Anesthesiology and Clinical Science Research

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Short Communication - Anesthesiology and Clinical Science Research (2023) Volume 7, Issue 4

From bench to bedside: Exploring the journey of clinical trials

Rouen Alwin *

Department of Neurosurgery, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA

*Corresponding Author:
Rouen Alwin
Department of Neurosurgery
Harvard University
Boston, MA, USA
E-mail: rouen.a@gmail.com

Received:25-Nov-2023, Manuscript No. AAACSR-23-136055; Editor assigned:27-Nov-2023, PreQC No. AAACSR-23-136055 (PQ); Reviewed:10-Dec-2023, QC No. AAACSR-23-136055; Revised:16-Dec-2023, Manuscript No. AAACSR-23-136055 (R); Published:22-Dec-2023, DOI:10.35841/ aaacsr-7.4.159

Citation: Alwin R. From bench to bedside: Exploring the journey of clinical trials. Anaesthesiol Clin Sci Res 2023;7(4):159

Visit for more related articles at Anesthesiology and Clinical Science Research

Introduction

Clinical trials represent a critical juncture in the journey of medical innovation, bridging the gap between scientific discovery and clinical application. From the laboratory bench to the patient's bedside, clinical trials play a pivotal role in evaluating the safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of new treatments, therapies, and interventions. In this article, we delve into the intricate process of clinical trials, exploring the key stages, stakeholders, and challenges involved in bringing promising medical discoveries to fruition [1].

Clinical trials typically progress through four distinct phases, each serving a specific purpose in the evaluation and development of new medical interventions. Phase I trials are the first step in testing experimental treatments in humans. These trials typically involve a small number of healthy volunteers and focus on assessing the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of the investigational drug or therapy. Phase I trials aim to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and identify any dose-limiting toxicities or adverse effects [2].

Phase II trials are designed to further evaluate the safety and efficacy of the investigational treatment in a larger group of patients with the target disease or condition. These trials provide preliminary evidence of therapeutic activity and help refine dosing regimens, treatment schedules, and patient selection criteria. Phase II trials may also explore different formulations or delivery methods of the investigational product [3].

Phase III trials are pivotal studies that aim to confirm the safety and efficacy of the investigational treatment in a larger, more diverse patient population. These trials are randomized, controlled, and often multicenter, comparing the investigational treatment to standard-of-care or placebo to assess superiority or non-inferiority. Phase III trials provide the definitive evidence needed for regulatory approval and market authorization [4].

Phase IV trials, also known as post-marketing or surveillance studies, are conducted after regulatory approval to monitor the long-term safety, effectiveness, and real-world outcomes of the approved treatment in a larger patient population. Phase IV trials provide additional evidence of the treatment's benefits and risks in diverse patient populations and clinical settings [5].

Investigators are responsible for designing, conducting, and overseeing the clinical trial at their respective research sites. They ensure compliance with study protocols, regulatory requirements, and ethical standards, and collaborate with study sponsors, regulatory agencies, and institutional review boards (IRBs) to ensure the integrity and validity of the research [6].

Study participants, or volunteers, are individuals who enroll in clinical trials to receive investigational treatments, contribute to medical knowledge, and potentially benefit from experimental therapies. Participants must provide informed consent and undergo screening to determine their eligibility for the study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria [7].

Study sponsors are organizations or entities that initiate, fund, or support clinical trials, including pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology firms, academic institutions, government agencies, and non-profit organizations. Sponsors are responsible for protocol development, study management, regulatory submissions, and financial oversight [8].

Regulatory agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) in Europe, oversee the conduct of clinical trials and evaluate the safety, efficacy, and quality of investigational treatments. Regulatory agencies review study protocols, assess data submissions, and grant regulatory approval for marketing authorization [9].

Institutional Review Boards (IRB) are independent ethics committees responsible for reviewing and approving the conduct of clinical trials to ensure the protection of participant rights, safety, and welfare. IRBs evaluate study protocols, informed consent documents, and participant recruitment strategies to ensure compliance with ethical principles and regulatory requirements [10].

Conclusion

Clinical trials represent a critical pathway for translating scientific discoveries into tangible benefits for patients and society. From bench to bedside, clinical trials are guided by rigorous scientific principles, ethical standards, and collaborative efforts among stakeholders. Despite the challenges and complexities inherent in clinical research, the potential impact of successful clinical trials on public health, medical practice, and patient outcomes is immense. By addressing challenges, fostering collaboration, and prioritizing patient-centric research, clinical trials continue to drive innovation, advance medical science, and improve the lives of patients worldwide.

References

  1. Allison T, Puce A, McCarthy G. Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2000;4(7):267-78.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Allsop SA, Wichmann R, Mills F, et al. Corticoamygdala transfer of socially derived information gates observational learning. Cell. 2018 May 31;173(6):1329-42.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Arsalidou M, Morris D, Taylor MJ. Converging evidence for the advantage of dynamic facial expressions. Brain topography. 2011;24(2):149-63.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Azzi JC, Sirigu A, Duhamel JR. Modulation of value representation by social context in the primate orbitofrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2012;109(6):2126-31.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Babiloni C, Vecchio F, Infarinato F, et al. Simultaneous recording of electroencephalographic data in musicians playing in ensemble. cortex. 2011;47(9):1082-90.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Allison T, Puce A, McCarthy G. Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2000;4(7):267-78.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Sosin DM, Sniezek JE, Waxweiler RJ. Trends in death associated with traumatic brain injury, 1979 through 1992. Success and failure. JAMA. 1995;273: 1778–80.

Indexed at, Google scholar

  1. Sosin DM, Sniezek JE, Thurman DJ. Incidence of mild and moderate brain injury in the United States, 1991. Brain Inj. 1996;10:47–54.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Pirko I, Fricke ST, Johnson AJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging, microscopy, and spectroscopy of the central nervous system in experimental animals. NeuroRx. 2005;2: 250–64.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

  1. Nagy KK, Joseph KT, Krosner SM, et al. The utility of head computed tomography after minimal head injury. J Trauma. 1999;46: 268–70.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref

Get the App