out how many people are getting sick and how fast it is spreading. This helps doctors and governments take action to stop the disease.

Why is Biostatistics Important?

Biostatistics is important because it helps in understanding health problems. Without biostatistics, doctors and scientists would not know if a treatment is working. It also helps in making good choices in medicine.

One important use of biostatistics is in clinical trials. When a new medicine is tested, scientists collect data on patients who take the medicine. They look at the numbers to see if the medicine is safe and helpful. If the numbers show that the medicine works well, it can be approved for use.

Biostatistics also helps in finding patterns in diseases. For example, if doctors see that many people in one city are getting the same sickness, they can find out why. Maybe the water is dirty, or maybe there is a virus spreading. By looking at the numbers, they can stop the disease and keep people safe.

How Does Clinfinite Solutions Use Biostatistics?

Clinfinite Solutions uses biostatistics in many ways to help in medicine and research. They collect and study data to understand how medicines work and how diseases spread.

One big way they help is in clinical trials. They look at all the numbers from patients who are testing a new medicine. They then analyze these numbers to see if the medicine is working. If the numbers show that the medicine is safe and helpful, it can be approved for use.

Clinfinite Solutions also helps in studying diseases. They look at how many people are getting sick and how the disease is spreading. This helps doctors and health experts make better plans to stop the disease.

They also use biostatistics to improve hospitals and treatments. By looking at hospital data, they can find out what treatments work best and help doctors make better choices for their patients.

Conclusion

Biostatistics is a very important part of medicine. It helps doctors and scientists understand health problems and make better treatments. Without biostatistics, it would be hard to know if medicines work or if diseases are spreading.

Clinfinite Solutions plays a big role in biostatistics. They collect data, study numbers, and help in research. Their work helps in making better medicines, stopping diseases, and improving healthcare for everyone.

[worksuremedpharma-blog]

Medical writing encompasses various documents, including regulatory submissions, educational materials for physicians, and public health articles. Writers must be adept in research, authoring, editing, and understanding audience-specific needs.

WorkSure® #MedicalWriting Services stands out by offering comprehensive regulatory writing support, helping clients navigate complex regulations and communicate their brand messages effectively.

Read more at: https://www.worksure.org/medical-writing-principles-scope-and-opportunities/

regulatorydocuments #researchwriting #clinicaldocuments #clinicalstudyreports

[creativeera]

Clinical Trials Support Services: Enabling Medical Advancements through Quality Research

Types of Clinical Trials Support Services Clinical trial support encompasses a wide array of services required to conduct medical research efficiently and effectively. Some of the key types of support services include: Regulatory Support

Clinical trials must adhere to stringent regulations and standards to ensure safety and ethical conduct. Regulatory support services help navigate these requirements and secure necessary approvals. Regulatory experts aid with preparation of documents such as clinical trial applications and maintaining compliance throughout the trial lifecycle. Patient Recruitment Support

Finding suitable human volunteers is one of the biggest challenges in clinical research. Dedicated patient recruitment teams leverage different online and offline strategies to promote awareness of trials and screen potential candidates as per eligibility criteria. Their efforts are vital for timely patient enrollment and study completion. Site Management Support

Managing the operational aspects at Clinical Trials Support Services sites spread across locations requires dedicated coordination. Site management services take care of site initiation activities, training investigators and staff, addressing their queries, facilitating logistics and ensuring protocol adherence. This helps sites function efficiently and focus on participant care. Biostatistics and Data Management Support

Clinical trials generate huge volumes of data at each stage that needs to be captured, assessed and reported as per quality standards. Biostatisticians and clinical data managers employ their analytical skills and use specialized software to plan the data collection methodology, perform interim analyses, and compile the clinical study report. Medical Writing Support

From drafting patient consent forms and recruitment material to compiling clinical study reports – medical writing plays a significant role in clearly communicating critical information for different stakeholders. Experienced medical writers utilize their medical and regulatory expertise to develop high-quality documentation tailored to the audience. Safety Monitoring and Pharmacovigilance

Ensuring participant safety is the utmost priority in clinical research. Independent safety boards and pharmacovigilance teams closely monitor trials for any adverse events. They analyze trends, determine causality and take necessary actions to minimize risks to human subjects. Logistics Support

Timely shipment of investigational products, medical supplies and equipment to sites spread across multiple countries requires efficient logistics management. Logistics coordinators arrange for customized solutions like GPS-enabled transportation, proper storage facilities and distribution tracking systems. Advantages of Outsourcing Clinical Trial Support Services With the complexity of modern clinical trials, most pharmaceutical and biotech organizations leverage specialized clinical research organizations (CROs) to outsource support functions: Access to Expertise

CROs employ multidisciplinary teams of highly qualified clinical research experts with vast international experience. Their combined and focused skillsets can deliver superior services than an in-house function. Cost Savings

