Clinical Research Regulation For Canada and Sierra Leone

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the CanadaFDA, Health Canada (HC) reviews, evaluates, and approves applications for clinical trials using authorized therapeutic products. HC also approves the sale or importation of drugs for use in clinical trials. (See the Manufacturing & Import section for additional information on importation.) As delineated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, institutional ethics committee (EC) review is required for each clinical trial site and may occur in parallel with HC’s clinical trial application (CTA) review and approval. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100. See CAN-23 and CAN-19 for background information on HC’s scope of assessment.

Per the CanadaFDA, a “therapeutic product” is defined as a drug or device, or any combination of drugs and devices, but does not include natural health products; and “therapeutic product authorization” refers to a license that is approved for the import, sale, advertisement, manufacture, preparation, preservation, packaging, labeling, storage, or testing of a therapeutic product. As per the G-CanadaCTApps, a drug is defined as a pharmaceutical, biologic, gene therapy, blood product, vaccine, and radiopharmaceutical for human use that is to be tested in a clinical trial. HC’s scope of assessment includes clinical trials (Phases I - III) using:

Drugs not authorized for sale in Canada in development and in comparative bioavailability studies
Marketed drugs where the proposed use of the drug for one (1) of the following is different: indication(s) and clinical use; target patient populations(s); route(s) of administration; or dosage regimen(s)

Clinical Trial Review Process

As set forth in the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-23, HC’s Health Products and Food Branch (HPFB) coordinates the CTA approval process. The G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-23 state that prior to initiating the trial, the sponsor must file a CTA to the appropriate HPFB Directorate. CTAs involving pharmaceutical drugs should be sent to the Pharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (PDD), and CTAs involving biologics and/or radiopharmaceuticals should be sent to the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD).

The G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-23 indicate that upon receipt of a CTA, the HPFB Directorate (PDD/BRDD) screens the application package for completeness. If deficiencies are found, the Directorate sends the sponsor a Request for Clarification or a Screening Rejection Letter. If the Directorate finds the application complete, an acknowledgement letter is issued to indicate the 30-day default review period commenced on the date of receipt.

Per the G-CanadaCTApps, once a clinical trial is authorized, the sponsor is allowed to sell or import a drug for use in a trial, if a CTA has been filed with HC and has not received an objection within 30 days. As delineated in the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-23, if the clinical trial is authorized, a No Objection Letter (NOL) is issued. If the CTA is rejected, a Not Satisfactory Notice (NSN) is issued. As specified in the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-23, during the review period, the Directorate may request additional information from the sponsor, who has two (2) calendar days to provide such information. Please see the G-CanadaCTApps for special requirements regarding reviews of comparative bioavailability studies and joint reviews of clinical trials covering a combination of devices, biologics, and pharmaceuticals. See the Submission Process section for detailed application submission requirements.

Per the G-CanadaCTApps, soon after HC issues an NOL, it will publish the following information about the clinical trial in HC’s publicly accessible database:

Protocol number
Protocol title
Drug name
Medical condition
Study population
Authorization date
Sponsor name
HC control number
Trial start and end dates, if known

The CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps also delineate that a clinical trial application-amendment (CTA-A) is required for proposed changes to a previously authorized study when the changes to clinical trial drug supplies affect the quality or safety of the drug, or when the changes to an authorized protocol alter the risk to clinical trial participants, or both. CTA-As must be authorized by HC prior to implementation of the changes. However, if the sponsor is required to immediately implement changes because the clinical trial or the use of the clinical trial drug endangers the health of participants or other persons, the sponsor may immediately make the amendment without prior review by HC. Sponsors must notify HC of this change, provide the relevant rationale in support of the immediate implementation, and file a CTA-A that clearly identifies the change and rationale for immediate implementation of the change within 15 days after the amendment implementation date. In addition, sponsors may make the following changes immediately if it notifies HC in writing within 15 days after the date of the change: a change to the chemistry and manufacturing information that does not affect the quality or safety of the drug; or a change to the protocol that does not alter the risk to the health of a participant.

Per the CanadaFDR, HC will suspend the authorization to sell or import a drug for clinical trial purposes if it has reasonable grounds to believe that:

The sponsor has contravened any relevant laws or regulations
Any information submitted in respect of the drug or clinical trial is false or misleading
The sponsor has failed to comply with good clinical practices
The sponsor has failed to provide information or samples as required by the regulation

See the CanadaFDR for additional details on HC’s suspension and cancellation responsibilities.

What is the Health Products and Food Branch?

Clinical Trial Site Information form

1.2, 2.1, 2.3-2.7, and Appendix 1

5.1, 5.2, 5.5, and 5.6

2 and Part II (Section 30 (1.2))

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.002, C.05.005-.008, and C.05.016-.017))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

In accordance with the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) is the regulatory authority responsible for reviewing, evaluating, and approving applications for clinical trials using registered and unregistered investigational products (IPs). The scope of the PBSL’s assessment includes all clinical trials (Phases I-IV). As delineated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, clinical trial application submissions to the PBSL and the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), may be made in parallel in the case of a public health emergency or as deemed fit by the PBSL.

Clinical Trial Review Process

As set forth in the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the PBSL coordinates the clinical trial application process. The SL-GCPs states that the sponsor/principal investigator (PI) must apply to the PBSL for approval to conduct a trial for a non-registered drug or a registered drug for new indications. The PBSL is responsible for reviewing the study design, which involves reviewing all significant ethical questions. The PBSL does a thorough scientific review of all applications for clinical trials to be conducted in Sierra Leone. According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL must issue a Clinical Trial Certificate to authorize the initiation and conduct of the clinical trial.

As delineated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL will inform the applicant in writing about the receipt of a valid clinical trial application or the formal grounds for non-acceptance, and the applicant must address formal grounds for non-acceptance. If changes are required and the applicant fails to modify the application correspondingly within a maximum of 30 working days, following the reasoned objections, the application will be deemed rejected. During evaluation, additional documents or changes may be requested through a query letter. Once a query has been raised and issued to the applicant, the process stops until the PBSL receives a written response to the query. If the PBSL requires changes to the application and the applicant fails to modify the application correspondingly within a maximum of 90 days following the reasoned objections, the application will be deemed rejected. See Figure 1 in Section 5.17 of the G-SLAppClinTrial for more details on the PBSL’s clinical trial authorization process.

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that any proposed amendment to the trial application, trial arrangements, and IP must be submitted to the SLESRC and the PBSL for approval before such amendments are carried out. If the amendments are substantial and are likely to have an impact on the safety of the trial participants, or are likely to change the interpretation of the scientific documents in support of the conduct of the trial, the sponsor must notify PBSL of the reasons for, and the content of, the amendments. For more details on amendment requirements, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the Clinical Trial Certificate must be renewed annually with an application for renewal to the PBSL. A Clinical Trial Certificate will be revoked if conditions for which the certificate was issued are violated.

The G-SLAppClinTrial further states that if a clinical trial application is rejected by the PBSL, any person or institution may appeal the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the decision, to request PBSL review or reconsideration of the initial decision. The applicant must give grounds for review for each reason given in the clinical trial rejection. The grounds for the request must be based on the information that was submitted in the application. Upon review of the appeal application, the PBSL must provide the appeal application decision in writing, including a statement of reasons (e.g., findings, references to evidence, and reasons for the decision). For more information on appeal contents and timelines, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

The G-SLInspect indicates that clinical trial inspections through on-site visits form part of the PBSL’s monitoring activities. Periodic good clinical practice (GCP) inspections of trial sites are conducted to ensure that the facilities used continue to be acceptable throughout the clinical investigation. The inspections may be carried out randomly and/or for specific reasons and are either announced or unannounced. An inspection would consist of a comparison of the procedures and practices of the PI with the commitments set out in the protocol and reports submitted to the PBSL by the investigator or the sponsor. See the G-SLInspect for more information.

Expedited Review During a Public Health Emergency

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, if expedited review of a clinical trial during a public health emergency is anticipated, the applicant should inform the PBSL in writing. This will allow for a review team to be assembled and plans to be made to manage the workload as well as interactions with other oversight bodies such as the SLESRC. To ensure a rapid start of the clinical study, the PBSL will conduct simultaneous review, rather than sequential review, of the application with the SLESRC. For more information on expedited review, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

Other Considerations

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that the PBSL may accept the decisions or scientific opinions of other national regulatory authorities, regional bodies, and international bodies if the IP or trial has been authorized by:

International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) founding regulatory members
ICH standing regulatory members
ICH regulatory members
ICH legislative and administrative authorities
The African Vaccine Regulatory Forum (AVAREF) at a joint review meeting facilitated by the World Health Organization (WHO) with the provision of a favorable scientific opinion
Any other regulatory decision deemed appropriate by the PBSL

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL may also consider an application for joint or assisted review by multiple national regulatory authorities and ECs for certain medical products of high public health value to countries on the African continent. For more information, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

For information on applications involving biosimilar products, see the G-SLBiosimilar.

4.0, 5.0-5.1, and 5.28

1.0, 5.1, 5.6, 5.10, 5.12-5.17, Appendix IV, Appendix V, and Appendix XI

Regulatory Fees

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

According to CAN-33, there are no fees to submit a clinical trial application in Canada.

Question 5

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone

As per the G-SLAppClinTrial, the applicant is responsible for paying a non-refundable fee to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) to submit a clinical trial application for authorization. As delineated below, the authorization fees for foreign sponsored clinical trials of therapeutics, vaccines, and other biological products are as follows:

Industry Funded (Phase I): $6,500 USD
Industry Funded (Phase II): $6,500 USD
Industry Funded (Phase III): $7,000 USD
Research Institution Funded: $5,000 USD
Protocol Amendment: $1,000 USD
Expedited Protocol Review: $1,200 USD
Renewal of Clinical Trial Certificate (yearly): $100 USD

For locally sponsored clinical trials of therapeutics, vaccines, and other biological products the fees are as follows:

Investigator/Local Phases: $2,000 USD
Protocol Amendment: $750 USD
Expedited Protocol Review: $900 USD
Renewal of Clinical Trial Certificate (yearly): $50 USD

Payment Instructions

No information is currently available regarding payment instructions for the clinical trial application fee to the PBSL.

5.1 and Appendix I

Ethics Committee

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

As indicated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, Canada has a decentralized process for the ethical review of clinical trial applications, and requires the sponsor to obtain institutional ethics committee (EC) approval for each participating trial site. (Note: institutional ECs are referred to as Research Ethics Boards (REBs) in Canada.) Canadian provinces may have varying requirements, and, therefore, the sponsor should consult with the applicable province(s) for more information.

Per CAN-35 and CAN-13, all proposed or ongoing research involving human participants carried out by, funded by, or otherwise under the auspices of Health Canada (HC) or the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) must obtain approval from a joint EC representing those two (2) agencies—as well as complying with the CanadaFDR and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50. This joint EC is known as the HC-PHAC REB. Further, if an institution is conducting an HC- or PHAC-funded project, the HC-PHAC REB must review and approve the research even if it has been previously reviewed and approved by another EC. See CAN-35 for details on the HC-PHAC REB’s development, responsibilities, and composition. HC’s operational policy (CAN-13) outlines policies and procedures that the joint HC-PHAC REB must follow when reviewing clinical trials.

Institutional ECs are required to comply with the provisions delineated in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, and CAN-52. Note that per CAN-50, HC-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100. In addition, institutional ECs are guided by the G-TCPS2. Jointly developed by Canada’s three (3) federal research agencies: the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the G-TCPS2 is a policy that sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs. However, only CIHR-, NSERC-, and SSHRC-funded institutions are required to comply with this guideline as a condition of funding. According to CAN-14, the CIHR, the NSERC, and the SSHRC created the Panel on Research Ethics (PRE) to promote the ethical conduct of research involving human participants. The PRE develops, interprets, and implements the G-TCPS2.

Ethics Committee Composition

As delineated in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, and CAN-52, institutional ECs must have at least five (5) members representing a mixed gender composition, the majority of which are Canadian citizens or permanent residents, and must include:

Two (2) members from a scientific discipline, with broad experience in the relevant research methods and areas, one (1) of whom is from a medical or dental discipline
One (1) member knowledgeable in ethics
One (1) member knowledgeable in relevant Canadian biomedical research laws
One (1) member from a nonscientific discipline
One (1) community representative

The G-TCPS2 mirrors these EC composition requirements. As mentioned earlier, only CIHR-, NSERC-, and SSHRC-funded institutions are required to comply with this guidance as a condition of funding.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

According to CAN-52, institutional ECs must establish written standard operating procedures (SOPs) to cover the entire review process. The SOPs should include EC composition, meeting schedules, notifications, frequency of reviews, protocol deviations, reporting to the EC, and recordkeeping. Further, ECs should make decisions at announced meetings where a quorum is present. Only those members who participate in the EC review and discussion should vote, provide their opinion, or advise. For detailed EC procedures and information on other administrative processes, see CAN-52. For examples of EC SOPs, see CAN-13 for the HC-PHAC REB operational policy.

2 and 3

Introduction, 1.24, 1.27, and 2.6, 3

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

About the REB and Policies, Guidelines, and Resources

1.2, 1.4, 2.1, and 2.7

5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.10

Introduction and Chapter 6 (Articles 6.4 and 6.10)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.002, C.05.005, C.05.006, and C.05.010))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that in Sierra Leone, the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC) fulfills the functions of the ethics committee (EC) (known as an Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) in Sierra Leone). Ethical clearance for all phases of clinical trials involving humans must be sought from the SLESRC. The SLESRC is responsible for ensuring the protection of the rights, safety, and well-being of trial participants, and providing assurance of that protection by reviewing, approving, and providing comments on trial protocols and the suitability of the investigator(s), facilities, and the methods and materials to be used in obtaining and documenting informed consent of the trial participants.

Ethics Committee Composition

As per the SL-GCPs, the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) should consist of members who collectively have the qualifications and experience required to review and evaluate the scientific, medical, and ethical aspects of a proposed clinical trial. Specifically, it is recommended that the EC should include:

At least five (5) members

At least one (1) member whose primary area of interest is nonscientific

At least one (1) member who is independent of the institution/trial site

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

As set forth in the SL-GCPs, the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) must perform its functions according to written standard operating procedures (SOPs), maintain written records of its activities and meeting minutes, and comply with good clinical practice (GCP) and other applicable regulatory requirements. An EC must make its decisions at announced meetings where a quorum, as stipulated in the SOPs, is present. Only those EC members who are independent of the trial’s principal investigator (PI) and sponsor should vote or provide an opinion on any trial-related matters. In addition, only members who participate in the EC review process and discussion should vote and provide their opinion.

The SL-GCPs also states that the EC must retain all relevant records (e.g., written procedures, membership lists, lists of occupations/affiliations of members, submitted documents, minutes of meetings, and correspondence) for at least three (3) years after the study’s conclusion, and make them available to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) upon request. The EC may be asked by investigators, sponsors, or the PBSL to provide its written procedures and membership lists.

5.2-5.3

4.0 and 5.1

Scope of Review

Last content review/update: December 23, 2024

Overview

According to the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, the G-TCPS2, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), the primary scope of information assessed by institutional ethics committees (ECs) (called Research Ethics Boards (REBs) in Canada) relates to maintaining and protecting the dignity and rights of human research participants and ensuring their safety throughout their participation in a clinical trial. ECs must also pay special attention to reviewing informed consent and protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed vulnerable. (See the Vulnerable Populations; Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates; Prisoners; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these populations.) Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

CAN-52, which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, also states that ECs must ensure an independent, timely, and competent review of all ethical aspects of the clinical trial protocol. They must act in the interests of the potential research participants and the communities involved by evaluating the possible risks and expected benefits to participants, and they must verify the adequacy of confidentiality and privacy safeguards. See CAN-52 for detailed ethical review guidelines.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

As per the CanadaFDR and CAN-52, HC must approve a clinical trial application (CTA) and an institutional EC(s) must give ethical clearance prior to a sponsor initiating a clinical trial. In addition, as delineated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, institutional EC review for each clinical trial site may occur in parallel with HC’s CTA review and approval. Once HC completes its review, the department issues a No Objection Letter (NOL) if the CTA is approved. However, per the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, CAN-6, and CAN-30, HC will not authorize the sponsor to begin the clinical trial until an institutional EC approval for each participating trial site is submitted. The sponsor should use the Clinical Trial Site Information Form (CAN-6) to submit the required information. The CanadaFDR also states that the EC must review and approve any protocol amendments prior to those changes being implemented. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs, requires EC review and approval of research involving living human participants and human biological materials. Further, ECs must have procedures in place to receive and respond to reports of new information, including, but not limited to, safety data, unanticipated issues, and newly discovered risks.

