The primary goal of the Protocol Review and Monitoring System (PRMS) is to ensure that all human subjects research is of the highest scientific quality. This resource is available to over 1300 faculty members. Over the past 5 years, on average annual 542 faculty members utilized the PRMS and participated in human subjects research each year. PRMS is supported by 29 staff members under the direction of Dr. Maurie Markman, Vice President for Clinical Research. The core function of the PRMS is to provide a mechanism to assure adequate internal oversight of the scientific and research aspects of all institutional clinical trials. The focus is to review the scientific merit, progress, and priorities of the clinical research protocols conducted by the faculty. This function is coordinated by PRMS as a single source of service, support and oversight. The PRMS is made of up several subcommittees that are designated to provide scientific review and approval for new research protocols, as well as monitor the progress of the protocols. During the last five years, new services provided include a function that allows Regulatory Specialists to review new submissions for format and completeness of information and either reject or accept the submissions electronically. This includes the use of a specialized electronic information sheet (a resubmission memo) that lists amendments made prior to resubmitting the revised protocol document. This is a valuable tool that is also used during the review process when a protocol is initially submitted. The electronic review document provided by each assigned reviewer during the scientific review process can be compared to this resubmission memo to ensure all items of concern have been addressed by the investigator. Additionally, the electronic protocol eligibility, abstract, and informed consent documents for all trials that have been submitted through the PDOL are made available on an intranet web page that is accessible by the patient care units. The navigational web page provides protocol status information as well, including when a protocol has been closed to new subject accrual. This allows caregivers to have ready access to current protocol information from time of activation, during new subject accrual and treatment though completion of the protocol. This information is provided in real time and no delays occur after regulatory approval of the protocol. During the last fiscal year, the funds used to support the PRMS function were $246,418 (15%) from the Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG), $172,163 (10%) from user fees, and $1,259,771 (75%) from the institution. It is projected that in the next award cycle, the increase in support provided by the CCSG will alter the sources of funds such that the percentages provided by the CCSG ($258,228), the user fees ($286,937) and the institution ($1,526,868), will be 12%, 14% and 74%, respectively. The PRMS supported 2739 protocols from 599 cancer center members, of which 81% hold peer-reviewed funding. During the last several years, the number of new protocols managed by PRMS has remained constant. Protocols that do not meet the UTMDACC scientific standards are typically withdrawn from submission and review. While the volume of protocols has not increased, the activity involved in oversight has become increasingly more detailed due to the evolution of regulatory requirements.

Agency
National Institute of Health (NIH)
Institute
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
Type
Center Core Grants (P30)
Project #
3P30CA016672-37S2
Application #
8530375
Study Section
Subcommittee G - Education (NCI)
Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
2012-07-01
Budget End
2013-06-30
Support Year
37
Fiscal Year
2012
Total Cost
$2,882
Indirect Cost
$1,058
Name
University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Department
Type
DUNS #
800772139
City
Houston
State
TX
Country
United States
Zip Code
77030
Yedururi, Sireesha; Terpenning, Silanath; Gupta, Sanjay et al. (2017) Radiofrequency Ablation of Hepatic Tumor: Subjective Assessment of the Perilesional Vascular Network on Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography Before and After Ablation Can Reliably Predict the Risk of Local Recurrence. J Comput Assist Tomogr 41:607-613
Montalban-Bravo, G; Huang, X; Jabbour, E et al. (2017) A clinical trial for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes not eligible for standard clinical trials. Leukemia 31:318-324
Tadros, Audree B; Smith, Benjamin D; Shen, Yu et al. (2017) Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Margins <2?mm: Contemporary Outcomes With Breast Conservation. Ann Surg :
Ikoma, Naruhiko; Raghav, Kanwal; Chang, George (2017) An Update on Randomized Clinical Trials in Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 26:667-687
Alhuraiji, Ahmad; Jain, Nitin (2017) Immunofluorescence staining with an antipromyelocytic leukemia antibody for a rapid diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther 10:33-34
Lin, Heather Y; Bedrosian, Isabelle; Babiera, Gildy V et al. (2017) Using the National Cancer Data Base for quality evaluation to assess adherence to treatment guidelines for nonmetastatic inflammatory breast cancer. Cancer 123:2618-2625
Rozovski, Uri; Harris, David M; Li, Ping et al. (2017) Constitutive Phosphorylation of STAT3 by the CK2-BLNK-CD5 Complex. Mol Cancer Res 15:610-618
Masarova, Lucia; Kantarjian, Hagop; Garcia-Mannero, Guillermo et al. (2017) Harnessing the Immune System Against Leukemia: Monoclonal Antibodies and Checkpoint Strategies for AML. Adv Exp Med Biol 995:73-95
Palacios, Cristina; Daniel, Carrie R; Tirado-Gómez, Maribel et al. (2017) Dietary Patterns in Puerto Rican and Mexican-American Breast Cancer Survivors: A Pilot Study. J Immigr Minor Health 19:341-348
Gunther, Jillian R; Chadha, Awalpreet S; Shin, Ui Sup et al. (2017) Preoperative radiation dose escalation for rectal cancer using a concomitant boost strategy improves tumor downstaging without increasing toxicity: A matched-pair analysis. Adv Radiat Oncol 2:455-464

Showing the most recent 10 out of 10289 publications