Outsourcing non-core operations frees up internal resources for other strategic activities. It also offers scalability with pay-as-you-go fee-for-service models to match financing needs at each stage. This provides significant cost advantages over building in-house infrastructure. Infrastructure and Technology

CROs make large investments in state-of-the-art technologies, facilities and resources required to support global clinical trials. Outsourcing leverages these resources that would otherwise require high capital expenditure for sponsors. Resource Flexibility

CRO staffing can easily scale up or down based on changing study requirements without long-term commitments. This flexibility enables sponsors to focus on core development work while managing variable external support needs. Compliance Expertise

With experience spanning hundreds of trials globally, CROs have in-depth knowledge and polished processes to ensure compliance with regulations in different regions. This mitigates risks of non-compliance for sponsors. Conducting Large Multinational Trials

Some clinical programs involve complex trials across dozens of countries simultaneously. Few sponsors have the bandwidth to internally coordinate such large-scale global operations. CROs specialize in seamlessly executing multinational clinical programs. Quality Clinical Trial Support Services Define Clinical Research Success A few key aspects guarantee the delivery of high-quality clinical trial support services: Extensive Therapeutic Experience

CROs with proven track record of supporting various therapeutic areas can adeptly cater to specific sponsor requirements and anticipate challenges through their past learning. Robust Quality Management Systems

Adopting global quality standards like GCP, ISO certified processes and ongoing audits ensure consistent adherence to protocol, timely issue resolution and generation of reliable data. Technology Integrated Solutions

Leveraging customized applications for functions like patient recruitment, site payments, interactive drug supply chain tracking and integrated clinical data capture enhances efficiency. Prequalified Global Network

A pre-established pool of qualified clinical sites, laboratories and investigators across regions facilitates rapid study startup. Their pre-qualification saves time in site feasibility assessments. Proactive Communication Culture

Regular sponsor interactions, performance reporting and swift issue escalation enable identifying risks early and collaborative troubleshooting. This drives seamless collaboration. Clinical Trials Support Services Talent Development Focus

Ongoing training and skill development programs for both sponsor and CRO staff keep the clinical research talent abreast with evolving science and best practices to deliver best quality.

Get more insights on Clinical Trials Support Services

Priya Pandey is a dynamic and passionate editor with over three years of expertise in content editing and proofreading. Holding a bachelor's degree in biotechnology, Priya has a knack for making the content engaging. Her diverse portfolio includes editing documents across different industries, including food and beverages, information and technology, healthcare, chemical and materials, etc. Priya's meticulous attention to detail and commitment to excellence make her an invaluable asset in the world of content creation and refinement.

(LinkedIn- https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-pandey-8417a8173/)

[transcriptioncity]

Translation Services for Clinical Studies and Clinical Reviews

Accurate translation services for clinical studies are crucial for medical research. Precise translations ensure that clinical reviews maintain the integrity and reliability of the original data. Inaccuracies can lead to misinterpretation; compromising patient safety and the efficacy of treatments. Leveraging professional translation services can enhance communication between international…

[mariacallous]

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., declared chronic diseases an “existential threat.” Then his agency terminated one of the world’s longest-running diabetes trials.

In 1999, Peggy Bryant, a fifty-year-old oncology nurse in Boston, received a postcard asking whether she’d like to take part in a clinical trial aimed at preventing diabetes. Well, this is fitting, she thought. How many patients have I asked to enroll in trials? Bryant, who’d long struggled with her weight, told me that she had cared for people dealing with grave complications of diabetes—vision loss, kidney failure, limb amputations—and had worried that “full-blown diabetes might be in my future.” She decided to sign up. Some of the trial’s participants were given a medication called metformin; others were given a placebo. Bryant was assigned to a third group, in which volunteers didn’t receive a pill but instead worked with trial staff to meet their health goals, exercise more, and lose weight. About once a month, she gave blood and urine samples. “It changed the way I approached my health,” she told me. “The staff were so committed that it made you more committed.” The study found that, in people with prediabetes, metformin lowered the risk of diabetes by roughly a third; the life-style intervention cut the risk by more than half. Both components were so successful that the trial was stopped early. (All participants got the life-style intervention for a year; since then, the study has mostly been observational.) The Secretary of Health and Human Services held a press conference to announce the findings. “I’ve been doing this a long time, and I’ve never heard of a study’s results being announced by the head of H.H.S.,” David M. Nathan, a Harvard professor who chaired the study, told me. “It was a big fucking deal.”