See TCPS2-InterpReview for the Panel on Research Ethics (PRE)’s interpretations of the G-TCPS2, including on the EC’s review of secondary use of non-identifiable information, delegated review of minimal risk studies, and ongoing review.

The G-TCPS2 lays out options, procedures, and considerations for the ethics review of multi-jurisdictional research either entirely within Canada, or in Canada and other countries. An institutional EC may approve alternative review models for research with multiple ECs and/or institutions but remains responsible for the ethics and conduct of research in its jurisdiction or under its auspices regardless of where the research is conducted. The SingleECRev provides guidance on the G-TCPS2’s single EC review model for multi-jurisdictional minimal risk, which seeks to streamline the research ethics review process where additional ethics reviews are not expected to add greater participant protections. In line with a proportionate approach to research ethics review, if research is of minimal risk and spans multiple jurisdictions, institutions that have approved the use of the single EC review model authorize the review of the research by one (1) EC. See the G-TCPS2 for more information about the various review models for multi-jurisdictional research.

Per CAN-8, an attestation must be completed by the EC that reviewed and approved the clinical trial. The completed attestation must be retained by the clinical trial sponsor for a period of 15 years. The attestation should not be submitted to HC unless requested. (See the Submission Process section for detailed submission requirements.)

The G-TCPS2 directs the researcher to submit an annual report to enable the EC to evaluate the continued ethical acceptability of the research. Per the G-CanadaCTApps, in the event that an EC terminates or suspends any prior approval or favorable opinion, it must document its views in writing, clearly identifying the trial, the documents reviewed, and the date for the termination or suspension.

1.2, 1.4, 2.1, 2.5, and 2.7

5.1, 5.2, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.10

Introduction, and Chapters 1-2, 6, 8, and 11

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.005, C.05.006, and C.05.010))

1.27, 2, 3, and 5.11

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the primary scope of information assessed by the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), relates to protecting the well-being and rights of research participants and ensuring their safety throughout their participation in a clinical trial.

As per the SL-GCPs, the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) must also pay special attention to trials that may include vulnerable subjects.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

As indicated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, clinical trial application submissions to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) and the SLESRC may be made in parallel in the case of a public health emergency or as deemed fit by the PBSL. For parallel submissions, the PBSL requires proof of the application’s submission to the SLESRC, as well as any updated versions of documents or information as requested by the SLESRC.

The G-SLEthics further specifies that the principal investigator (PI) must obtain approval for a clinical trial from the SLESRC. The PI should submit a proposal along with other required documentation to the SLESRC Chair at least two (2) calendar months prior to the anticipated commencement of the proposed study.

The SL-GCPs requires that the EC review a proposed clinical trial within a reasonable time and document its views in writing, clearly identifying the trial, the documents reviewed, and the dates for the following: approval/favorable opinion; modifications required prior to its approval/favorable opinion; disapproval/negative opinion; and termination/suspension of any prior approval/favorable opinion. The EC must conduct continuing review of each ongoing trial at intervals appropriate to the degree of risk to human participants, but at least once per year.

There is no stated expiration date for EC approval in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the SL-GCPs, or the G-SLEthics.

(See the Submission Process and Timeline of Review sections for detailed submission process requirements.)

5.1

4.0 and 5.1

Ethics Committee Fees

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

Institutional ethics committees (ECs) may independently decide whether to charge fees to conduct protocol reviews. For example, an institutional EC may require industry sponsors or other for-profit organizations to pay a fee. See specific examples of institutional fee requirements in CAN-3 and CAN-1.

REB Review Fees

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee

The G-SLEthics indicates that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), requires the principal investigator (PI) to pay a nonrefundable administrative fee to submit a protocol for ethical review and approval. The fees are as follows:

For self-funded, individual Sierra Leonean researchers based in Sierra Leone: 300,000 Leones
For graduate students studying in Sierra Leone: 200,000 Leones
For Sierra Leonean students studying abroad: $100 United States Dollars (USD)
For Sierra Leonean academics abroad: $150 USD
For all foreign students studying abroad: $200 USD
For self-funded, international researchers: $400 USD
For national/local non-governmental organizations (NGOs)/community-based organizations (CBOs): 2,000,000 Leones
For international NGOs based in Sierra Leone and international universities conducting non-clinical research: 4,000,000 Leones
For multinational institutions, donor agencies, and institutions not ordinarily based in Sierra Leone: $1,500 USD
For exclusively government funded studies: 500,000 Leones (must be submitted with a cover letter from the Permanent Secretary of the relevant Ministry or the Chief Medical Officer in the case of the Ministry of Health and Sanitation (MoHS))
For any amendment made to a previously approved application: 25% of the current fee for the first request, 50% for the second, and 100% for subsequent ones. Sierra Leonean students are exempt from this charge.
For an application extension: 25% of the original fee
For exclusively electronic applications: additional $50 USD

Payment Instructions

No information is currently available regarding payment instructions for the SLESRC.

Oversight of Ethics Committees

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

There are no applicable regulations or guidance regarding the registration, auditing, and accreditation of institutional ethics committees (ECs).

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

SLE-3 indicates that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), does not have a supervisory or oversight mandate over institutional ECs for health research. Few institutions have their own institutional ECs.

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

No applicable requirements.

Submission Process

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, Canada requires the sponsor to obtain clinical trial authorization from Health Canada (HC) prior to initiating the trial. The sponsor must file a clinical trial application (CTA) to the appropriate Directorate within HC’s Health Products and Food Branch (HPFB). In addition, as delineated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, the sponsor may submit a CTA for clinical trial authorization to the HC in parallel with its submission to an institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as a Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada) for a favorable ethical opinion. However, per the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, CAN-6, and CAN-30, HC will not authorize the sponsor to begin the clinical trial until an institutional EC approval (provided in the required Clinical Trial Site Information (CTSI) form (CAN-6)) for each participating trial site is submitted. The HCNotice-CTSIForm indicates that the CTSI form improves efficiencies and supports the submission of CTAs using the electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) format. See CAN-30 for instructions on filling out and submitting CAN-6.

CAN-19 provides a full list of HC’s forms for drug-related applications and submissions. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

Regulatory Submission

Per the G-CanadaCTApps, CTAs (CAN-4) should be sent directly to the appropriate HPFB Directorate for review—the Pharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (PDD) for pharmaceutical drugs or the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD) for biological drugs and radiopharmaceuticals. The outer label should be clearly identified with "Clinical Trial Application." Per CAN-44, applicants must submit CTAs electronically in either eCTD format or non-eCTD format. According to the G-MDSA, HC does not accept paper copies of CTAs, CTA amendments, and CTA notifications.

The G-MDSA and the G-CanadaCTApps indicate that sponsors may request a pre-submission/application meeting with the appropriate Directorate within the HPFB if they have any questions or concerns prior to filing a CTA. Additional details on requesting a meeting and meeting procedures are available in the aforementioned guidance documents. According to CAN-4, the submission can be in French or English. For CTAs that use pharmacometric approaches, sponsors should consider the policy statements in G-Pharmacometrics. Pharmacometrics is the science of using quantitative analysis and modelling and simulation approaches to inform and enhance drug development and regulatory review. In addition, see the G-CTACell for guidance on preparing CTAs for use of cell therapy products in humans.

Per the CanadaFDR, an application by a sponsor for authorization to sell or import a drug for the purposes of a clinical trial must be submitted to HC, signed and dated by the sponsor’s senior medical or scientific officer in Canada and senior executive officer. The sponsor’s clinical trial attestation must be submitted with the application (CAN-4). For guidance on completing CAN-4, see the G-DrugApp.

eCTD Electronic Submission

As indicated in the G-eCTD, clinical trial applications in eCTD format are recommended, not mandatory. However, once a sponsor files a regulatory activity in eCTD format, all additional information and subsequent regulatory activities for the same dossier must be filed in eCTD format. CAN-36 explains that prior to filing the first regulatory transaction for a dossier in eCTD format, the sponsor must request a dossier ID using the online dossier ID request. Per the ElecSubms, CAN-20 is the request form for biological clinical trial dossiers and CAN-21 is for pharmaceutical clinical trial dossiers. A request for a dossier ID should be sent a maximum of eight (8) weeks prior to submitting the CTA. In addition, applicants should review the Rules-eCTD for validation rules before submission. (Note: As per ElecSubms, G-eCTD and CAN-36 are only available upon request at no-reply.ereview.non-reponse@hc-sc.gc.ca. Please ensure the text 'Request for eCTD Guidance Document' is in the subject line of the email.)

Per the G-eCTD and CAN-28, all regulatory transactions in eCTD format must be sent via the Common Electronic Submissions Gateway (CESG) (CAN-25), except for those exceeding 10 gigabytes (GB) in size. The CESG allows users to submit secure regulatory transactions electronically to HC, including CTAs. The G-eCTD and CAN-36 describe how to file CTAs and other clinical trial regulatory transactions (e.g., CTA amendments, responses to requests for information, and other in-scope activities) in eCTD format to CESG. The G-eCTD clarifies that prior to using the CESG for sending transactions, sponsors must register as a trading partner. To access and use CESG, CAN-34 instructs sponsors to follow these steps:

Register as a trading partner with the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) by completing the FDA Electronic Submissions Gateway (ESG) (CAN-51) registration for an account (CAN-47).
Send regulatory transactions to HC by selecting “HC” as the center on the FDA ESG system; CTAs intended for HC will be automatically redirected.

For detailed information on how to become a trading partner and send regulatory transactions, refer to CAN-25 and the FDA User Guide (CAN-47).

As indicated in the G-eCTD, the following media formats are acceptable for eCTD transactions greater than 10 GB: Universal Serial Bus (USB) 2.0 or 3.0 drive; or portable external hard drive with USB 2.0 or 3.0 interfaces. (Contact HC at hc.ereview.sc@canada.ca for other media formats that may be acceptable at the time of filing.) A paper copy of the cover letter must accompany the media (unless otherwise indicated), and a pre-paid envelope must be provided if the media is to be returned. The complete regulatory transaction must be provided on a single drive, and the label on the drive should contain the following information:

Stakeholder Name
Brand Name
Dossier ID, which is based on the protocol number
Sequence (regulatory transaction) number

Media must be mailed to HC at the address below:

Health Canada
Finance Building
101 Tunney’s Pasture Driveway
Address Locator: 0201A1
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K9

See the G-CESG, the G-eCTD, CAN-47, CAN-34, CAN-36, CAN-25, and CAN-28 for details on registering as a trading partner for CESG transactions, how to use CESG, and submitting CTAs in eCTD format. (Note: As per ElecSubms, G-CESG is only available upon request at no-reply.ereview.non-reponse@hc-sc.gc.ca. Please ensure the text 'Request for eCTD Guidance Document' is in the subject line of the email.)

Non-eCTD Electronic Submission

For non-eCTD electronic submissions, G-Non-eCTD indicates that HC requires both PDF and MS-Word formats for the CTA (CAN-4). The PDF documents must be generated from electronic sources (not scanned material), except when access to an electronic source document is unavailable or where a signature is required. It is important that PDF files be properly bookmarked and hyperlinked. Documents that legally require signatures may be signed with an electronic signature, or the signature page can be printed, signed, scanned, and saved as a PDF file. The cover letter does not require a signature, but should include a printed name, phone number, and email address. All regulatory submissions should be validated prior to transmitting to HC. For validation rules, see the Rules-Non-eCTD. The ElecSubms contains a zip file of the folder structure for clinical trial non-eCTD submissions. (Note: As per ElecSubms, G-Non-eCTD is only available upon request at no-reply.ereview.non-reponse@hc-sc.gc.ca. Please ensure the text 'non eCTD Guidance Document' is in the subject line of the email.)

Per the G-Non-eCTD, CTA submissions to the appropriate Directorate within HC’s HPFB must be in one (1) of these accepted media formats:

Compact Disc-Recordable (CD-R) conforming to the Joliet specification
USB 2.0 or 3.0 drive
Digital Versatile Disc (DVD-RAM and DVD+R/-R) in Universal Disk Format (UDF) standard

All media should be labelled and contain the following information:

Stakeholder Name
Brand Name
Dossier ID (if known)

Subsequent to burning the CD/DVD or transferring data to a drive, applicants should ensure that all files can be opened, files are not corrupted, and that "Thumb.db" files are removed.

As per the G-Non-eCTD, CAN-18, and CAN-17, non-eCTD CTAs involving pharmaceutical drugs should be sent to PDD, and CTAs involving biologics and/or radiopharmaceuticals should be sent to BRDD at the addresses listed below.

Office of Clinical Trials
Pharmaceutical Drugs Directorate
Health Canada
5th Floor, Holland Cross, Tower B
1600 Scott Street
Address Locator: 3105A
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1A 0K9
General Inquiries E-mail: oct.enquiries-requetes.bec@hc-sc.gc.ca

Office of Regulatory Affairs
Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate
Ground Floor, Health Canada Building 6
100 Eglantine Driveway
Address Locator: 0601C
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1A 0K9
General Enquiries E-mail: brdd.ora@hc-sc.gc.ca

Per the HCNotice-CTSIForm, questions related to pharmaceutical CTSI forms should be sent to: oct.enquiries-requetes.bec@hc-sc.gc.ca and questions related to biologic CTSI forms should be sent to brdd.ora@hc-sc.gc.ca.

Per the G-Non-eCTD, if an applicant submits a non-eCTD CTA via email, they should meet the following requirements:

The maximum email size accepted by the corporate mail server is 20 megabytes. If the clinical trial submission is larger than 20 megabytes, the submission may be split and sent as separate emails (e.g., an email for Module 1, and another email for Module 2/3). The subject line of the emails should clearly link to each other (e.g., "Email 1 of 2" in the relevant subject line)
A duplicate copy must not be provided by mail
The submission should be organized in folders and the body of the email should only contain the zipped regulatory submission
Zipped files and documents contained in the email should not be password protected

The G-Non-eCTD provides additional information on emailing other clinical trial submissions, including responses to a clarification request, responses to a no objection letter, notifications, and development safety update reports.

Ethics Review Submission

As indicated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, all research involving human participants in Canada must be reviewed by an institutional ethics committee (EC). (Note: institutional ECs are referred to as Research Ethics Boards (REBs) in Canada.) Because the submission process at individual institutional ECs will vary, applicants should review and follow their institution’s specific requirements. Further, Canadian provinces may have varying requirements, and, therefore, the sponsor should consult with the applicable province(s) for more information. See CAN-35 for submission requirements to the joint HC-Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC)’s REB. This joint EC reviews all research involving human subjects that is carried out by HC or PHAC researchers, on the premises, or in collaboration with external researchers.

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.7

5.2, 5.4, and 5.5

3.1-3.4 and Appendix B

Guidance documents, notices, and supporting documents

7.1, 8.1, and 8.2

1.3 (Table 1), 3.2, and 5

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.002, C.05.004, C.05.005))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

In accordance with the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, Sierra Leone requires the sponsor and principal investigator (PI) to obtain clinical trial authorization from the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) before commencement of the clinical trial. Furthermore, per the G-SLEthics, the PI is required to obtain ethics approval from the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC).

As indicated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, a favorable opinion from the SLESRC is a required element of a clinical trial application to the PBSL. However, submissions to the PBSL and the SLESRC may be made in parallel in the case of a public health emergency or as deemed fit by the PBSL.

Regulatory Submission

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that applicants must submit 15 hard copies of all clinical trial application documents to the PBSL, as well as one (1) soft copy in Microsoft Word format (Acrobat PDF files are also acceptable).

