Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
Published on: January 28, 2020
The New First-in-Human EMA Guideline: Disruptive or Constructive? Outcomes From the First EUFEMED Discussion Forum
Kerstin Breithaupt-Grögler1, Tim Hardman2,3, Jan de Hoon4
1Association for Applied Human Pharmacology, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract:
The European Federation for Exploratory Medicines Development (EUFEMED) organized a meeting in Leuven, Belgium entitled 'The new FIH EMA guideline: Disruptive or constructive?' to provide a forum for stakeholders to discuss the guideline's operational impact. The revised EMA Guideline on strategies to identify and mitigate risks for first-in-human (FIH) and early clinical trials with investigational products was published on 20 July 2017. The revision gave guidance on sentinel dosing/staggering of subjects within a multiple-ascending dose (MAD) clinical trial, permissible maximum exposure/investigation of supra-therapeutic doses and dose escalations above the no-observed adverse effect level. As the guidelines came into operation on 1 February, 2018 it was assumed that by the date of the meeting many early phase stakeholders had gathered sufficient first-hand experience of working within the guideline to discuss their thoughts on its impact. The concluding part of the meeting focused on the possible differences between European countries in handling the revised FIH guideline and ways of achieving harmonization. Information on current industry practice was gathered by online polling during the meeting, where perception of the revised guideline as either 'disruptive' or 'constructive' was explored at the start and at the end of the Forum along with recommendations on reducing future regulatory discordance. It was generally agreed that the necessary changes encompassed by new guidelines included both constructive and disruptive aspects. The final vote on whether the new FIH guideline is disruptive or constructive was taken by 69 delegates: 51% stated that it was both constructive and disruptive, 48% decided on constructive, none on disruptive and 1% were still undecided. It was generally accepted that stakeholders need to continue in a process of stakeholder engagement and discussion, particularly on critical safety issues. Such an approach allows partners to adopt a proactive approach to sharing best practice. For example, attendees agreed that a 'Question and Answer' document harmonized between the European agencies is required for the sentinel approach and for the selection of supratherapeutic doses.
More Related Videos
08:27Highly Efficient Gene Disruption of Murine and Human Hematopoietic Progenitor Cells by CRISPR/Cas9
Published on: April 10, 2018
05:31Author Spotlight: Modeling an Aspect of Preeclampsia in Female Mice Using Hypoxic Human Placenta-Derived Small Extracellular Vesicles
Published on: January 26, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation II
Timely documentation is crucial to ensure continuity of care for patients. Any delays in recording or reporting medical information can result in medical errors and even adverse patient outcomes. From medication administration to diagnostic test results, every detail must be accurately and promptly documented to provide the best possible care for patients.
Legal Guidelines for Documentation
Predicting Reaction Outcomes
Guidelines for Sketching a Curve
Guidelines for Nursing Documentation I
Factual:
The following points emphasize the significance of upholding accurate and unbiased documentation in healthcare.