Diabetes is a lifelong condition whose consequences can be varied: nerve damage, heart disease, digestive problems, foot ulcers. It affects nearly forty million Americans and kills more than a hundred thousand each year. “Studying it for three or five years seemed shortsighted,” Nathan said. His team applied for funding to extend their project and consider follow-up questions. How long do the health benefits last? How do blood-sugar levels affect the body and the brain over time? For more than a quarter of a century, Nathan and his colleagues tracked thousands of patients—which was itself a feat of logistical and scientific endurance. (Many doctors struggle to get their patients to attend annual physicals, let alone engage them for a study of this duration.)

The Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study, as the project is known, has led to more than two hundred scientific publications. Simply by continuing to exist, it has overcome one of the central difficulties of chronic-disease research: time. Most studies enroll patients for months or for years. But, if you want to prove that a drug or a life style can extend a person’s life—not in theory but in fact—you have to follow them for, well, much of their life. And to study a condition with wide-ranging effects, such as diabetes, you tend to gather wide-ranging data: genetic information, dietary habits, imaging, metabolic markers. The study collected hundreds of thousands of samples, which serve as a sort of time capsule of America’s health. Such troves of medical information can often lead to unexpected breakthroughs. This month, a study found that the people who’d participated in a rigorous diet-and-exercise program in the late nineteen-nineties, as Bryant did, were substantially less likely to develop diabetes decades later. Midlife investments in health compound into older age. As the study’s participants have aged, researchers have turned their focus to a link between diabetes and dementia.

The study’s funding comes from the National Institutes of Health, which in 2022 committed some eighty million dollars to cover five years of further research, one of its largest grants. The N.I.H. sends the money to a coördinating center—in this case, Columbia University—which then distributes the funds to dozens of participating trial sites around the country. But, in early March, the Trump Administration froze hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to Columbia, and the diabetes study was abruptly terminated. Columbia informed collaborators at other institutions that trial-related work needed to stop immediately. “We had to call some participants that night and tell them not to come in the next day,” Nathan said. Bryant, who now lives in New York City, got a call from a study coördinator at Montefiore Einstein Medical Center informing her of the cancellation. “I was shocked,” she said. “It just seemed so pointless.” A few days later, she joined other Montefiore study participants on a Zoom call with the site’s lead researcher and a member of the study’s executive committee, an endocrinologist named Jill Crandall. Even the N.I.H. team overseeing the grant had been blindsided, Crandall told me. They learned of the termination not from the government for which they work but from the study’s leaders. “They were completely in the dark,” she said.

When Bryant joined the trial, her daughter was a child; her daughter now has two children of her own. On the Montefiore video call, Bryant noticed an older man who looked ill—a fellow-participant who appeared to be sleeping or unconscious. The man’s wife was there with him. She held his hand as she explained that he had dementia, and that it had progressed. She wanted everyone to understand the stakes of the research they’d been engaged in. Perhaps hidden somewhere in the time capsule was a key to prevent, or at least delay, such an outcome. “I thought, Wow, that could be any of us one day,” Bryant told me. “We should be doing more—a lot more. Instead, here we are, moving in the wrong direction.”

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., the Trump Administration’s Secretary of Health and Human Services, has called chronic diseases such as diabetes an “existential threat.” He has railed against the food industry, calling sugar a “poison” and labelling high-fructose corn syrup “a formula for making you obese and diabetic.” Strangely—perhaps incoherently—his agency is also responsible for ending a diabetes study that has been running for longer than almost any other. In recent months, H.H.S., which oversees the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and nearly a dozen other entities, has cut some twenty thousand jobs, or about a quarter of its workforce. (Kennedy has acknowledged that the mass layoffs could result in many mistakes.) A C.D.C. unit that works to prevent childhood lead poisoning was purged. Another unit dedicated to helping people stop smoking, the country’s leading cause of preventable death, was also eliminated. At the F.D.A., veterinarians focussed on curtailing the risks of the ongoing bird-flu outbreak were let go; some fired employees at C.M.S. were told to direct their complaints to an administrator who died last year. “I have no argument with the need for government to do things better and more efficiently,” Richard Besser, a former C.D.C. director, told me. “But this is not about that. This is about tearing down institutions they don’t like. I doubt that rebuilding them will be possible in my lifetime.”

Patients are already feeling the effects. It’s estimated that at least a hundred clinical trials are at risk of stopping or have already halted, including some dedicated to preventing sexually transmitted infections, reducing rates of postpartum depression, and keeping organ-transplant recipients safe from infectious threats. More may soon follow. Bryant told me that she’s been working at a contract research organization that helps enroll patients in trials. Even studies sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry are being affected: many rely partially on federal funding, or are run by staff who do, and who have consequently been laid off. An oncologist told me about a patient with Stage IV cancer who, until recently, had three options for experimental trials. She now has none. Meanwhile, people who have never participated in a trial will suffer the costs of unrealized discoveries—potential treatments and insights that never materialize.