As per the G-SLAppClinTrial, the delivery address for a clinical trial application is as follows:

The Registrar
Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone
Central Medical Stores
New England Ville, Freetown
P.M.B. 322
Sierra Leone

As per SLE-23, the clinical trial application and accompanying material must be provided in English.

Ethics Review Submission

The G-SLEthics states that the PI should submit to the SLESRC five (5) hard copies of the full research proposal (and all supporting documents) detailing the ethical issues in the study and how they will be addressed (only three (3) copies for extensions), each in a separate envelope. In addition, an electronic copy of the application should be emailed to efoday@health.gov.sl. The G-SLEthics also indicates that the PI may submit an exclusively electronic application for an additional fee. See the Ethics Committee Fees section for more information.

The G-SLEthics states that PIs should submit their applications with a cover letter addressed to the Chair of the SLESRC at least two (2) calendar months before the anticipated commencement of the proposed study.

Per the G-SLEthics, the delivery information for the SLESRC is as follows:

Office of the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee
Ministry of Health and Sanitation
Directorate of Policy, Planning & Information (DPPI)
Youyi Building, Fifth Floor, East Wing
Freetown
Sierra Leone
Phone: +23278 366493

5.1 and 5.28

5.1 and 5.2

Submission Content

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Regulatory Authority Requirements

As set forth in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, and CAN-31, Health Canada (HC) requires the sponsor to apply for clinical trial authorization by submitting a clinical trial application (CTA) to HC. As specified in the G-CanadaCTApps and the G-QCM-PharmCTAs, the CTA should be organized into three (3) modules in Common Technical Document (CTD) format:

Module 1 - Administrative and clinical information about the proposed trial
Module 2 - Quality (Chemistry and Manufacturing) summaries about the drug product(s) to be used in the proposed trial
Module 3 - Additional supporting quality information

Per the CanadaFDR, the clinical trial application form (CAN-4) and the following information and documents must be submitted:

Protocol
Summary of potential risks/benefits
Clinical trial attestation that includes drug information (chemistry, names, classifications, dosage, therapeutic purpose, human-sourced excipient, drug identification number or notice of compliance, manufacturing information); sponsor’s contact information; if the drug is to be imported, contact information for the sponsor’s representative in Canada who is responsible for the sale of the drug; and contact information for the qualified investigator at each site, if known at the time of submittal
Contact information for each institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada) that approved the protocol, if known at the time of submitting the application
Contact information of any institutional EC that previously refused to approve the protocol, its reasons, and refusal date
Investigator’s Brochure (IB)
Informed consent form (ICF)
Information about use of a human-sourced excipient
Chemistry and manufacturing information
Proposed date for trial commencement at each site, if known

Refer to the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, the G-DrugApp, the G-QltyBioCTs, and the G-QCM-PharmCTAs for detailed submission information.

Ethics Committee Requirements

Each institutional EC has its own application form and clearance requirements, which can differ significantly regarding the number of copies to be supplied and application format requirements. However, the following requirements comply with the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, and are basically consistent across all Canadian ECs:

Clinical protocol
ICFs and participant information
Participant recruitment procedures
IB
Safety information
Participant payments and compensation
Investigator(s) current curriculum vitaes (CVs)
Additional required institutional EC documentation

See section 3.1.2 of CAN-52 for additional submission content requirements.

The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs, requires clinical trial researchers to include a plan for monitoring safety, efficacy/effectiveness (where feasible), and validity in their proposal for EC review. See the G-TCPS2 for additional details on the plan’s required contents.

See CAN-35 for submission requirements to the joint HC-Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC)'s REB. This joint EC reviews all research involving human subjects that is carried out by HC or PHAC researchers, on the premises, or in collaboration with external researchers.

Clinical Protocol

As delineated in CAN-52, the clinical protocol should include the following elements:

General information
Background information
Trial objectives and purpose
Trial design
Participation selection/withdrawal
Participant treatment
Efficacy assessment
Safety assessment
Statistics
Direct access to source data/documents
Quality control/quality assurance procedures
Ethical considerations
Data handling and record keeping
Financing and insurance
Publication policy
Supplements

For complete protocol requirements, see section 6 of CAN-52.

3.1.2, 6, and 7

Efficacy guidelines

Apply for Ethics Review

2.3 and 2.7

I, S Drug Substance, and P Drug Product

Chapter 11 (Article 11.6)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.004, and C.05.005))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Regulatory Authority Requirements

As per the G-SLAppClinTrial and SLE-9, the following documentation must be submitted to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

Cover letter, including the list of documents submitted and their version number and date
Non-refundable application fee as specified in the PBSL’s Fee Schedule (see Appendix I of the G-SLAppClinTrial)
Protocol with all the relevant sections including site-specific addendums (see below for detailed protocol requirements)
Two (2) copies of the completed clinical trial application forms signed by authorized persons, including cover page (see Appendix II of the G-SLAppClinTrial)
Proof of registration with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR) (SLE-19) or an internationally recognized PBSL-approved online registry
Investigator’s Brochure (IB)
Synopsis of previous trial(s) with the investigational product(s) (IP(s)), if applicable
Summary of product characteristics or other professional information for all registered medicines used in the trial, or the international equivalent if the medicines are not registered in Sierra Leone
A list of the planned clinical trial sites and the planned number of trial participants at the sites
The name and position of the principal investigator(s) (PI(s)) who will be responsible for the sites where the trial is to be conducted, who must be registered with the relevant statutory health council, where applicable, and a resident in Sierra Leone
Signed curriculum vitae(s) (CVs) for all key staff participating in the conduct of the clinical trial, as well as other relevant documents (see Annex 8 of SLE-6 for the recommended CV format for staff conducting clinical trials)
Proof of current training in good clinical practice (GCP) for investigator(s), pharmacist(s), and monitor(s)
Proof of registration of the key investigators with a professional statutory body, if applicable
Any previous training in the principles of GCP or experience obtained from work with clinical trials and patient care
Any conditions, such as economic interests and institutional affiliations, that might influence the impartiality of the investigator(s)
Proof of current, relevant, and appropriate study insurance for all participants undertaken by the sponsor
Proof of sponsor indemnification for investigator(s) and trial site(s) (see Annex 7 of SLE-6 for suggested wording of the sponsor indemnification)
Professional indemnity insurance for investigator(s) and other trial staff
Details of the site(s) where the trial is to be conducted and a duly justified written statement on the suitability of the clinical trial sites adapted to the nature and use of the IP. This should include a description of the suitability of facilities, equipment, and human resources, and a description of expertise, issued by the head of the clinic/institution at the clinical trial site or other responsible party
A favorable opinion from the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC). In the case of a parallel submission, proof of clinical trial application submission to the SLESRC and the updated versions of documents or information as requested by the SLESRC are required
Recruitment arrangements
Signed joint financial declaration between the sponsor and the PI (see Appendix IIIc of the G-SLAppClinTrial and Annex 4 of SLE-6)
Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) membership, CVs, and signed charter
IP dossier and label
Product information if the IP is registered: summary of product characteristics, patient information leaflet/package insert, and labelling
Current good manufacturing practice (GMP) certificate issued from the national regulatory authority of the country where the IP is manufactured
Product information and certificate of analysis for the concomitant and rescue medications
Certificate(s) of analysis of the IP
Certificate(s) of accreditation for the central laboratories
Participant information sheet, informed consent form (ICF), and informed consent procedure
Signed declaration by the applicant (see Annex 2 of SLE-6)
Sponsor/PI contractual agreement, including the study budget
Signed declaration by the PI and the sponsor of the trial that they are familiar with and understand the protocol, and will comply with GCP as determined by the PBSL in the conduct of the trial (see Appendix IIIa of the G-SLAppClinTrial and Annex 4 on page 12 of SLE-6)
Workload forms for investigator(s)
Signed declaration(s) by the local PI, as well as each investigator and key staff participating in the clinical trial (see Appendix IIIb of the G-SLAppClinTrial and Annex 5 of SLE-6)
Signed declaration(s) by the sub-investigators and key staff participating in the clinical trial

CVs and signed declaration by regional monitor(s) (see Annex 6 of SLE-6)

Copies of recruitment advertisement(s) and questionnaires, if applicable
Electronic copies of key peer reviewed publications following International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations to support the application, if applicable
Labelled CD-ROM (list of files submitted on CD-ROM)

See the G-SLAppClinTrial for more details, including the application submission checklist (Appendix IIa) and the application form (Appendix IIb). The application checklist and form are also available at SLE-9 and SLE-6, respectively.

Additionally, see Appendix V of the G-SLAppClinTrial for the Clinical Trial Amendment Form. See also SLE-8 for the amendment checklist.

Ethics Committee Requirements

As per the G-SLEthics, the SLESRC requires the PI to submit the following documentation for ethics approval:

Cover letter to the Chair of the Committee
ICF attached to each proposal (Committee does not accept verbal consent, except where it is supported by an independent witness)
Completed checklist for the Essential Elements in the Application for Approval (see the G-SLEthics)
Brief CV for the PI and associates clearly stating their roles (not more than four (4) pages each)
Study proposals submitted for award of a degree must be accompanied by a letter of confirmation from the supervisor and approval by the institution’s review board
Requests for amendment or extension of study should include a copy of the previous approval letter
A non-refundable administrative fee for each proposal submitted (see the Ethics Committee Fees section for detailed fee information)

Clinical Protocol

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that the clinical trial protocol must comply with the International Council for Harmonisation's (ICH) Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (SLE-24) and the SL-GCPs. Accordingly, the protocol must include:

General information (protocol title, identifying number, and date; contact information for the sponsor, medical expert, investigator(s), trial site(s), qualified physician(s), and laboratory and/or institutions involved in the study)
Background information
Objectives and purpose
Trial design
Selection, withdrawal, and treatment of participants
Assessment of efficacy
Assessment of safety
A description of the statistical methods to be used in the trial
Direct access to source data and documents
Quality control and quality assurance
Ethical considerations
Data handling and recordkeeping
Financing and insurance
Publication policy

PBSL Clinical Trial Application Form (CTA) and Annexes 2-8

6

5.46-5.61

5.0-5.2 and Appendices I-III and V

Timeline of Review

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

As delineated in the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, the review and approval of a clinical trial application (CTA) by Health Canada (HC) and an institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada) may be conducted in parallel. However, per the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, CAN-6, and CAN-30, HC will not authorize the sponsor to begin the clinical trial until an institutional EC approval (provided in the required Clinical Trial Site Information (CTSI) form) for each participating trial site is submitted. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

Regulatory Authority Approval

According to the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, an authorized clinical trial is one that has been filed with HC and has not received an objection within 30 days. All CTAs are subject to the 30-day default period from the date of receipt of the completed application at the appropriate Directorate within HC’s Health Products and Food Branch (HPFB). While the Directorates can establish shorter administrative targets of seven (7) days for the review of bioequivalence trials, the 30-day default system remains the regulatory requirement. Applications to conduct Phase I clinical trials using somatic cell therapies, xenografts, gene therapies, prophylactic vaccines, or reproductive and genetic technologies are not included in the seven-day target system. Please see the G-CanadaCTApps for special requirements regarding reviews of comparative bioavailability studies and joint reviews of clinical trials covering a combination of devices, biologics, and pharmaceuticals.

As specified in the G-CanadaCTApps and the G-MDSA, during the review period, the Directorate may request additional information from the sponsor, who has two (2) calendar days to provide such information. The G-MDSA clarifies that, where warranted, HC can adjust the timelines to be longer or shorter based on the complexity of the request, dialogue with the sponsor, and/or circumstances of the review, including pausing the clock during the scientific review. According to the G-CanadaCTApps and the G-MDSA, if HC authorizes the CTA, then it issues a No Objection Letter (NOL). If HC rejects the CTA, it sends a Not Satisfactory Notice (NSN). HC will issue an NSN if it identifies significant deficiencies, or, if a timely response to requested information has not been provided. The sponsor may resubmit the information and material at a future time, and it will be processed as a new CTA.

Ethics Committee Approval

The EC review and approval process timeline varies by institution. However, according to the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the institutional EC should review a proposed clinical trial within a reasonable time. The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs, recommends a proportionate approach to ethics review—the lower the level of risk, the lower the level of scrutiny (delegated review); the higher the level of risk, the higher the level of scrutiny (full board review). In either case, pursuant to the G-TCPS2, the institutional EC should make its decisions in an efficient and timely manner. See CAN-35 for ethics review timelines with the joint HC-Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC)'s REB. This joint EC reviews all research involving human subjects that is carried out by HC or PHAC researchers, on the premises, or in collaboration with external researchers.

3.1.2

Efficacy guidelines

Apply for Ethics Review

2.1, 2.3.3, 2.5, and 2.7

5.5 and 5.6

Chapter 2 (Articles 2.8 and 2.9) and Chapter 6 (Article 6.13)

11.1, 12.1, and 13.3-13.4

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.005 and C.05.006))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) and the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC) reviews may be conducted in parallel in the case of a public health emergency or as deemed fit by the PBSL. For parallel submissions, the PBSL requires proof of the application’s submission to the SLESRC, as well as any updated versions of documents or information as requested by the SLESRC.

Regulatory Authority Approval

Per the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL’s processing times of clinical trial applications for different investigational products (IPs) are as follows, unless otherwise specified by the PBSL on a case-by-case basis:

Medical devices - 40 working days
Pharmaceuticals - 50 working days
Biological and biotechnology medical products - 60 working days
Genetically modified organisms - 120 working days

As delineated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL will inform the applicant in writing about the receipt of a valid clinical trial application or the formal grounds for non-acceptance within 10 working days from the receipt of the application. The applicant must address formal grounds for non-acceptance within 10 working days. If changes are required and the applicant fails to modify the application correspondingly within a maximum of 30 working days, following the reasoned objections, the application will be deemed rejected. If the PBSL requires changes to the application and the applicant fails to modify the application correspondingly within a maximum of 90 days following the reasoned objections, the application will be deemed rejected. See Figure 1 in Section 5.17 of the G-SLAppClinTrial for more details on the PBSL’s clinical trial authorization process.

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, if expedited review of a clinical trial during a public health emergency is anticipated, the applicant should inform the PBSL in writing. The timeline for processing such applications is 10-20 working days. For more information on expedited review, see the Scope of Assessment section and the G-SLAppClinTrial.

The G-SLAppClinTrial further indicates that any proposed amendment to the trial application, trial arrangements, and IP must be submitted to the SLESRC and the PBSL for approval before such amendments are carried out. The PBSL’s processing time for protocol amendment applications is 30 working days. For more details on amendment requirements, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that the PBSL must issue a Clinical Trial Certificate to authorize the trial to be conducted, which must be renewed annually. The PBSL’s processing time for a Clinical Trial Certificate renewal application is 15 working days.

The G-SLAppClinTrial further states that if a clinical trial application is rejected by the PBSL, any person or institution may appeal the decision in writing within 60 days after receipt of the decision, to request PBSL review or reconsideration of the initial decision. The PBSL’s response to the appeal application must be addressed to the affected person or institution within 90 days of the appeal’s submission. For more information on appeal contents and timelines, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL’s processing time for IP import permits is 10 working days.

Ethics Committee Approval

No information is currently available on the SLESRC’s timeline of review.

5.1, 5.6, 5.16-5.17, Appendix V, and Appendix XI

Initiation, Agreements & Registration

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, a clinical trial can only commence after the sponsor receives authorization from both Health Canada (HC) and an institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada). No waiting period is required following the applicant’s receipt of these approvals. CAN-30 specifies that for purposes of the Clinical Trial Site Information (CTSI) Form (CAN-6), the trial commencement date is the date when the clinical trial site is ready to enroll participants. The commencement date is a date after which the sponsor has both the HC authorization from the appropriate Directorate (date on the No Objection Letter (NOL)) and approval from the relevant EC. Further, the commencement date would be the date when the sponsor implements the protocol, which includes the screening period that occurs prior to the check-in date. See the Scope of Review section for detailed institutional EC requirements, and the Submission Content section for additional HC approval information. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

In addition, per the G-CanadaCTApps, if a sponsor (Canadian or foreign) wants to import a drug into Canada to conduct a clinical trial, a copy of HC’s clinical trial authorization (i.e., the NOL) must be included with the drug shipment. According to the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-32, if a sponsor plans to import investigational drugs directly to each trial site, then the sponsor must also authorize the importer (i.e., the clinical trial site) when submitting the clinical trial application using Appendix I of HC’s Drug Submission Application Form (CAN-4). See the Manufacturing & Import section for detailed import requirements.