The lapse in funding means that the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study can no longer continue to collect patient data as planned; it can no longer pay staff to do blood work, collect urine samples, scan brains, or conduct neurocognitive tests. Even worse, the study’s existing data are at risk. Scientists need funds to properly store and retrieve samples; they need money to pay for computer servers and to hire statisticians and analysts, who clean and curate the data. (Although the N.I.H. stores some study samples, the agency has told researchers that it doesn’t have the capacity to accept the entire collection.) “The absence of funding could prevent us from continuing to maintain the integrity of the database,” Nathan, the Harvard professor, told me. “It’s a tremendous waste of resources.” The contents of the time capsule may become irrecoverable.

In recent weeks, Nathan, Crandall, and others involved with the study have worked furiously to try to have the N.I.H. funding restored. They’ve spoken with agency representatives and members of Congress. They’ve gone to the media and lobbied professional societies. In March, the bipartisan chairs of the Congressional Diabetes Caucus sent a letter to Kennedy and the N.I.H. acting director, urging them to “take necessary action” to insure that the diabetes study continues. (The N.I.H. and H.H.S. did not respond to my requests for comment.)

The longer that the trial is paused, the harder it will be to resume. Trial staff at the various clinical sites, with whom some participants have decades-long relationships, are already being laid off. “People think trials are just about collecting data, but there’s an art to keeping participants invested and engaged,” Crandall said. “That personal connection will fade.” She told me about an older participant who’d recently passed away. The woman didn’t have much family; a friend organized her memorial service and wound up inviting the study team. At the service, the friend spoke about how much the study had meant to the woman—how, through it, she felt that she was contributing to something larger than herself, something that might help others. “That’s what a trial like this can be,” Crandall said. “If we let this study fade, it will never be duplicated. No one else is going to do it.”

[covid-safer-hotties]

Also preserved in our archive

By Samantha Fields

When Charlie McCone got COVID in March 2020 in San Francisco, he was 30, otherwise healthy and fit, not considered high-risk. His doctors told him he’d get better in a couple of weeks. He didn’t.

Eventually, weeks into being sick and with no real answers from his doctors, he turned to that place many of us turn to for medical information: the internet.

“I found a Facebook group with thousands of other people asking what’s going on, and I was like, ‘Oh my God,’” he said, “‘This is happening to so many other people.’”

It was already becoming clear then, in spring of 2020, that COVID could cause serious, lasting issues, including debilitating fatigue and brain fog, among many other symptoms. Because there was so much attention on COVID at the time, McCone said, “there was a lot of hope about the response to long COVID, I think, the first two years.”

Then in late 2020, Congress allocated over $1 billion to the National Institutes of Health for long COVID research. “There was this feeling that we’re going to have answers here in a few years,” he said.

But now it is a few years later, and that feeling has changed.

McCone is still sick. He’s not working anymore and can’t walk much more than a block. Roughly 20 million people in the U.S. are now estimated to have long COVID, maybe more. And that initial $1.15 billion NIH got for the RECOVER program — which stands for Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery — has yielded few answers and zero approved treatments so far.

“There’s been a lot of disappointment in terms of the program moving slowly and also focusing a lot on the kind of observational side of things,” said Betsy Ladyzhets, co-founder and managing editor of the Sick Times, a nonprofit news site focused on long COVID.

Most of the research money has gone into trying to learn more about what long COVID is — into clinical research, data collection and analysis and studies of electronic health records.

“Rather than what many people in the patient community and also the research community really want, which is focus on treatments, clinical trials,” Ladyzhets said.

There’s good reason for the focus on observational research, according to Dr. Serena Spudich, a neurologist and researcher at Yale who’s working with the RECOVER program.

“There has to be a very, very strong urgency for finding treatments,” she said. “And at the same time, we will only find treatments if we understand the condition properly.”

And understand what’s causing the many different kinds of symptoms people are having.

“Because long COVID is not one condition, it’s a very heterogeneous condition,” Spudich said. “And it’s very, very possible, I would even say likely, that different forms of long COVID — for example, the more neurologic forms versus something like severe shortness of breath or problems with the heart rate — those may actually be due to different types of biologic mechanisms that need different treatments.”

Outside researchers agree that these kinds of observational studies and data collection are critical, but some feel the NIH didn’t need to spend nearly $1 billion on them.

Dr. Ziyad Al-Aly, director of the Clinical Epidemiology Center and chief of the Research and Education Service at the VA St. Louis Health Care System, said his team and others did similar research earlier in the pandemic, “for peanuts, a few hundred thousand dollars that generated evidence much more robustly, faster, years ahead of RECOVER, for a small, small, small, small fraction of the funds.”

At this point, more than four years in, “NIH should be laser-focused, laser-focused on finding treatment for long COVID,” he said.

That will be a bigger focus going forward. NIH got another $515 million this year for RECOVER and plans to put much of it toward clinical trials.

This fall, it held a kickoff meeting for the next phase of the RECOVER program, called RECOVER-TLC, which stands for Treating Long COVID. Now, Joseph Breen at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at NIH said it’s in the process of soliciting ideas for drugs and other treatments to trial.

“We have every intention of getting started as soon as possible,” he said. “In reality, we’re probably into next year.”

David Putrino, director of rehabilitation innovation for the Mount Sinai Health System in New York, has been doing long COVID research since 2020. He said how the clinical trials are designed will be critical.

“What we need to be doing is rapidly testing as many drug targets as possible, rather than taking big swings,” he said. Meaning that instead of putting all the funding into a few big, expensive trials of a couple of drugs, RECOVER could do a bunch of smaller trials.

“For a couple million dollars apiece, they could be testing 100 drugs. And they could be logging the responses of those 100 drugs, and they could be moving into more sophisticated clinical trial strategies,” Putrino said. “That is where I think we should be applying the money.”

Many long COVID patients and advocates are cautiously optimistic about this next phase of research. Charlie McCone, who has become something of an expert in his own illness and now volunteers with the Patient-Led Research Collaborative, was at the kickoff meeting and left feeling a little more hopeful.

“The NIH can do this right, they have to do this right,” he said. “And they need to do it fast, which we know is possible.”

But no matter what comes of this current slate of funding, he said more is going to be needed. “No disease is solved with a one-time investment. And so, just because this first billion dollars didn’t produce much does not mean the next billion and the next billion won’t.”

Some legislators are already pushing for additional funding. Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont Independent, along with several Democratic senators, introduced the Long COVID Research Moonshot Act in the Senate, and a companion bill has been introduced in the House. The Moonshot Act would provide $1 billion a year for 10 years for long COVID research. It has yet to be brought to the floor for a vote.

[lotus-tower]

For those who don't know, there's going to be a demonstration for Long Covid on March 15, which is Long Covid Awareness Day since 2023. You can find the LCDC website here.

Their stated goals:

1. Declare Long Covid a National Emergency. 2.  Implement Emergency Use Authorization for drug repurposing and trials. 3.  Establish annual funding for Long Covid programs and research to find a cure. 4.  Ensure racial and gender health equity in research, access to clinical trials, antiviral drug repurposing, preventative measures, educational campaigns, and social services.  5. Enact Clean Indoor Air Laws to prevent SARS-CoV-2 forward transmission in public spaces and forced-congregant settings. 6. Implement respirator use and clean air protections in healthcare facilities. Additionally, devise strategies to ensure immunocompromised patients or those with Long Covid are given reasonable accommodations and are not penalized. Enforce protected class status for people with Long Covid as disabled. 7.  Fast-track compassionate allowance and sufficient social support for people with Long Covid in addition to increased funding for Home and Community Based Services.  8.  Develop guidelines for physicians on Long Covid and continuing education on breaking research. 9.  Acknowledge that Long Covid affects children and implement specialized care immediately. 10. Public tracking of SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater at Publicly Owned Treatment Works and provide affordable PCR testing nationwide.  11. Establish regular White House press communication regarding progress toward stated goals and real time data for Covid transmission awareness.

There's a gofundme here to raise funds for a stage, sound equipment, respirators, and multimedia equipment in order to stream the event to those who can't physically attend. If you can spare a few bucks I encourage you to donate. Any leftover funds will go to Long Covid research.

If you have Long Covid or know someone who does, LCDC is also looking for stories/personal accounts for their media projects.

[stevishabitat]

Judge orders HHS, CDC and FDA to restore webpages and data : Shots - Health News : NPR

A federal judge has ordered federal health agencies to restore websites and datasets that were abruptly pulled down beginning in late January, prompting an outcry from medical and public health communities.

The temporary restraining order was granted in response to a lawsuit filed against the federal government by Doctors for America (DFA), a progressive advocacy group representing physicians, and the nonprofit Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group.

Last week, a spokesperson for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told NPR "changes to the HHS website and HHS division websites are in accordance with President Trump's January 20 Executive Orders, Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government and Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing."

The pages that are now set to be revived include information for patients about HIV testing and HIV prevention medication, guidance on contraceptives, datasets that show vulnerability to natural disasters and emergencies, and an action plan for improving enrollment of underrepresented populations in clinical trials.

Judge John Bates with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, who was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2001, said the sudden loss of these resources had jeopardized the work of clinicians and public health. "It bears emphasizing who ultimately bears the harm of defendants' actions: everyday Americans, and most acutely, underprivileged Americans, seeking healthcare," he wrote in his opinion.

The Department of Health and Human Services, the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have until midnight Tuesday to bring back the specific webpages cited in the lawsuit.

By the end of the week, the order directs the federal government to identify any other resources that physicians rely on to provide medical care and restore those as well.