Clinical Trial Agreement

Prior to initiating the trial, as delineated in the G-FDR-0100 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the sponsor must sign an agreement between all involved parties, including ECs, Qualified Investigators (QIs), contract research organizations, and others, to ensure full compliance with the regulatory requirements. Further, the sponsor should obtain the investigator’s/institution's agreement:

To conduct the trial in compliance with good clinical practice, with the applicable regulatory requirement(s), and with the protocol agreed to by the sponsor and given approval/favorable opinion by the EC
To comply with procedures for data recording and reporting
To permit monitoring, auditing, and inspection
To retain the trial-related essential documents until the sponsor informs the investigator/institution these documents are no longer needed

The sponsor and the investigator/institution should sign the protocol, or an alternative document, to confirm this agreement.

In accordance with the G-CanadaCTApps, prior to initiating a clinical trial, the sponsor must ensure that a Qualified Investigator Undertaking (QIU) form (CAN-37 or similar documentation that meets the CanadaFDR requirements) has been completed and is kept on file by the sponsor. Per the CanadaFDR, the form certifies that the QI will conduct the clinical trial in accordance with good clinical practice and will immediately inform trial participants and the institutional EC of trial discontinuance and the reason for this discontinuance. If there is a change in the QI at a site, a new CTSI Form must be submitted to HC, and a new QIU form must be maintained by the sponsor.

See CAN-6, CAN-8, and CAN-19 for additional clinical trial forms.

Clinical Trial Registration

As per the G-CanadaCTApps, sponsors should register their clinical trials on one (1) of two (2) publicly accessible registries accepting international clinical trial information and recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO), ClinicalTrials.gov (CAN-45), and the International Standardized Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) Registry (CAN-46). According to HCNotice-CTRegDisc, clinical trial registration is not a mandatory requirement at this time. However, per the G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs, clinical trials must be registered before recruitment of the first trial participant in a publicly accessible registry that is acceptable to the WHO or the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). In addition, following registration, researchers are responsible for ensuring that the registry is updated in a timely manner with: new information; safety and, where feasible, efficacy reports; reasons for stopping a trial early; and the location of findings.

1.17, 5.1.2, 5.6.3, and 8.2.6

Efficacy guidelines

1.2 and 2.7

5.6

Chapter 11 (Articles 11.10-11.11)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.006))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

In accordance with the G-SLAppClinTrial, a clinical trial can only commence after the sponsor and the principal investigator (PI) receive authorization from Sierra Leone’s Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) via a Clinical Trial Certificate. Additionally, per the G-SLAppClinTrial, the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC) fulfills the functions of the ethics committee (EC) (known as an Independent Ethics Committee (IEC) in Sierra Leone) in the country. Ethics approval must be obtained from the SLESRC prior to initiating a study. The G-SLEthics indicates that the PI must obtain the SLESRC approval.

In addition, as per SLE-23, no waiting period is required following the applicant’s receipt of PBSL and SLESRC approval. According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL must be informed of the trial’s initiation in writing on the exact date the study commences. If the trial does not begin or is delayed, then the PBSL must be informed of the new commencement date within 90 days of the Clinical Trial Certificate’s issuance. SLE-23 further indicates that investigators are required to notify their local institution prior to initiating a trial.

As per the G-SLAppClinTrial, a permit from the PBSL is required for the import of an investigational product (IP) to be used in a trial. (See the Manufacturing & Import section for additional information.)

Clinical Trial Agreement

The G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs state that the clinical protocol submitted to the PBSL must include a signed contractual agreement between the sponsor and the PI.

As required by the G-SLAppClinTrial, the sponsor/PI contractual agreement must have sections indicating:

Study title
Protocol version and date
Trial site
IP information
Definitions of all terms
Effective date of agreement
Outline of the sponsor’s responsibilities, which must include general management of the trial; provision of adequate funding, resources/logistics and IPs for the study; and insurance for the study participants
Outline of the PI’s responsibilities, which must include retaining all trial related essential documents until the sponsor informs the PI these documents are no longer needed
Term (period of study duration) and termination of agreement (conditions for this)
Confidentiality

Per the SL-GCPs, the sponsor should obtain the investigator’s/institution’s agreement to:

Conduct the trial in compliance with good clinical practice (GCP), with the applicable regulatory requirement(s), and with the PBSL-approved protocol
Comply with procedures for data recording/reporting
Permit monitoring, auditing, and inspection

The sponsor and the investigator/institution should sign the protocol, or an alternative document, to confirm this agreement.

Clinical Trial Registration

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that proof of trial registration with the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry (PACTR) (SLE-19), or an internationally recognized PBSL-approved online registry, must be submitted as part of a clinical trial application to the PBSL.

5.9, 5.24, and 5.64

4.0, 5.1-5.2, 5.6, 5.8-5.9, and Appendix VIIa

Safety Reporting

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Safety Reporting Definitions

According to the CanadaFDR and G-CanadaCTApps, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of Canada’s safety reporting requirements:

Adverse Event (AE) – Any adverse occurrence in the health of a clinical trial subject who is administered a drug that may or may not be caused by the administration of the drug, and includes an adverse drug reaction.
Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – Any noxious and unintended response to a drug that is caused by the administration of any dose of the drug.
Serious Adverse Drug Reaction (SADR) or Serious Adverse Event (SAE) – Any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or causes a congenital anomaly/birth defect.
Serious, Unexpected ADR – A serious ADR that is not identified in nature, severity, or frequency in the risk information set out in the investigator’s brochure or on the label of the drug.

The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ethics committees (ECs), requires researchers to promptly report new information revealed during the conduct of the trial that might affect the welfare or consent of participants to the EC, to a publicly accessible registry, and to other appropriate regulatory or advisory bodies. In addition, when new information is relevant to participants’ welfare, researchers must promptly inform all participants to whom the information applies (including former participants). Researchers must work with their ECs to determine which participants must be informed, and how the information should be conveyed.

For Health Canada (HC)’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

Safety Reporting Requirements

Investigator Responsibilities

Per CAN-52, which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, all SAEs should be reported immediately to the sponsor except for those SAEs that the protocol or other document (e.g., Investigator's Brochure) identifies as not needing immediate reporting. The immediate reports should be followed promptly by detailed, written reports. The immediate and follow-up reports should identify participants by unique code numbers assigned to the trial subjects rather than by their names, personal identification numbers, and/or addresses. The investigator should also comply with the applicable regulatory requirement(s) related to the reporting of unexpected serious ADRs to the regulatory authority(ies) and the EC. AEs and/or laboratory abnormalities identified in the protocol as critical to safety evaluations should be reported to the sponsor according to the reporting requirements and within the time periods specified by the sponsor in the protocol. For reported deaths, the investigator should supply the sponsor and the EC with any additional requested information (e.g., autopsy reports and terminal medical reports).

Sponsor Responsibilities

As delineated in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, and CAN-22, the sponsor is required to expedite reports of ADRs to HC that meet these three (3) criteria: serious, unexpected, and having a suspected causal relationship. ADR reports that are expected or unexpected, but not serious, should not be reported to HC, but rather monitored and tracked by the sponsor. Further detail and clarifications on AE/ADR reporting criteria can be found in CAN-22. As specified in the G-CanadaCTApps, when evaluating whether an AE is serious and unexpected, the Qualified Investigator’s (QI) and sponsor’s determination of causality is important. Only serious and unexpected ADRs found to have a reasonable suspected causal relationship to the drug should be reported by the sponsor to HC.

Per the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, during a clinical trial, the sponsor is required to inform HC of any serious, unexpected ADR that has occurred inside or outside Canada. An ADR report must be filed in the following specified timelines:

When the ADR is neither fatal nor life-threatening, within 15 days after becoming aware of the information
When it is fatal or life-threatening, immediately when possible and, in any event, within seven (7) days after becoming aware of the information
Within eight (8) days after having informed HC of the ADR, submit a report that includes an assessment of the importance and implication of any findings

Other Safety Reports

The G-DSUR delineates that the development safety update report (DSUR) and the DSUR Checklist (CAN-38) should be provided when requested by HC. A DSUR may be submitted voluntarily to HC when important new safety information on a drug needs to be conveyed by a clinical trial sponsor. In these cases, a rationale/justification for the filing of the DSUR should be included in the cover letter. For additional details, see the G-DSUR.

The G-DSUR-CanUK describes the region-specific requirements for DSURs submitted to the regulatory authorities of Canada and the United Kingdom. This guidance applies to both marketed and non-marketed drugs that are used in clinical trials and applies to DSURs prepared by the manufacturer and/or marketing authorization holder of the investigational drug.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

As per the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-22, all serious and unexpected ADRs should be reported individually to HC. According to CAN-48 (which Canada adopted pursuant to CAN-50), at a minimum, the report should include an identifiable patient, the name of a suspect medicinal product, an identifiable reporting source, and an event or outcome that can be identified as serious and unexpected and for which, in clinical investigation cases, there is a reasonable suspected causal relationship. The G-CanadaCTApps requires the sponsor to complete the expedited reporting form (CAN-5) and the CIOMS Form I (CAN-7) and fax them to the appropriate HC Directorate: BRDD Fax: 613-957-0364; PDD Fax: 613-941-2121.

Additionally, the G-DSUR indicates that HC recommends that DSURs in electronic Common Technical Document (eCTD) format be submitted via the Common Electronic Submission Gateway (CESG). For information on eCTD format, refer to the ElecSubms. For technical questions on eCTD filings, contact ereview@hc-sc.gc.ca as instructed in the G-DSUR.

1.1, 1.2, 1.50, 1.60, and 4.11

Efficacy guidelines

Notice, 1.2, and 2.4

2.1 and 2.8

5.14

Chapter 11 (Article 11.8)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001 and C.05.014))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Safety Reporting Definitions

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of Sierra Leone’s safety reporting requirements:

Adverse Event (or Adverse Experience) (AE) – Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant to whom an investigational product (IP) has been administered, including occurrences which are not necessarily caused by or related to that product

Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – Any noxious and unintended response to an IP which is related to any dose administered to that participant

Serious Adverse Event (SAE) or Serious Adverse Drug Reaction (SADR) – Any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect

Unexpected Adverse Event/Adverse Drug Reaction – An adverse reaction where the nature or severity is inconsistent with the applicable product information

Safety Reporting Requirements

As stated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the sponsor and the principal investigator(s) (PIs) are responsible for proper reporting of AEs and SAEs. The sponsor should expedite the reporting of all AEs that are both serious and unexpected. Any SAEs/SADRs must be reported to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) immediately where possible. In any event, the SAEs/SADRs must be reported to the PBSL within 48 hours of site awareness, but no later than 15 calendar days.

The SL-GCPs indicates that all SAEs/SADRs should be reported immediately except for those incidents documented by the protocol or the investigator’s brochure that do not require immediate reporting. The immediate reports should be followed promptly by detailed, written reports. The reports should identify participants by unique code numbers. AEs and/or laboratory abnormalities identified in the protocol as critical to safety evaluations should be reported to the PBSL. Furthermore, per the G-SLAppClinTrial, any SAE/SADR related to the IP should receive immediate medical attention.

In addition, per the G-SLAppClinTrial, any frequent AEs/ADRs should be reported to the PBSL immediately where possible, and in any event, within seven (7) days of site awareness. Non-serious AEs must be reported to the PBSL on request and, where applicable, submitted as part of an application for registration.

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that non-serious AEs must be reported on request and where applicable, submitted as part of an application for registration.

Investigator Responsibilities

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that in the event of an SAE/SADR, the PI is required to submit follow-up information (e.g., copies of diagnostic test results, laboratory reports, medical record progress notes) as soon as it becomes available. This information should be clearly marked as updated information and include the protocol and participant numbers. Follow-up reports must be submitted immediately when there is a change in the severity of the SAE/SADR initially reported, whenever there is any new development on an initially reported SAE/SADR, and/or when the SAE/SADR is resolved. Follow-up reports must include an assessment of the importance and implication of any findings. All fatal cases must be accompanied by a formal autopsy report. In exceptional circumstances where a formal autopsy is not practicable, provision of a verbal autopsy report must be prior approved by the PBSL and be given with ample reasons. SLE-23 indicates that the investigator is responsible for submitting these follow-up reports, but the sponsor can also report through the contract research organization.

As per the SL-GCPs, the investigator should also comply with applicable regulatory requirements related to reporting unexpected SAEs/SADRs to the PBSL. For a reported death, the investigator should supply the PBSL with any additional requested information (e.g., autopsy reports and terminal medical reports).

Sponsor Responsibilities

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the sponsor is required to expedite the reporting of all AEs/ADRs that are both serious and unexpected to the PBSL. The SL-GCPs further indicates that the sponsor must also expedite the reporting of all AEs/ADRs that are both serious and unexpected to all concerned investigator(s)/institutions(s) and the ethics committee(s).

Per the SL-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for the ongoing safety evaluation of IPs, and should promptly notify the investigator(s)/institution(s) and the PBSL of findings that could adversely affect participant safety, impact the conduct of the trial, or alter the PBSL’s approval of the trial.

Other Safety Reports

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that notifications of changes in nature, severity, or frequency of risk factors must be submitted to the PBSL within 28 days, and new information that impacts the risk benefit profile of the product or conduct of the trial must be reported within seven (7) days.

Per the G-SLSftyMntrng and the G-SLAppClinTrial, a Development Safety Update Report (DSUR) must be submitted annually to the PBSL.

According to the G-SLSftyMntrng, the main objective of a DSUR is to present a comprehensive, thoughtful annual review and evaluation of pertinent safety information collected during the reporting period related to a drug under investigation, whether or not it is marketed, by:

Examining whether the information obtained by the sponsor during the reporting period is in accord with previous knowledge of the IP’s safety
Describing new safety issues that could have an impact on the protection of clinical trial participants
Summarizing the current understanding and management of identified and potential risks, and
Providing an update on the status of the clinical investigation/development program and study results

For more information on DSURs, see Section 12 of the G-SLSftyMntrng.

For safety reporting from foreign sites and other reporting requirements, see Appendicies VIa – VIc of the G-SLAppClinTrial.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the SAE/SADR report form must include detailed information to enable a causality assessment report to be prepared by the PBSL’s Expert Committee on Drug Safety. The SAE/SADR form must conform to the format of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences’ (CIOMS) Form I (SLE-7), or must be previously approved by the PBSL. Furthermore, all SAEs/suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions (SUSARs) and AEs/ADRs must be reported using the SLE-7 form format and also electronically through the PBSL’s online reporting platform (SLE-14). Frequent AEs/ADRs should be reported to the PBSL in a line listing and through the PBSL’s online reporting platform. Electronic submissions must be E2B compliant. See SLE-12 for the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s E2B Guidelines.

For non-serious AEs, the G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that individual reporting must be formatted in accordance with the data elements specified in the ICH Harmonised Tripartite Efficacy Guideline on Clinical Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting (E2A) (see SLE-12).

E2A and E2B

Section 12

4.0, 5.15, and 5.35-5.36

4.0, 5.7, and Appendix VI

Progress Reporting

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

Pursuant to the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, CAN-22, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), investigators and sponsors share responsibility for submitting interim and annual reports on the status of a clinical trial. The investigator is required to provide annual progress reports to the institutional ethics committee (EC) and submit interim progress reports to the EC and Health Canada (HC) if there are any significant changes affecting the trial or risk to participants. The sponsor is required to submit annual reports (in the form of an updated Investigator’s Brochure (IB)) to HC. Note that per CAN-50, HC-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

As per CAN-52, which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the investigator should promptly provide written reports to the sponsor and the institutional EC on any changes significantly affecting the conduct of the trial, and/or increasing the risk to participants.

According to the G-TCPS2, investigators must report new information that may affect the welfare or consent of participants to the institutional EC, HC, and other appropriate regulatory or advisory entities. When new information is relevant to participants’ welfare, researchers must promptly inform all participants to whom the information applies (including former participants). Researchers should work with their ECs to determine which participants must be informed, and how the information should be conveyed. New information may comprise a range of issues, including, but not limited to:

Changes to the research design
Evidence of any new risks
Unanticipated issues that have possible health or safety consequences for participants
New information that decisively proves the benefits of one (1) intervention over another
New research findings, including relevant non-trial findings
Unanticipated problems
Closure of trials at other sites for reasons that may be relevant to the welfare or consent of participants in the ongoing trial

Pursuant to CAN-52, the investigator should submit written summaries of the trial status to the institutional EC annually, or more frequently, if requested.

Final Report

Upon completion of the trial, as delineated in CAN-52, the investigator is required to submit a final report to the institutional EC summarizing the trial’s outcome. The CanadaFDR does not require submission of a final study report to HC.

Per the G-CanadaCTApps, the sponsor should notify the HC Directorate when a clinical trial is completed or a clinical trial site is closed. A study is considered to be completed after the last participant globally completes the "end of study" visit as defined in the protocol. The "end of study visit" is the final visit for study-related tests and procedures, including the capture of any final potential study-related adverse events, and usually occurs after the participant has completed/discontinued study drug administration. The "end of study visit" is normally an in-person visit, but for some studies it can also be carried out over the telephone. There may be certain scenarios (e.g., gene therapies, drugs with very long half-lives) where a study may be considered to be ongoing well beyond the period of study treatment, i.e., where long-term safety monitoring and reporting would be required. The reporting requirements with regards to such long-term follow-up of safety are normally specified in the study protocol and agreed to between the sponsor and HC prior to the authorization of the clinical trial in Canada.

4.10 and 4.13

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

2.8

5.12 and 5.13

Chapter 11 (Article 11.8)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.012 and C.05.013))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

Per the SL-GCPs, the investigator should submit written summaries of the trial status to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) as required in the G-SLAppClinTrial, or more frequently, if requested by the PBSL. The investigator should also promptly provide written reports to the PBSL on any changes that significantly affect the conduct of the trial and/or increase the risk to participants.

As set forth in the G-SLAppClinTrial, quarterly reports must be submitted starting from the date the Clinical Trial Certificate is issued using the Quarterly Progress Report Form provided in Appendix VIIb. The reports must be submitted to the PBSL within 21 days following the end of the previous quarter, and an interim report must be submitted within 21 days after the end of the first half of the trial period, and as stipulated in the protocol. If the trial is interrupted, the reason must be communicated in writing to the PBSL within 10 working days. See the G-SLAppClinTrial for additional details on preparing progress reports.

Final Report

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the principal investigator (PI) or the sponsor must notify the PBSL no later than 30 days following the trial’s completion and submit a preliminary report on the trial. This report, referred to as a close-out report in the G-SLAppClinTrial, must be submitted to PBSL after study completion in the recommended format as per Appendix VIII.

The G-SLAppClinTrial delineates that in addition to the close-out report, the PI or the sponsor must compile and submit a comprehensive formal report to the PBSL no later than 90 days following the trial’s completion. The report should conform to the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) Harmonised Tripartite Guideline - Structure and Content of Clinical Study Reports (E3) (SLE-11). The report must include a short but comprehensive summary of the essential findings of the trial, as well as its methodology and course, and be submitted in hard and soft copies. Publication(s) of the study in a scientific journal or other medium for the purpose of disseminating the information obtained to stakeholders may be done only after notification of the PBSL.

The SL-GCPs indicates that the investigator is responsible for submitting the final report summarizing the trial’s outcome to the PBSL.

5.14 and 5.17

5.8, Appendix VII, and Appendix VIII

Definition of Sponsor

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

As per the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, a sponsor is defined as an individual, corporate body, institution, or organization that conducts a clinical trial. The International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, expands on this definition to include individuals, companies, institutions, or organizations that take responsibility for the initiation, management, and/or financing of a clinical trial.

In accordance with CAN-52, Canada also permits a sponsor to transfer any or all of its trial-related duties and functions to a contract research organization (CRO) and/or institutional site(s). However, the ultimate responsibility for the trial data’s quality and integrity always resides with the sponsor. Any trial-related responsibilities transferred to a CRO should be specified in a written agreement. The CRO should implement quality assurance and quality control. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

According to the CanadaFDR and G-CanadaCTApps, a sponsor may be domestic or foreign. A foreign sponsor is required to have a senior medical or scientific officer who is residing in Canada who will represent the sponsor, and sign and date the application and the clinical trial attestation form.

For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

1.53, 5.1, and 5.2

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

2.1

5.1 and 5.5

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.005, C.05.015))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

As per the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, a sponsor is defined as an individual, company, institution, or organization that takes ultimate responsibility for the initiation, management, and financing of a trial.

In accordance with the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the sponsor may authorize a contract research organization (CRO) to perform one (1) or more of its trial-related duties and functions. However, the ultimate responsibility for the trial’s data quality and integrity always resides with the sponsor.

The SL-GCPs further requires that any trial-related duty and function that is transferred to and assumed by a CRO should be specified in writing. The sponsor should ensure oversight of any trial-related duties and functions carried out on its behalf, including trial-related duties and functions that are subcontracted to another party by the sponsor’s contracted CRO(s). Any trial-related duties and functions not specifically transferred to and assumed by a CRO are retained by the sponsor.

Additionally, as delineated in the SL-GCPs, a sponsor-investigator is defined as an individual who both initiates and conducts, alone or with others, a clinical trial, and under whose immediate direction the investigational product is administered to, dispensed to, or used by a participant. The term does not include any person other than an individual (e.g., it does not include a corporation or an agency). The obligations of a sponsor-investigator include both those of a sponsor and those of an investigator.

Per SLE-23, a foreign individual/organization may be the sponsor of a clinical trial, but a local representative in Sierra Leone is required.

4.0 and 5.20

4.0

Site/Investigator Selection

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

As set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the sponsor should select the investigator(s) and the institution(s) for the clinical trial, taking into account the appropriateness and availability of the study site and facilities. The sponsor must also ensure that the investigator(s) are qualified by training and experience. Furthermore, the sponsor must sign an agreement or contract with the participating institution(s). Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

In accordance with the G-CanadaCTApps, prior to initiating a clinical trial, the sponsor must ensure that a Qualified Investigator Undertaking (QIU) form (CAN-37) (or similar documentation that meets the CanadaFDR requirements) has been completed and kept on file by the sponsor; it should be retained by the sponsor for 15 years. Per the CanadaFDR, the form certifies that the qualified investigator will conduct the clinical trial in accordance with good clinical practice, and will immediately inform trial participants and the institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Boards in Canada) of trial discontinuance, and the reason for this discontinuance. (See the Submission Content section for additional information on clinical trial application requirements). For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

Per CAN-11, the Canadian Clinical Trials Asset Map (CCTAM) (CAN-26) is a pan-Canadian research inventory of investigators, clinical research sites, and other resources across the country. Sponsors can use CCTAM to identify potential sites and investigators, which may expedite study feasibility and start-up timelines. To view the CCTAM, the user must register and create an account.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

According to the CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, a sponsor may be domestic or foreign. A foreign sponsor is required to have a senior medical or scientific officer residing in Canada to represent the sponsor, and sign and date the application and the clinical trial attestation form.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

Although not specified as a sponsor requirement, CAN-52 states that a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) (known as an Independent Data-Monitoring Committee in Canada) may be established to assess the progress of a clinical trial, including the safety data and the critical efficacy endpoints at intervals, and to recommend to the sponsor whether to continue, modify, or stop a trial.

The G-TCPS2 provides the following considerations to help researchers and ECs determine whether a DSMB is needed:

The magnitude of foreseeable research-attributable harms to participants
Whether the circumstances of the participants make them vulnerable in the context of research
The feasibility of interim data analysis
The complexity of the study
Conflicts of interest

Multicenter Studies

Per CAN-52, if a multicenter trial will be conducted, the sponsor must organize a coordinating committee or select coordinating investigators. In addition, the sponsor must ensure that:

All investigators conduct the trial in strict compliance with the protocol agreed to by the sponsor, and, if required, by HC
The EC has given approval to the protocol
The case report forms (CRFs) are designed to capture the required data at all multicenter trial sites
The responsibilities of coordinating investigator(s) and the other participating investigators are documented prior to the start of the trial
All investigators are given instructions on following the protocol, on complying with a uniform set of standards to assess clinical and laboratory findings, and on completing the CRFs
Communication between investigators is facilitated

The CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps, require the sponsor to complete and retain the Research Ethics Board (REB) Attestation (CAN-8) and Qualified Investigator Undertaking (QIU) (CAN-37) forms at each trial site, while submitting in electronic format the Clinical Trial Site Information Form (CAN-6) to the appropriate HC Directorate for each trial site.

The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ECs, provides that in multi-site clinical trials, a lead principal investigator (PI) is a designated PI who is responsible for the ethical conduct of the study for all sites. The lead PI is responsible for communicating any changes to the study, new information, and/or unanticipated events to the EC, to the sponsor, and to local site PIs.

Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented the ICH Guidance E17: Multi-Regional Clinical Trials (CAN-40), which describes general principles for the planning and design of multi-regional clinical trials with the aim of increasing the acceptability of these trials in global regulatory submissions. HC recognizes that the scope and subject matter of current HC guidance may not be entirely consistent with ICH guidance. In such circumstances, HC-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence.

1.25, 5.5, 5.6, and 5.23

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Canadian Clinical Trials Asset Map

2.1 and 2.7.2

5.5

Chapter 11 (Article 11.7)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.005))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

The SL-GCPs states that the sponsor is responsible for selecting the investigator(s) and the institution(s) for the clinical trial and for ensuring that the investigator(s) are qualified by training and experience. Additionally, the sponsor must define and allocate all trial-related duties and responsibilities to the relevant parties. Prior to entering into an agreement with the investigator(s) and the institution(s) to conduct a study, the sponsor should provide the investigator(s) with the protocol and an investigator’s brochure.

As stated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the principal investigator (PI) directly in charge of a trial, and at each site in a multi-center trial, must possess appropriate qualifications, training, and experience. The PI must be a scientist and domicile in Sierra Leone.

The G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs further indicate that the PI must be responsible for the proper conduct of the trial(s), have previous experience as a co-investigator in at least two (2) trials in the relevant professional area, and have proof of formal training in good clinical practice (GCP) for at least two (2) years. See the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs for additional requirements.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

Per SLE-23, a foreign individual/organization may be the sponsor of a clinical trial, but a local representative in Sierra Leone is required.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

As indicated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the sponsor must establish an independent data-monitoring committee, such as a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB), to regularly assess the trial’s progress and analyze safety data. The applicant must provide a copy of the DSMB’s membership, curriculum vitaes, and signed charter in the clinical trial application package submitted to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL). However, the SL-GCPs indicates that establishing a DSMB is optional.

The G-SLAppClinTrial further indicates that a duly signed and authenticated DSMB report(s) and/or minutes must be forwarded to the PBSL upon request. For more information on DSMB requirements, see the G-SLAppClinTrial.

Multicenter Studies

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, in the event of a multicenter clinical trial, the sponsor must ensure that:

All investigators conduct the trial in strict compliance with the protocol agreed to by the sponsor, and the approvals of the PBSL and the ethics committee
The case report forms (CRFs) are designed to capture the required data at all multicenter trial sites
Investigator responsibilities are documented prior to the start of the trial
All investigators are given instructions on following the protocol, complying with a uniform set of standards to assess clinical and laboratory findings, and completing the CRFs
Communication between investigators is facilitated

In addition, the sponsor may organize a coordinating committee or select coordinating investigators.

5.5 and 5.23-5.25

5.1-5.2 and 5.8.2

Insurance & Compensation

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Insurance

The CanadaFDR does not require the sponsor to provide insurance coverage to investigators, institutions, or trial participants. However, the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, guides sponsors on providing insurance. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

Compensation

Injury or Death

The Canadian regulations do not require compensation for trial participants in the event of trial-related injuries or death. However, CAN-52 indicates that the sponsor must explain to participants the compensation and/or treatment available to them in the event of trial-related injuries.

Trial Participation

The Canadian regulations do not require compensation for trial participation. However, as per the G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, the informed consent form (ICF) should contain a statement with a description of the anticipated prorated payment to the participant(s) that is reasonably expected for participation in the trial. Any compensation or incentive to participants must not be so excessive that it may unfairly influence participants or cause them to overlook important facts and risks. CAN-35 further states that the ICF should describe any compensation, incentives, or reimbursements to be paid or given to participants and how participant withdrawal will affect the offered compensation (e.g., prorated remuneration). If no compensation will be provided, this should be stated.

4.8 and 5.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Policies, Guidelines, and Resources, Consent Process (Consent Form Template)

Chapter 3 (Article 3.2)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Insurance

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that for all sponsor-initiated trials, a valid insurance certificate for the duration of the study must be provided before initiating the study, and a copy of this coverage must be included in the clinical trial application submission to the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL). Sponsors and principal investigators (PIs) must ensure insurance cover for clinical trial participants and must submit a certificate of insurance cover for participants as evidence. The certificate must at least contain:

Insurance company
Policy number
Initial date
Expiry date
Insured (Policy Holder/Sponsor)
Description of activity (purpose of the policy)

The G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs also state that the sponsor must provide insurance or indemnify the investigator(s)/institution(s) against claims arising from the trial, except for those claims arising from malpractice and/or negligence as stipulated in the G-SLAppClinTrial. See Annex 7 of SLE-6 for suggested wording of the sponsor indemnification.

Compensation

Injury or Death

The SL-GCPs indicate that the sponsor's policies and procedures should address the costs of treatment of trial subjects in the event of trial-related injuries in accordance with the applicable requirement(s). In addition, when trial participants receive compensation, the method and manner of compensation should comply with the PBSL's requirements.

Trial Participation

According to the SL-GCPs, the ethics committee (EC) (i.e., the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC)) should review both the amount and method of payment to participants to assure that neither presents problems of coercion or undue influence. Payments to a participant should be prorated and not wholly contingent on the participant’s completion of the trial. The EC should also ensure that information regarding payment to participants, including the methods, amounts, and schedule of payment, is set forth in the written informed consent form and any other written information to be provided to participants. The way payment will be prorated should be specified.

Annex 7

5.1.3 and 5.26

5.1

Risk & Quality Management

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Per the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the sponsor should implement a system to manage quality throughout all stages of the trial process, focusing on trial activities essential to ensuring participant protection and the reliability of trial results. Per CAN-50, Canada implements the ICH Guidance E8(R1): General Considerations for Clinical Studies (CAN-49), which provides guidance on conduct during the clinical trial. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

As indicated in CAN-52, the quality management system should use a risk-based approach that includes:

During protocol development, identifying processes and data that are critical to ensure participant protection and the reliability of trial results
Identifying risks to critical trial processes and data
Evaluating the identified risks against existing risk controls
Deciding which risks to reduce and/or which risks to accept
Documenting quality management activities and communicate to those involved in or affected by these activities
Periodically reviewing risk control measures to ascertain whether the implemented quality management activities are effective and relevant
In the clinical study report, describing the quality management approach implemented in the trial and summarize important deviations from the predefined quality tolerance limits and remedial actions taken

As stated in the CanadaFDR and CAN-52, the sponsor is responsible for implementing and maintaining quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) systems with written standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure that trials are conducted and data generated, recorded, and reported in compliance with the protocol, CAN-52, and the applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor is responsible for obtaining agreement from all involved parties to ensure direct access to all trial related sites, source data/documents, reports for monitoring and auditing purposes, and inspection by domestic and foreign regulatory authorities. QC should be applied to each stage of data handling to ensure that all data are reliable and have been correctly processed. A written agreement must be signed by both the sponsor and the investigator or any other parties involved with the clinical trial, verifying that both parties agree to the trial protocol, the monitoring and auditing practices, the SOPs, and their respective duties.

Per CAN-50, HC adopted and implements the ICH guidance on statistical principles for clinical trials (CAN-53), as well as the ICH addendum on estimands and sensitivity analysis (CAN-39), which presents a framework for defining an appropriate estimand for a clinical trial and conducting sensitivity analyses.