Questions remain about how much information was changed

"This is a very strong decision," said Dorit Reiss, a law professor at the University of California College of the Law San Francisco. The order explains how the takedown of websites and data was "likely legally flawed" because it "lacked notice" and there was "no explanation for the broad action," she said. "It suggests the government is in a weak place for this case."

HHS didn't reply to NPR's request for comment on the order.

Many webpages that were initially removed have since reappeared on CDC, FDA and HHS websites, although it's still unclear how much remains missing and what information has been modified.

"There's a lot of shifting ground here where they tore down a lot of stuff. They put some of it back up, but not nearly all of it," said Zach Shelley, an attorney with Public Citizen Litigation Group. "Hopefully with this order, we get everything that's important back up."

The sudden loss of websites prompted a mad rush in the scientific community to download and archive data. Dr. Joshua Sharfstein was among those on a CDC advisory committee who wrote the CDC's acting director protesting the purge of data.

He said the advisers have now sent a second letter pointing out that they remain concerned about "how communities will be able to monitor diseases and receive guidance on current disease investigations," the possibility of "broad workforce reductions," and "disruptions in grant funding."

The judge's order underscores any changes to resources and data should be based on "reasoned decision-making," said Sharfstein, a professor of public health practice at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"Some of these websites provided actual recommendations on how to take care of patients," he said. "These are not just like books on the shelf. These are like heavily thumbed through manuals that people really need."

[darkmaga-returns]

STAT News reported that “Marks was one of the architects of Operation Warp Speed, the $18 billion U.S. effort to speed development of Covid-19 vaccines. He regularly embraced regulatory flexibility. And he spoke not infrequently about the importance of accelerated approval for next-generation treatments, including with those whose potential benefits weren’t always crystal-clear in clinical trial data.”

"Vaccine Mandates Are Not Going to Get Us THERE. It's Got to Be Compelling Evidence." - Vaccine Chief Peter Marks

During a 4-hour Public Health Workshop hosted by Duke University on March 20, 2025, Marks alluded to having contentious disputes with the higher-ups of the new Health & Human Services (HHS) administration (aka - Secretary Kennedy) over ‘the need for vaccine efficacy and vaccine safety data’ when FDA-approved vaccines can just be mandated.

[clivaldatabase]

Revolutionizing Clinical Research with Comprehensive Data

Clival Database offers advanced clinical trials databases in India, supporting clinical drug development through all clinical drug development phases. Partnering with leading organizations like Asiatic Clinical Research and Insite Clinical Research, Clival provides precise data insights to enhance trial efficiency. Trusted by clinical research organizations (CROs), it streamlines study management, accelerates drug approvals, and ensures compliance. With Clival Database, pharmaceutical companies and researchers gain reliable, real-time data solutions, driving innovation and success in global clinical trials.

[cro-services]

Helping Medicines Get Approved with Regulatory Submission at Clinfinite Solutions

Introduction

Medicines help people feel better when they are sick. But before a new medicine can be given to people, it needs to be checked to make sure it is safe. This process is called regulatory submission. Companies like Clinfinite Solutions help with this process to make sure medicines follow all rules and are safe for everyone.

What is Regulatory Submission?

Regulatory submission is the process of sending important information about a new medicine or treatment to the government for approval. Scientists work hard to make new medicines, but they cannot sell them right away. They need to show proof that the medicine works and does not harm people.

This proof includes test results, safety reports, and details about how the medicine was made. These reports are sent to health authorities like the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in the United States or other similar organizations in different countries. The government checks everything carefully before allowing the medicine to be sold.

Clinfinite Solutions helps companies prepare and send these reports. They make sure that everything is done correctly so that the medicine gets approved faster.

Why is Regulatory Submission Important?

Regulatory submission is very important because it helps keep people safe. If a medicine is not tested properly, it could have bad effects on health. The approval process makes sure that only safe medicines reach the market.

This process also helps in finding the best treatments. Scientists test medicines on volunteers to see if they work well. If the medicine is safe and effective, it can be approved and used by doctors to help patients. Without regulatory submission, it would be hard to know which medicines are safe.

Another reason why this process is important is that it keeps medicines of good quality. Companies cannot sell fake or harmful drugs because they must pass strict tests. Regulatory submission ensures that all medicines are made properly and meet high standards.

What is the Role of Clinfinite Solutions?

Clinfinite Solutions plays a big role in regulatory submission. They help companies collect all the needed documents and send them in the right way. If there are mistakes, they help fix them so that the approval process does not take too long.

Clinfinite Solutions also works with scientists and doctors to make sure all the research is correct. They help write reports and organize data so that everything is clear. This makes it easier for the government to check and approve the medicine.

Another important role of Clinfinite Solutions is to stay updated with the latest rules. Every country has different rules for approving medicines. Clinfinite Solutions keeps track of these rules and makes sure that companies follow them properly. This helps avoid delays and makes the process smoother.

Clinfinite Solutions also helps in clinical trials, where medicines are tested on people before approval. They make sure the tests are done correctly and that all results are recorded properly. This helps in proving that a medicine is safe and effective.

Conclusion

Regulatory submission is an important process that helps bring safe medicines to people. It makes sure that new drugs are tested properly before they are sold. Without this process, unsafe medicines could harm people.

Clinfinite Solutions plays a big role in helping companies with regulatory submission. They help in preparing reports, following rules, and making sure the approval process is smooth. Their work helps in bringing new and better medicines to the market safely.

With Clinfinite Solutions, the journey of a new medicine from the lab to the pharmacy becomes easier. This teamwork ensures that people get safe treatments and better healthcare.

[worksuremedpharma-blog]

WorkSure® is a Medpharma outsourcing company which offers impeccable services in #pharmacovigilance with profound experience of the team.

Read more at: https://www.worksure.org/pharmacovigilance-the-science-in-public-welfare/ Demo Video: https://youtu.be/gZ-qNxOqyWY?si=WZSqylrZrobmsNOq

#medicalaffairs #regulatoryaffairs #medicomarketing #patientsafety #healthcare

[orangerosebush]

Article is here, full text attached below.

ARTICLE TEXT:

Puberty blockers, which pause the physical changes of puberty such as breast development or facial hair, will now only be available to children as part of clinical research trials.

It follows a public consultation on the issue and an interim policy, and comes after NHS England commissioned an independent review in 2020 of gender identity services for children under 18.

That review, led by Dr Hilary Cass, followed a sharp rise in referrals to the Gender Identity Development Service (Gids) run by the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, which is closing at the end of March.

The clinic has come under repeated scrutiny.

In February 2022, Dr Cass published an interim report saying there was a need to move away from one unit and recommended the creation of regional services to better support youngsters.

She also pointed to a lack of long-term evidence and data collection on what happens to children and young people who are prescribed medication.

She added that Gids had not collected routine and consistent data “which means it is not possible to accurately track the outcomes and pathways that children and young people take through the service.”

Following the Tavistock’s closure, two new NHS services will now open in early April, situated in London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital and Alder Hey Children’s Hospital in Liverpool.

The NHS has said children attending these clinics will be supported by clinical experts in neurodiversity, paediatrics and mental health, “resulting in a holistic approach to care”.

Former prime minister Liz Truss, who has mooted an amendment to the Health and Equalities act, that includes a ban on the prescription of body-altering hormones to children questioning their sex, both privately and on the NHS, said: “I welcome NHS England’s decision to end the routine prescription of puberty blockers to children for gender dysphoria.

"I urge the government to back my Bill on Friday which will reinforce this in law and also prevent these drugs being supplied privately.”

Health minister, Maria Caulfield, said: “We have always been clear that children’s safety and wellbeing is paramount, so we welcome this landmark decision by the NHS.

“Ending the routine prescription of puberty blockers will help ensure that care is based on evidence, expert clinical opinion and is in the best interests of the child.”

The consultation on the future of services received more than 4,000 responses, including around a quarter from members of the public, 22% from patients, 21% from parents, 10% from trans adults and 5% from clinicians.

John Stewart, national director of specialised commissioning at NHS England said: “Given that the debate is often very polarised, so too were the responses to the consultation.

“Many people said the policy didn’t go far enough in terms of still allowing potential access (to puberty blockers) through research, and others saying clearly they disagreed fundamentally and that these should be routinely available to everyone who believes they need it.”

Regarding the new clinics, he said: “This is just the first step in building a regional model, where our aim is to establish between seven and eight specialist centres including the north and the south hubs over the next year to two years.”

Around 250 patients are expected to be transferred to the new clinics from Gids when they open.

Some 5,000 more children and young people are currently on the waiting list for referral into the new clinics.

[mariacallous]

Much of the IT and cybersecurity infrastructure underpinning the US health system is in danger of a possible collapse following a purge of IT staff and leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), four current and former agency workers tell WIRED. This could put vast troves of public health data, including the sensitive health records of hundreds of millions of Americans, clinical trial data, and more, at risk of exposure.

As a result of a reduction in force, or RIF, in the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO), the sources say, staff who oversee and renew contracts for critical enterprise services are no longer there. The same staff oversaw hundreds of contractors, some of whom play a crucial role in keeping systems and data safe from cyberattacks. And a void of leadership means that efforts to draw attention to what the sources believe to be a looming catastrophe have allegedly been ignored.

Thousands of researchers, scientists, and doctors lost their jobs earlier this month at HHS agencies critical to ensuring America’s health, such as the Centers for Disease Control and and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Hundreds of administrative staff were also subjected to a reduction in force. Many of these staffers were responsible for helping ensure that the mass of highly personal and sensitive information these agencies collect is kept secure.