Monitoring Requirements

As part of its QA system, CAN-52 notes that the sponsor should ensure the trial is monitored and audited. The purpose of the audit should be to evaluate trial conduct and compliance with the protocol, SOPs, CAN-52, and other applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor should appoint auditors to review the clinical trial. The sponsor should ensure that the auditors are qualified by training and experience, and the auditors’ qualifications should be documented. The sponsor must also ensure that the audit is conducted in accordance with their own SOPs and the auditor observations are documented. The sponsor should develop a systematic, prioritized, risk-based approach to monitoring clinical trials. The extent and nature of monitoring is flexible and permits varied approaches that improve effectiveness and efficiency. The sponsor may choose on-site monitoring, a combination of on-site and centralized monitoring, or, where justified, centralized monitoring. The sponsor should document the rationale for the chosen monitoring strategy (e.g., in the monitoring plan).

Per the HCNotice-ICH-E19, HC adopted and implements ICH guidance on selective safety data collection in specific late stage pre-approval or post-approval clinical trials (CAN-15). Selective safety data collection refers to the recording of certain data by investigators in case report forms. It does not affect the monitoring and clinical care of individual trial participants or documentation of their adverse events in medical records. See the HCNotice-ICH-E19 and the CAN-15 for more information.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

The CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps state that if a trial is prematurely terminated or suspended, the sponsor should inform HC no later than 15 days after the termination or suspension. In addition, the sponsor should provide HC with the reason(s) for the termination or suspension and its impact on the proposed or ongoing clinical trials related to the drug in Canada by the sponsor. The sponsor should also promptly notify the qualified investigators of the termination or suspension and advise them in writing of any potential risks to the participants’ health. Further, the G-CanadaCTApps states that the sponsor’s notification to HC should include confirmation that the sale or importation of the drug to the discontinued sites has been stopped and that reasonable measures to ensure the return of all unused quantities of the drug will be taken. This notification must also be submitted for premature discontinuation of a clinical trial or clinical trial site outside Canada where there are ongoing trials with the drug in Canada.

According to CAN-52, if it is discovered that noncompliance significantly affects or has the potential to significantly affect participant protection or reliability of trial results, the sponsor should perform a root cause analysis and implement appropriate corrective and preventive actions. Further, the ethics committee (EC) should also be informed promptly and provided the reason(s) for the termination or suspension by the sponsor.

Purpose and Scope, and Glossary

5.0-5.2, 5.18, 5.19, 5.21, and 6.10

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

2.8.1

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.007-008, C.05.010, and C.05.015))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

As stated in the SL-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for implementing and maintaining quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) systems with written standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure that trials are conducted and data are generated, recorded, and reported in compliance with the protocol, good clinical practice (GCP), and the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL)’s regulatory requirement(s). The sponsor is responsible for obtaining agreement from all involved parties to ensure direct access to all trial related sites, source data/documents, reports for monitoring and auditing purposes, and inspection by domestic and foreign regulatory authorities. QC should be applied to each stage of data handling to ensure that all data are reliable and have been correctly processed.

Monitoring Requirements

As part of its QA system, the SL-GCPs notes that the sponsor may choose to perform a clinical trial audit. The purpose of the audit should be to evaluate trial conduct and compliance with the protocol, SOPs, the PBSL, and other applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor should ensure that the auditors are qualified by training and experience, and that their qualifications are documented. The sponsor must also ensure that the audit is conducted in accordance with the sponsor’s own written procedures on what to audit, how to audit, the frequency of audits, and the form and content of audit reports. The observations and findings of the auditor(s) should be documented. No specific timeframe is provided for the audit process. See the SL-GCPs for detailed audit requirements.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

As per the SL-GCPs, if a trial is terminated or suspended prematurely, the sponsor should promptly inform the investigator(s)/institution(s) and the PBSL of the termination or suspension, and explain the reason(s) for the termination or suspension. The ethics committee (EC) (i.e., the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC)) should also be informed promptly and provided the reason(s) for the termination or suspension by the sponsor or by the investigator/institution.

5.19, 5.38, and 5.40

Data & Records Management

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Electronic Data Processing System

Per the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, when using electronic trial data handling processing systems, the sponsor must ensure and document that the electronic data processing system conforms to the sponsor’s established requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance. To validate such systems, the sponsor should use a risk assessment approach that takes into consideration the system’s intended use and potential to affect human subject protection and reliability of trial results. In addition, the sponsor must maintain standard operation procedures (SOPs) that cover system setup, installation, and use. The SOPs should describe system validation and functionality testing, data collection and handling, system maintenance, system security measures, change control, data backup, recovery, contingency planning, and decommissioning. With respect to the use of these computerized systems, the responsibilities of the sponsor, investigator, and other parties should be clear, and the users should receive relevant training. Note per CAN-50, HC-implemented ICH guidelines take precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. Refer to CAN-52 for additional information.

The G-FDR-0100 provides that if electronic records are generated during a clinical trial, then the electronic system must be validated to confirm that the system’s specifications meet the goals and requirements for the clinical trial. This evidence of validation should be kept for the required record retention period and available for inspection by Health Canada (HC) inspectors. See the G-FDR-0100 for additional details.

Records Management

As set forth in the CanadaFDR and the CanadaFDR1024, the sponsor must record, handle, and store all trial-related information to allow complete and accurate reporting, interpretation, and verification. The CanadaFDR requires the sponsor to maintain all trial-related records for a period of 15 years. Per the G-FDR-0100, sponsors may also be required to maintain records under provincial law, institutional policies, and contractual agreements with investigators, ethics committees (ECs), or others. Where it is not possible to comply with both sets of requirements, the CanadaFDR would govern and the records must be maintained for 15 years.

Pursuant to CanadaFDR1024, the sponsor must submit requested records to HC within 48 hours if safety concerns arise. Additionally, to facilitate inspection of a site, the sponsor must submit information to HC within seven (7) days of a request. Per CAN-8, an attestation must be completed by the EC that reviewed and approved the clinical trial. The completed attestation must be retained by the clinical trial sponsor for a period of 15 years. The attestation should not be submitted to HC unless requested.

In addition, CAN-52 states that the sponsor and investigator/institution should maintain a record of the location(s) of their respective essential documents including source documents. The storage system used during the trial and for archiving (irrespective of the type of media used) should allow for document identification, version history, search, and retrieval. The sponsor should ensure that the investigator has control of and continuous access to the data reported to the sponsor. The investigator/institution should have control of all essential documents and records generated by the investigator/institution before, during, and after the trial.

1.65, 5.5, 6.10, and 8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

5.12

Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.012))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Electronic Data Processing System

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, when using electronic trial data handling and/or remote electronic data systems, the sponsor must ensure and document that the electronic data processing system(s) conforms to the sponsor’s established requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance, and that the sponsor maintains standard operating procedures (SOPs) for using these systems. The responsibilities of the sponsor, investigator, and other parties with respect to the use of these computerized systems should be clear, and the users should be provided with training in their use. Refer to the SL-GCPs for detailed information on electronic trial data systems.

Records Management

As set forth in the SL-GCPs, the sponsor, or other data owners, should retain all sponsor-specific essential documents pertaining to the trial for at least two (2) years after formal discontinuation of the trial or in conformance with the applicable regulatory requirement(s) of the country(ies) where the product is approved, and/or where the sponsor intends to apply for approval(s). In addition, all clinical and experimental data (electronic or paper) must be kept in a secure place for a period of five (5) years, or 20 years for a new drug application, after a trial’s completion. The data must also be readily available for review upon request by the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL).

See the SL-GCPs for a list of essential documents for the conduct of a clinical trial.

5.23, 5.59, and 5.64

Personal Data Protection

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

Responsible Parties

The G-TCPS2, which sets the ethical benchmark for all Canadian institutional ethics committees (ECs), states that where researchers seek to collect, use, share, and access different types of information or data about participants, they should determine whether the information or data proposed in research may reasonably be expected to identify an individual. Researchers and ECs must consider whether information is identifiable or non-identifiable.

Data Protection

Per CAN-42, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada provides advice and information for individuals about protecting personal information, and enforces the two (2) federal privacy laws that set out the rules for how federal government institutions and certain businesses must handle personal information, including health data. The PrivAct covers the personal information-handling practices of federal government departments and agencies in Canada, and the PIPEDA regulates private businesses’ data protection practices. In addition, some provinces and territories have laws that deal specifically with protection of personal health information. See CAN-43 for a list of provincial and territorial privacy laws and webpages.

Per the G-TCPS2, in the research context, the most simplified method to protect participants is through the collection and use of anonymous or anonymized data. When anonymized data is not possible or desirable, a next best alternative is to use de-identified data, which is provided to the researcher in de-identified form and the existing key code is accessible only to a custodian or trusted third party who is independent of the researcher. Where it is not feasible to use anonymous or anonymized data for research, the ethical duty of confidentiality and the use of appropriate measures to safeguard information become paramount. Researchers should consult their ECs if they are uncertain about whether information proposed for use in research is identifiable (e.g., when proposing to link anonymized or coded data sets).

Consent for Processing Personal Data

Both PIPEDA and the PrivAct require consent for the use of personal data, including health data, except under prescribed conditions, such as for research or during emergencies. Also see CAN-43 for provincial and territorial privacy laws.

Chapter 2 (Article 2.1) and Chapter 5 (A. Key Concepts)

Part I (2, 6.1, and 7)

3, 7, and 8

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

No information is currently available regarding personal data protection requirements.

Documentation Requirements

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Obtaining Consent

In all Canadian clinical trials, a freely given informed consent is required from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the CanadaFDR, the G-TCPS2, CAN-35, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

As per the CanadaFDR, the G-TCPS2, and CAN-52, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by an institutional ethics committee (EC) (known as a Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada) and provided to HC with the clinical trial application (CTA). (See the Required Elements section for details on what should be included in the form.)

The G-TCPS2 and CAN-52 state that the qualified investigator (QI) must provide detailed research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. As delineated in the G-TCPS2, CAN-35, and CAN-52, the ICF content should be in plain language (i.e., non-technical and easy to understand) and provided in a format that facilitates understanding. For example, written documentation may be supplemented with audio and/or visual aids. The participant and legal representative/guardian should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate. CAN-35 notes that the person obtaining consent may also need to explain the consent form verbally to ensure that the participant fully understands the information. See CAN-35 for informed consent and assent templates and sample forms.

Re-Consent

According to CAN-52, any change in the ICF that is relevant to the participant’s consent should be approved by the institutional EC prior to implementing any changes. The participant or legal representative/guardian should also be informed in a timely manner if new information becomes available that may be relevant to the participant’s willingness to continue participation in the trial. The communication of this information should be documented.

Per the G-TCPS2, consent must be maintained throughout the research project. Researchers have a continuous duty to provide participants with all information relevant to their ongoing consent to participate in the research. Consent begins with the initial contact (e.g., recruitment) and carries through to the end of participation in the study. Throughout the clinical trial, researchers have a continuous responsibility to provide participants and ECs with all information relevant to participants’ ongoing consent to participate in the research. The researcher also must notify participants of any changes to the research project that may affect them. These changes may have ethical implications, may be relevant to their decision to continue in the study, or may be unique to the particular circumstances of individual participants. Specifically, researchers must disclose changes to the risks or potential benefits of the research. Change in participant capacity is an important element of ongoing consent. Rather than an age-based approach to consent, researchers should use an approach based on decision-making capacity in compliance with any laws governing research participation. This includes those whose decision-making capacity is in the process of development, those whose decision-making capacity is diminishing or fluctuating, and those whose decision-making capacity remains only partially developed. Mechanisms should be in place from the outset to identify and address any changes that could affect consent. Further, within the limits of consent provided by the participant, researchers should disclose to the participant any material incidental findings discovered in the course of research. Incidental findings are considered to be material incidental findings if they are reasonably determined to have significant welfare implications for the participant or prospective participant. Where material incidental findings are foreseeable, researchers should inform participants during the initial consent process. In addition, researchers should develop a management plan for review by the EC. For more information on how to address material incidental findings, see G-ConsentMatIncFindings.

Language Requirements

CAN-35 further specifies that consent forms should be provided in the language that participants are most comfortable with. The G-TCPS2 and CAN-52 require the ICF to be presented in plain language that the participant is able to understand. Per CAN-35, ICFs should be translated where it is relevant to particular communities. If there is a language barrier, the G-TCPS2 indicates that the qualified investigator should select an intermediary who has the necessary language skills to ensure effective communication. Further, per CAN-35, the level of language used should be appropriate to the age and comprehension/reading level of the participant population, generally at approximately a grade 6-8 reading level.

Documenting Consent

As per the G-TCPS2, CAN-52, and CAN-35, the participant or legal representative/guardian, as well as the qualified investigator, must sign and date the ICF. CAN-52 and the G-FDR-0100 state that the QI should retain the signed ICF. CAN-35 indicates that information letters and ICFs must be presented on institutional/department letterhead.

According to CAN-52, where the participant is illiterate and/or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, an impartial witness should be present during the entire informed consent discussion. The witness should sign and date the ICF after the following steps have occurred:

The written ICF and any other written information to be provided to the participant is read and explained to the participant and legal representative/guardian
The participant and legal representative/guardian have orally consented to the participant’s involvement in the trial, and have signed and dated the ICF, if capable of doing so

Before participating in the study, the participant or legal representative/guardian should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF.

As per the G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, none of the oral and written information concerning the research study, including the written ICF, should contain any language that causes the participant or legal representative/guardian to waive or appear to waive the participant’s legal rights, or that releases or appears to release the investigator(s), the institution, the sponsor, or their representative(s) from their liabilities for any negligence.

Per CAN-35, in some situations, written consent is not be feasible or desirable, for example due to logistical issues or because of the preferences of the participants. In addition, some individuals may perceive written consent as an attempt to legalize the consent process, thereby creating mistrust. It is also important to recognize that in some cultures written consent is not consistent with community traditions. In these cases, it may be more appropriate to use a handshake, a verbal agreement, or oral consent. Article 10.2 of the G-TCPS2 further indicates that researchers can use a range of procedures to seek and document consent, including oral consent documented in field notes, and other forms of recording (e.g., a consent log, audio or video recordings, or other electronic means). Evidence of consent may also be documented via completed questionnaires (in person, by mail, or by email or other electronic means). ECs should consider the power relationship that might exist between researchers and participants, and whether a waiver of the requirement for signed written consent may affect the welfare of the participants. If researchers plan to obtain non-written consent, they must explain their strategy to the EC.

Waiver of Consent

As explained in the G-TCPS2, there are research situations that call for alterations of consent. The EC may approve research that involves an alteration to the consent requirements if the EC is satisfied, and documents, that all of the following apply:

The research involves no more than minimal risk to the participants
The change to consent requirements is unlikely to adversely affect the welfare of participants
It is impossible or impracticable to carry out the research and to address the research question properly, given the research design, if the prior consent of participants is required
In the case of a proposed alteration, the exact nature and extent of any proposed alteration is defined
There is a plan to brief participants and offer the option of refusing consent and/or withdrawing data and/or human biological materials

4.8, 8.2, and 8.3

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Policies, Guidelines, and Resources; Consent Process (Key Considerations)

5.5, 5.6, 5.8, and 5.10

Chapters 3 and 10

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.005, C.05.006, C.05.008, and C.05.010))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Obtaining Consent

In all Sierra Leone clinical trials, a freely given informed consent must be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the SL-GCPs. In obtaining and documenting informed consent, the investigator should comply with Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) requirements and should adhere to good clinical practice (GCP) and to the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki (SLE-5), which is available in Appendix 3 of the SL-GCPs.

As per the SL-GCPs and the G-SLAppClinTrial, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document. The sponsor and principal investigator (PI) must submit the ICF to the PBSL with the clinical trial application. The G-SLEthics further indicates that the PI must also submit the ICF to the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), for review. (See the Required Elements section for details on what should be included in the form.)