Employees who were subject to the RIF, as well as some who remain at the agency, tell WIRED that without intervention, they believe the systems they managed could go dark, potentially putting the entire health care system at risk.

“Pretty soon, within the next couple of weeks, everything regarding IT and cyber at the department will start to operationally reach a point of no return,” one source, who was part of a team that managed these systems at HHS for a decade before being part of the RIF, alleges to WIRED.

Like many across the agency, administrative staff found out they were part of the RIF on April 1 in an email sent at 5 am Eastern, though a number of employees only realized they had been let go when their badges no longer worked when trying to access HHS buildings.

Among those impacted were half of the staff working at the OCIO—around 150 people, including the entire workforce at the Immediate Office of the CIO, which includes senior figures like the chief of staff, HR director, acquisition director, and budget director, sources tell WIRED. The CIO, Jennifer Wendel, who has worked in the federal government for almost three decades, is also departing, sources say, and will end her tenure next month. Wendel did not respond to a request for comment from WIRED.

“The suggestion that critical IT and cybersecurity functions at HHS are being left unsecured is simply untrue,” an HHS spokesperson tells WIRED. “Essential operations at HHS, including contract management and cybersecurity oversight—remain staffed and functional. It’s unfortunate that some former employees are spreading unfounded rumors. HHS remains committed to a secure, modernized HHS that serves the American people, not internal bureaucracy.”

One team that was purged from HHS managed over a hundred contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including crucial cybersecurity licenses. It also managed the renewal of contracts for hundreds of specialized contractors who perform critical tasks for the department, including a dozen cybersecurity contractors who work at the Computer Security Incident Response Center (CSIRC)—the primary component of the department’s overall cybersecurity program which is overseen by the chief information security officer.

While all of HHS’s agencies have their own cybersecurity and IT teams, the CSIRC is the only one that has visibility across the entire network of the department. This center, based in Atlanta, monitors the entire HHS network and is tasked with preventing, detecting, reporting, and responding to cybersecurity incidents at HHS.

“It is the department’s nerve center,” the source says. “It has direct links to DHS, CISA, Defense Health Agency, and the intelligence community.”

The contractors provide round-the-clock coverage on three eight-hour shifts every single day, monitoring the network for any possible outages or attacks from inside or outside the network. Those contracts are set to expire on June 21; while there is time to renew them, it’s not clear who is authorized to do so or knows how, since the entire office that oversees the process is no longer working at HHS.

Adding to the threat is the decision by the General Service Administration to terminate the lease for the CSIRC in Atlanta, effective December 31, 2025.

Many of the cybersecurity and monitoring tools the contractors use to monitor the networks are also due for renewal in the coming months.

If the situation is not addressed, “pretty soon, the department will be completely open to external actors to get at the largest databases in the world that have all of our public health information in them, our sensitive drug testing clinical trial information at the NIH or FDA or different organizations’ mental health records,” the source claims, echoing the opinions of other sources who spoke to WIRED.

In the weeks leading up to the RIF, some administrative staff did have interactions with Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) operatives, including Clark Minor, a software engineer who worked at Palantir for over a decade and was recently installed as the department’s chief information officer.

As one employee was detailing the work they did at the OCIO, they said, they got the sense that Minor—whose online résumé does not detail any experience in the federal government—seemed overwhelmed by the sheer scale of HHS, an agency that accounted for over a quarter of federal spending in 2024 and consists of an almost innumerable amount of offices and staff and operating divisions.

Minor has not provided guidance to the remaining HHS staff on the transition, according to two sources still at the agency.

Minor did not respond to a request for comment from WIRED.

Some internal systems are already breaking down, according to sources still working at HHS. One employee, who facilitates travel for HHS employees, says the RIF “set federal travel back to processes that were in place prior to the first Electronic Travel System contract in 2004.”

While sources who spoke to WIRED differed on exactly when and how the IT and cybersecurity infrastructure at the department might collapse, they all agreed that without a radical intervention in the coming weeks, the fallout could be catastrophic.

"If the US health system lost CMS, FDA, NIH, and CDC functionality indefinitely without warning, and no backup systems were available, this would be an unprecedented systemic shock," one source at the OCIO tells WIRED.

Current HHS workers say they have not been presented with a plan to remedy the looming crisis, and have seen no leadership from either the political appointees or DOGE operatives who have been installed at HHS.

“There is no transition, and those in charge are AWOL,” one person currently working at HHS tells WIRED, echoing the sense of “chaos” found in an in-depth investigation into HHS by Stat. “I’m doing nothing productive. I’m answering emails stating we cannot help, we cannot process, we have no guidance, we cannot operate. This ship has no captain whatsoever, and I’m playing in the band while the Titanic sinks.”