The SL-GCPs states that the investigator, or the investigator’s designated representative, must provide detailed research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. In addition, the oral and written information concerning the trial, including the ICF, should be easy to understand and presented without coercion or unduly influencing a potential participant to enroll in the clinical trial. The participant or legal representative/guardian should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate.

As per the SL-GCPs, none of the oral and written information concerning the research study, including the written ICF, should contain any language that causes the participant or legal representative/guardian to waive or appear to waive their legal rights, or that releases or appears to release the investigator(s), the institution, the sponsor, or their representatives from their liabilities for any negligence.

Re-Consent

According to the SL-GCPs, the participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed in a timely manner if new information becomes available that may be relevant to the participant’s willingness to continue participation in the trial. The communication of this information should be documented, and the participant or legal representative/guardian should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF updates, including a copy of any amendments to the written information provided to the participants.

Language Requirements

As per SLE-23, the clinical trial application and accompanying material must be provided to the PBSL in English.

Documenting Consent

The SL-GCPs states that the participant or legal representative/guardian, as well as the investigator(s), must sign and date the ICF.

Where the participant is illiterate or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, an impartial witness should be present during the entire informed consent discussion. The witness should sign and date the ICF after:

The written ICF and any other written information is read and explained to the participant or legal representative/guardian;
The participant or legal representative/guardian has orally consented to the participant’s involvement in the trial; and
The participant or legal representative/guardian has signed and dated the ICF, if capable of doing so.

According to the G-SLEthics, the SLESRC does not accept verbal consent, except when supported by an independent witness.

Per the SL-GCPs, before participating in the study, the participant or legal representative/guardian should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF.

Waiver of Consent

The SL-GCPs delineates that where the protocol indicates that prior consent of the participant or legal representative/guardian is not possible, the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) should determine whether the proposed protocol and/or other document(s) adequately addresses relevant ethical concerns and meets applicable regulatory requirements for such trials. See the Emergencies and Mentally Impaired sections for more information.

5.1.3, 5.12, 5.28, 5.64, and Appendix 3

5.1

Required Elements

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Based on the G-TCPS2, the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), and CAN-35, the informed consent form (ICF) should include the following statements or descriptions in plain language, as applicable (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

The study involves research and an explanation of its purpose and duration
The trial treatment(s) and the probability for random assignment to each treatment
The procedures to be followed, including all invasive procedures
The participant’s responsibilities
Those aspects of the trial that are experimental
Any reasonably foreseeable risks or inconveniences to the participant and, when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant
Any reasonably expected benefits; if no benefit is expected, the participant should be made aware of this
The disclosure of specific alternative procedure(s) or therapies available to the participant, and their important potential benefits and risks
Compensation and/or treatment available to the participant in the event of a trial-related injury
The anticipated prorated payment, if any, to the participant for participating in the trial
Any expenses the participant needs to pay to participate in the trial
That participation is voluntary, and that the participant can refuse to participate or withdraw from the trial, at any time, without penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled
Information concerning the possibility of commercialization of research findings, and the presence of any real, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest on the part of the researchers, their institutions, or the research sponsors
Confidentiality of records identifying the participant will be maintained, and permission given to monitors, the auditors, the ethics committee (EC), and Health Canada (HC) to access the participant’s medical records to verify the procedures and/or data, without violating the confidentiality of the participant, insofar as the applicable laws and regulations permit, and that, by signing a written ICF, the participant or legal representative/guardian is authorizing such access
That records identifying the participant will not be made publicly available, insofar as the applicable laws and/or regulations permit; if the results of the trial are published, the participant’s identity will remain confidential
The participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified in a timely manner if information becomes available that may affect the participant’s willingness to continue
The qualified investigator’s contact information for further information regarding the trial and the rights of participants, and whom to contact in the event of a trial-related injury
The identity and contact information of a qualified designated representative who can explain scientific or scholarly aspects of the research to participants
Information on stopping rules, foreseeable circumstances, and/or reasons under which the participant’s involvement in the trial may be terminated
The approximate number of participants in the trial

Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented CAN-52.

Per CAN-35, if blood is taken, indicate total volume (e.g., teaspoons and milliliter equivalent) and note the possibility of bruising or swelling while giving blood, or other possible discomforts at the site where blood is drawn. Further, state that there may be minimal chance of infection and that discomforts experienced will be brief and transient.

CAN-35 also indicates that participants should not be told if an EC has approved the study, since this may appear to offer a guarantee of safety. Further, no clause or language should be used to excuse or appear to excuse investigators or other persons or institutions involved from liability for their negligence or other faults. Sample consent forms can be found in CAN-35.

See the Vulnerable Populations and Consent for Specimen sections for further information.

4.8

Efficacy guidelines

Policies, Guidelines, and Resources, and Consent Process (Sample consent forms)

Chapter 3

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Based on the SL-GCPs, the informed consent form (ICF) should include the following statements or descriptions, as applicable:

The study involves research and an explanation of its nature and purpose

Trial procedures to be followed, including all invasive procedures

Expected duration of participation

Participant’s responsibilities in the trial

Experimental aspects of the study

Approximate number of participants involved in the trial

The trial treatment(s) and the probability for random assignment to each treatment

Any foreseeable risks or discomforts, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant

Any expected benefits or prorated payment; if no benefit is expected, the participant should also be made aware of this

Alternative procedures or treatment that may be available

Compensation and/or medical treatment available to the participant in the event of a trial-related injury

Person(s) to contact for further information regarding the trial and the rights of trial participants, and whom to contact in the event of trial-related injury

Any additional costs that may result from participation in the research

That the monitor(s), the auditor(s), the ethics committee (EC) (i.e., the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC)), and the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) will be granted direct access to the participant’s original medical records to verify clinical trial procedures and/or data without violating the participant’s confidentiality

That records identifying the participant will be kept confidential and, to the extent permitted by applicable laws and/or regulations, will not be made publicly available. If the results are published, the participant’s identity will remain confidential

Foreseeable circumstances under which the investigator(s) may remove the participant without the participant’s consent

That participation is voluntary, the participant may withdraw at any time, and refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits, or reduction in the level of care to which the participant is otherwise entitled

The participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified in a timely manner if significant new findings develop during the course of the study which may affect the participant's willingness to continue

Additionally, see Annex 1 of SLE-6 for standardized wording for the ICF.

Annex 1

5.12.10

Participant Rights

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

In accordance with the CanadaFDR, the G-TCPS2, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), Canada’s ethical standards promote respect for all human beings and safeguard the rights of research participants. The G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, state that a participant’s rights must also be clearly addressed in the informed consent form (ICF) and during the informed consent process. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

The informed consent template in CAN-35 provides that if a participant has any questions about their rights, they should contact:

Health Canada-PHAC Research Ethics Board Secretariat
70 Colombine Driveway, Room 941C, PL: 0909C
Brooke Claxton Building, Tunney's Pasture
Ottawa, ON K1A 0K9
Telephone: 613-941-5199
Fax: 613-941-9093
reb-cer@hc-sc.gc.ca

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

As stated in the G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, the participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that they may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

Per CAN-35, participants should be assured that their participation is completely voluntary, they are under no obligation to participate, and they are free to withdraw at any time without consequence. It should be made clear that their decision to withdraw will not influence their relationship with the researcher in any way. The researcher should explain what will happen to participant samples or data if they choose to withdraw. If applicable, clearly state the point in the study at which removal of samples or data becomes difficult or impossible.

The Right to Information

As per the G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, a potential research participant or legal representative/guardian has the right to be informed about the nature and purpose of the research study, its anticipated duration, study procedures, any potential benefits or risks, any compensation or treatment in the case of injury, and any significant new information regarding the research study.

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

According to the G-TCPS2 and CAN-52, all participants must be afforded the right to privacy and confidentiality, and the ICF must provide a statement that recognizes this right.

Per CAN-35, the ICF should explain what information will be collected about participants and for what purpose, including the type of information that will be collected (e.g., will it be coded or de-identified?) and how it will be stored. Further, the ICF should state who will have access to the collected information and describe the efforts that will be made to prevent the risk of participant re-identification. Limits to confidentiality and additional requirements for projects led by HC or the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) are provided in CAN-35.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

The G-TCPS2 and CAN-52 state that the research participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the individual responsible for addressing trial-related inquiries and/or the participant’s rights.

The Right to Safety and Welfare

CAN-52, which upholds the Declaration of Helsinki, clearly state that a research participant’s right to safety and the protection of their health and welfare must take precedence over the interests of science and society.

See the Required Elements and Vulnerable Populations sections for additional information regarding requirements for participant rights.

1.27, 3.1, and 4.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Consent Process (Consent Form Template)

5.1 and 5.5

Chapter 1 (Article 1.1), Chapter 2, and Chapter 3 (Articles 3.1 and 3.2)

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001 and C.05.005))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

In accordance with the SL-GCPs, which is guided by the International Council for Harmonsation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (SLE-24), the Declaration of Helsinki (SLE-5), and other international guidelines, Sierra Leone’s ethical standards promote respect for all human beings and safeguard the rights of research participants. The SL-GCPs and the G-SLAppClinTrial state that a participant’s rights must also be clearly addressed in the informed consent form (ICF) and during the informed consent process.

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

As stated in the SL-GCPs, the participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that the participant may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

The Right to Information

As per the SL-GCPs, a potential research participant or legal representative/guardian has the right to be informed about the nature and purpose of the research study, its anticipated duration, study procedures, any potential benefits or risks, any compensation or treatment in the case of injury, and any significant new information regarding the research study.

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

According to the SL-GCPs and the G-SLAppClinTrial, all participants must be afforded the right to privacy and confidentiality, and the ICF must provide a statement that recognizes this right.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

The SL-GCPs states that the research participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the sponsor and the investigator(s) to address trial-related inquiries and/or the participant’s rights.

The Right to Safety and Welfare

As set forth in the SL-GCPs and the G-SLAppClinTrial, the research participant’s dignity, safety, and welfare must take precedence over the interests of science and society.

See the Required Elements and Vulnerable Populations sections for additional information regarding requirements for participant rights.

5.0-5.1, 5.12, and Appendix 3

5.1-5.2

Emergencies

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

The G-TCPS2 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, make provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when the procedure is complicated by medical emergencies. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. As per CAN-52, in an emergency, if the signed informed consent form (ICF) has not been obtained from the research participant or legal representative/guardian, or, if an effective treatment is lacking but the investigational product could address the participant’s emergency needs, the clinical trial may be conducted. However, the method used on the participant must be explained clearly in the trial protocol, and the ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Board (REB) in Canada) must approve the protocol in advance. The participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed about the trial as soon as possible, and consent to continue and other consent should be requested, as appropriate.

Per G-TCPS2, research involving medical emergencies must be conducted only if it addresses the emergency needs of the individuals involved, and then only in accordance with criteria established in advance of such research by the EC. The EC may allow research that involves medical emergencies to be carried out without the consent of participants, or legal representatives/guardians, if all of the following apply:

A serious threat to the prospective participant requires immediate intervention
Either no standard efficacious care exists, or the research offers a realistic possibility of direct benefit to the participant in comparison with standard care
Either the risk is not greater than that involved in standard efficacious care, or it is clearly justified by the prospect for direct benefits to the participant
The prospective participant is unconscious or lacks capacity to understand the risks, methods, and purposes of the research project
Authorization from the legal representative/guardian cannot be secured in sufficient time, despite diligent and documented efforts to do so
No relevant prior directive by the participant is known to exist

4.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy Guidelines

Chapter 3 (Articles 3.7-3.9)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

The SL-GCPs make provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when the procedure is complicated by emergency situations.

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, if the signed informed consent form (ICF) cannot be obtained from the research participant in an emergency, then the consent of the legal representative/guardian, if present, should be obtained. If prior consent of the participant or legal representative/guardian cannot be obtained, then the participant’s enrollment should follow measures specified in the protocol, and/or elsewhere, with documented approval/favorable opinion by the ethics committee (EC) (i.e., the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC)) and the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) to protect the rights, safety, and well-being of the participant and ensure compliance with EC and PBSL requirements. The participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed about the trial and provide consent as soon as possible.

In addition, per the SL-GCPs, because the participants who are experiencing medical emergencies are usually extremely vulnerable, these individuals should be excluded from all but minimally invasive observational research. ECs must also take great care when assessing emergency care research. Once the researcher has presented clear reasons to justify the initiation of emergency care research without consent to the EC, the EC may approve the research provided it is satisfied that:

Reasonable steps are being taken to ascertain the religious and cultural sensitivities of participants experiencing medical emergencies
The condition of the participant precludes the giving of consent
Inclusion in the trial is not contrary to the interests of the participant
The research is intended to be therapeutic and poses no more risk than is inherent to the patient’s condition or would be caused by alternative methods of treatment
The participant and the legal representative/guardian will be informed as soon as is reasonably possible of the patient’s inclusion in the study and of the option to withdraw from the research project at any time
The participant will be informed, and consent obtained, once the participant who has undergone the necessary emergency procedures has regained consciousness
The research is based on valid scientific hypotheses and offers a realistic possibility of benefit over standard care

4.0, 5.4, and 5.12

Vulnerable Populations

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Overview

As per the G-TCPS2, in all Canadian clinical trials, research participants selected from vulnerable populations must be provided additional protections to safeguard their health and welfare during the informed consent process. The International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52) characterizes vulnerable populations as those who may be unduly influenced by the expectation, whether justified or not, of benefits associated with participation, or of a retaliatory response from not participating. Examples are members of a group with a hierarchical structure, such as medical, pharmacy, dental, and nursing students; subordinate hospital and laboratory personnel; employees of the pharmaceutical industry; members of the armed forces; and persons kept in detention. Other vulnerable subjects include patients with incurable diseases, persons in nursing homes, unemployed or impoverished persons, patients in emergency situations, ethnic minority groups, homeless persons, nomads, refugees, minors, and those incapable of giving consent.

CAN-52, which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, specifies that ethics committees (ECs) (known as Research Ethics Boards in Canada) must pay special attention to protecting participants who are from vulnerable populations. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

See the Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these vulnerable populations.

1.61, 3.1, and 4.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy Guidelines

Chapter 3 (Article 3.9) and Chapter 4 (Article 4.7)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Overview

As per the SL-GCPs, in all Sierra Leonean clinical trials, research participants selected from vulnerable populations must be provided additional protections to safeguard their health and welfare during the informed consent process.

According to the SL-GCPs and the G-SLAppClinTrial, vulnerable populations include individuals whose willingness to volunteer in a clinical trial may be unduly influenced by the expectation, whether justified or not, of benefits associated with the participation, or of a retaliatory response from senior members of a hierarchy in case of refusal to participate. The SL-GCPs states that other participants representing vulnerable populations include patients with incurable diseases, persons in nursing homes, unemployed or impoverished persons, patients in emergency situations, ethnic minority groups, homeless persons, nomads, refugees, minors, and those incapable of giving consent. Additionally, types of research that need additional attention include research involving collectivities, indigenous medical systems, innovative therapy or interventions, HIV and AIDS clinical and epidemiological research, and emergency care research.

The SL-GCPs indicates that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), must pay special attention to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants, including minors, women, persons with mental disabilities or substance abuse related disorders, persons in dependent relationships or comparable situations, prisoners, and persons highly dependent on medical care.

Persons Highly Dependent on Medical Care

According to the SL-GCPs, participants who are highly dependent on medical care must be given special attention to protect the welfare of this vulnerable study population. Researchers need to acknowledge that the participant’s medical condition may compromise the participant’s informed consent and affect the participant’s ability to form an opinion or to communicate. There may also be a perception of coercion if a participant is reluctant to refuse consent for fear that it may compromise the participant’s medical treatment.

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, the following research areas require investigators to pay special attention to these participants to safeguard their welfare and ensure proper consent:

Intensive care research – Characteristic features are the difficulties in communicating with participants receiving ventilatory assistance and the impairment of cognition in heavily sedated participants. Whenever possible, information should be obtained from potential participants prior to their admission to intensive care. These participants should be excluded from all but minimally invasive observational research due to their extreme vulnerability.
Neonatal intensive care research – Research involving infants should be conducted in strict accordance with the principles discussed in the Children/Minors section. These principles do not permit research that is contrary to the child’s best interests.
Terminal care research – Research in terminal care is distinguished by the short remaining life expectancy of participants and potential vulnerability to unrealistic expectations of benefits. Researchers must ensure that the prospect of benefit from research participation is neither exaggerated nor used to justify a higher risk than that involved in the participant’s current treatment.
Research involving persons with impaired capacity to communicate or unconscious persons – Refer to the Mentally Impaired section.

Persons in Dependent Groups

As set forth in the SL-GCPs, for participants whose proposed involvement in research arises from dependent or comparable relationships, the EC must be satisfied that the participants’ consent is both adequately informed and voluntary. The following list provides some examples of hierarchically structured groups and the junior or subordinate relationships that may exist in these groups:

Older persons and their caregivers
Persons with chronic conditions or disabilities and their caregivers
Wards of the state and guardians
Patients and healthcare professionals
Students and teachers
Prisoners and prison authorities
Persons with life-threatening illnesses
Employees and employers (e.g., farm workers and their employers, members of the uniformed services and hospital staff and their employers)

See the Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these vulnerable populations.

4.0, 5.1, and 5.4

4.0

Children/Minors

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Per CAN-35, because the G-TCPS2 does not specify an age of consent for children, the decision on whether to seek consent from children is based on whether they have the capacity to understand the research and the risks and benefits of their participation. Youth who have not reached the age of majority (either 18 or 19 depending on the province or territory) may still be old enough to provide their own consent. For children who are not sufficiently mature to provide consent but are able to understand the nature of study participation, researchers must obtain the child’s assent in addition to the consent of an authorized third party. The decision of a child not to assent must be respected regardless of whether third-party consent was obtained.

CAN-35 provides the following criteria for determining whether participants can provide their own consent, or whether an authorized third party should be involved:

The risk level associated with the research project
The legal requirements for age of consent in that jurisdiction
The characteristics of the research participant (e.g., maturity level)
In certain cases, the topic of the research itself

CAN-35 states that it is generally accepted that youth can consent to minimal risk studies at 16 years of age, and that assent should be sought from children beginning at approximately seven (7) years of age. However, it is ultimately up to the researcher to determine whether to obtain assent or consent from children, and to provide the rationale for this decision to the ethics committee (EC) (known as a Research Ethics Board in Canada). Researchers should also consider that within a single research project, some minors may be capable of consenting while others may not. See CAN-35 for additional details regarding obtaining consent from minors.

As per the G-TCPS2 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), when the research participant is a child, the informed consent form (ICF) must be signed by the child’s parent/legal guardian. All pediatric participants, however, should be informed to the extent compatible with the child’s understanding, and if capable, the pediatric participant should sign and personally date the ICF. Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented CAN-52. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

As stated in G-TCPS2, children should only participate in clinical studies when the research objective cannot be achieved with adult participants only. When considering the inclusion of children in research, the investigators and ECs must consider a child’s stage of physical, physiological, psychological, and social development to ensure adequate protections for the child’s welfare.

Assent Requirements

Per G-TCPS2 and TCPS2-InterpCnsnt, where a child has some ability to understand the significance of the research, the researcher must ascertain the wishes of that individual with respect to participation. Children—whose decision-making capacity is in the process of development—may be capable of verbally or physically assenting to, or dissenting from, participation in research. While their assent would not be sufficient to permit them to participate in the absence of consent by the child’s parent/legal guardian, their expression of dissent must be respected.

Further, according to CAN-12, which offers best practices and guidance to researchers and ECs in pediatric research and complements the G-TCPS2, provincial laws in Canada vary as to when a child is presumed to be legally competent to provide informed consent. Some provinces use age while others use a competence-based evaluation.

As per CAN-12, if the pediatric participant has the capacity for assent, then affirmative assent is required to participate in a study according to the participant’s level of development and capacities. When the child develops the legal capacity to provide informed consent or attains the legal age of majority (which depends on the province), researchers should obtain an informed consent. Regarding dissent, CAN-12 states that the researchers must respect the dissent of a child who is capable of understanding.

CAN-35 provides sample assent forms and templates. For more detail and guidance about best practices for research involving pediatric participants, see CAN-12.

Guidelines III and IV

4.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Consent Process (Key Considerations)

Chapter 3 (Article 3.10) and Chapter 4 (Article 4.4)

1

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

According to the SL-GCPs, a minor is someone under 18 years of age.

As set forth in the SL-GCPs, when the participant is a minor, informed consent must be obtained from the participant’s parent/legal guardian. Assent from the minor must also be obtained where the minor is capable of understanding. A minor’s refusal to participate in research must be respected.

The SL-GCPs indicates that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), must pay special attention to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants, including minors. Research involving minors should be approved only if:

The research interventions, including those in observational research, presents the participant with no greater than minimal risk; or
The research interventions present more than minimal risk but hold out the prospect of direct benefit for the participant; or
The research interventions, including those in observational research, present more than minimal risk and do not hold out the prospect of direct benefit to the participant, but have a high probability of yielding generalizable knowledge.

In all cases, the protocol must provide sufficient information to justify clearly why minors should be included as participants.

Assent Requirements

The G-SLAppClinTrial also states that in trials involving minors, the parent/legal guardian of a minor is required to sign an informed consent form (ICF). In addition, an assent form similar to the ICF must also be signed and dated by a minor who is capable of understanding as a confirmation of the minor’s willingness to participate in a trial, after having been informed of all aspects of the trial that are relevant to the minor’s decision to participate.

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, assent refers to a minor’s affirmative agreement to participate in research. If a minor fails to object, this should not be construed as assent. The EC (i.e., the SLESRC) must ensure that adequate steps are specified in the protocol to obtain the minor’s assent when, in the EC’s judgment, the minor is capable of providing such assent. Additionally, when the EC determines that assent is required, it must also indicate whether and how such assent must be documented.

4.0, 5.4, and 5.4.1

5.1

Pregnant Women, Fetuses & Neonates

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

As per the G-TCPS2, studies involving women of childbearing age, or who are pregnant, require additional safeguards to ensure that the research assesses the risks to the women and the fetuses. The following guidance applies to research involving materials related to human reproduction:

Research using materials related to human reproduction in the context of an anticipated or ongoing pregnancy must not be undertaken if the information can reasonably be obtained by alternative methods
Materials related to human reproduction for research use must not be obtained through commercial transaction, including exchange for services

Per the G-TCPS2, research on in vitro embryos already created and intended for implantation to achieve pregnancy is acceptable if:

The research is intended to benefit the embryo
Research interventions will not compromise the care of the woman, or the subsequent fetus
Researchers closely monitor the safety and comfort of the woman and the safety of the embryo
Consent was provided by the gamete donors

According to the G-TCPS2, research involving embryos that have been created for reproductive or other purposes permitted by law, but are no longer required for these purposes, may be ethically acceptable if:

The ova and sperm from which they are formed were obtained in accordance with the G-TCPS2
Consent was provided by the gamete donors
Embryos exposed to manipulations not directed specifically to their ongoing normal development will not be transferred for continuing pregnancy
Research involving embryos will take place only during the first 14 days after their formation by combination of the gametes, excluding any time during which embryonic development has been suspended

Per the G-TCPS2, research involving a fetus or fetal tissue:

Requires the consent of the woman
Must not compromise the woman’s ability to make decisions regarding continuation of her pregnancy

In accordance with the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, informed consent requirements for conducting clinical trials with pregnant or nursing women or fetuses follow the general requirements listed in the Required Elements section. Specifically, the informed consent form should include a statement on the reasonably foreseeable risks or inconveniences to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

4.8

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy Guidelines

Chapter 4 (Article 4.3) and Chapter 12 (Articles 12.6-12.9)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

The SL-GCPs requires that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), pay special attention to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants, including women who are or may become pregnant.

The SL-GCPs states that the following conditions must be met for research conducted with pregnant women and fetuses:

Applicable studies on animals and non-pregnant individuals have been completed
The purpose of the study is to meet the health needs of the mother of the particular fetus, the risk to the fetus is minimal and, in all cases, presents the least possible risk for achieving the study’s objectives
Individuals engaged in the study will have no part in any decision as to the timing, method, and procedures used to terminate the pregnancy, and determining the viability of the fetus at the termination of the pregnancy
No procedural changes that could cause greater than minimal risk to the fetus or the pregnant woman will be introduced into the procedure for terminating the pregnancy solely in the interest of the activity

Per the SL-GCPs, for any study to be conducted that is associated with either the fetus in utero or ex utero, the parents should be legally competent and have given their informed consent.

The SL-GCPs also specifies that the father’s informed consent does not need to be obtained if any of the following applies:

The study purpose is to meet the mother’s health needs
The father’s identity or whereabouts cannot be reasonably established
The father is not reasonably available
The pregnancy is the result of rape

Further, per the SL-GCPs, no fetus in utero may be involved as a research participant unless:

The purpose of the study is to meet the health needs of the particular fetus, and the fetus will be placed at risk only to the minimum extent necessary to meet these needs
The risk to the fetus in the proposed study is minimal, and the study’s objective is to obtain biomedical knowledge that cannot be achieved by other means

According to the SL-GCPs, until it has been established whether a fetus ex utero is viable, a fetus ex utero may not be involved as a participant in any research study unless one (1) of the following conditions is met:

The fetus faces no added risk from participation in the study, and the purpose of the study is to develop biomedical knowledge that cannot be obtained by other means
The purpose of the study is to enhance the possibility of survival of the particular fetus to the point of viability

The SL-GCPs states that nonviable fetuses may not be involved as participants in any research activity unless both of these conditions are met:

The vital functions of the fetus will not be artificially maintained; experimental activities that would terminate the heartbeat or respiration of the fetus will not be employed
The purpose of the study is to acquire biomedical knowledge not otherwise obtainable

Participants engaged in the study will have no part in any decision as to timing, method, and procedures used to terminate the pregnancy, and/or determining the viability of the fetus at the pregnancy’s termination.

5.4 and 5.4.2

Prisoners

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

According to the G-TCPS2 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, prisoners are considered vulnerable because incarceration could affect their ability to make a voluntary decision regarding participation in research. A research study involving prisoners should ensure that these prospective participants are informed and are given the opportunity to make their own decisions without any interference from a higher authority. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

1.61

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Chapter 3 (Article 3.1) and Chapter 4 (Article 4.7)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

The SL-GCPs indicates that the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), must pay special attention to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants, including prisoners. Prisoners are considered vulnerable because incarceration could affect their ability to make a voluntary decision regarding participation in research. A research study may only involve prisoners as participants when the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) has ensured that the clinical trial involves:

The study of the possible causes, effects, and processes of incarceration and of criminal behavior with no more than minimal risk and inconvenience to the participants
The study of prisons as institutional structures or of prisoners as incarcerated persons
Research on conditions particularly affecting prisoners as a class (e.g., vaccine trials and other research on diseases that may be more prevalent in prisons, and research on social and psychological problems such as alcoholism, drug addiction, and sexual assaults) only after appropriate experts have been consulted
Research on practices, both innovative and accepted, that have the intent and probability of improving the health or wellbeing of prisoners

In addition, per the SL-GCPs, in a study where some prisoners may be assigned to control groups that may not benefit from the research, the study may proceed only after appropriate experts have been consulted. Research that could be conducted on a population other than prisoners should not be permitted unless the EC is presented with a valid case and is convinced that the study does not represent exploitative research.

The SL-GCPs also states that when the EC reviews research involving prisoners, the following requirements must be met:

The majority of the EC members, other than prison members, must have no association with the prison(s) involved
At least one (1) member of the EC must be a prisoner, or a prisoners’ representative with appropriate background and experience to serve in that capacity. Where a research project is reviewed by more than one (1) EC, only one (1) EC need satisfy this requirement

5.4 and 5.4.5

Mentally Impaired

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

According to the G-TCPS2 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), the ethics committee (EC) (known as Research Ethics Board in Canada) must approve the participation of research participants who are mentally or physically incapable of giving consent. Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented CAN-52.

Per CAN-35, adults with diminished decision-making capacity include:

Individuals whose decision-making capacity remains only partially developed, such as those living with permanent cognitive impairment, and
Individuals who once were capable of making an autonomous decision regarding consent but whose decision-making capacity is diminishing or fluctuating (e.g., due to cognitive impairment resulting from an injury or disease).

Per CAN-35, as is the case for any vulnerable population, care must be taken to ensure that adults with diminished decision-making capacity are not inappropriately included in research because of their situation, and neither should they be excluded from participating in research that may benefit them.

The G-TCPS2 indicates that for research involving individuals who lack the capacity, either permanently or temporarily, to decide for themselves whether to participate, the EC must ensure that, at a minimum, the following conditions are met:

The researcher involves participants who lack the capacity to decide on their own behalf to the greatest extent possible in the decision-making process
The researcher seeks and maintains consent from the participant’s legal representative/guardian in accordance with the best interests of the persons concerned
The legal representative/guardian is not the researcher or any other member of the research team
The researcher demonstrates that the research is being carried out for the participant’s direct benefit, or for the benefit of other persons in the same category; if the research does not have the potential for direct benefit to the participant but only for the benefit of the other persons in the same category, the researcher shall demonstrate that the research will expose the participant to only a minimal risk and minimal burden, and demonstrate how the participant’s welfare will be protected throughout the participation in research
When authorization for participation was granted by a legal representative/guardian, and a participant acquires or regains decision-making capacity during the course of the research, the researcher must promptly seek the participant’s consent as a condition of continuing participation

Per CAN-35 and the G-TCPS2, the participant’s legal representative/guardian can provide consent for adults who lack the capacity to decide on their own behalf in accordance with the best interests of the persons concerned. In such cases, participants should still be involved to the greatest extent possible in the decision-making process, and their assent to participate must be obtained if they are capable of expressing their wishes in a meaningful way (whether verbally or physically). Importantly, when authorization for participation was granted by the participant’s legal representative/guardian and a participant acquires or regains decision-making capacity during the course of the research, the researcher must promptly seek the participant’s consent as a condition of continuing participation.

Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

1.61 and 3.1

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

Consent Process (Key Considerations)

Chapter 3 (Article 3.7-3.10)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

According to the SL-GCPs, the national ethics committee (EC), the Sierra Leone Ethics and Scientific Review Committee (SLESRC), must pay special attention to research participants with mental disabilities, including those with psychiatric, cognitive, or developmental disorders, or participants with substance abuse related disorders. Individuals who have been institutionalized may be further compromised in terms of their capacity to make a truly voluntary decision to participate in a study.

Per the SL-GCPs, research involving people with mental disabilities or with substance abuse related disorders must therefore:

Be relevant to mental disabilities or substance abuse related disorders so that it is necessary to involve people who have a mental disability and/or a substance abuse related disorder(s)
Justify the involvement, as the study population, of institutionalized people with mental disabilities
Ensure appropriate evaluation procedures for ascertaining the participants’ ability to provide informed consent. If participants are deemed unable to understand and make a choice, then consent should be obtained from the participant’s legal representative/guardian
Ensure that consent is free from coercion and risk to participants
Ensure that only minimal risk is involved, and that the risk is outweighed by the anticipated benefits for the participants and by the importance of the knowledge that will be derived from the research

In addition, the SL-GCPs notes that persons with intellectual or mental impairment should not participate in research that might be conducted equally well with individuals without those impairments. Consent cannot be given that is contrary to the interests of a participant with mental or intellectual impairment, and the person's refusal to participate in research must always be respected. Accordingly, consent must be obtained from one (1) of the following:

The participant to the extent that the participant is competent to give informed consent
The participant’s legal representative/guardian when the participant is deemed not competent to do so
An authority, organization, or individual legally authorized to do so

The SL-GCPs further states that research involving participants with impaired capacity to communicate also requires special attention. The distinguishing features of research involving participants with impaired capacity to communicate include acute impairment states requiring medical care, as well as non-acute states. In acute impairment states, the condition and medical care may mask the participant’s degree of cognition and require different means of expression. In non-acute impairment states, the condition may prevent the participant from expressing wishes at all.

As indicated in the SL-GCPs, research involving unconscious persons requires consent to be provided by the participant’s legal representative/guardian, including any relevant statutory authorities, on that person’s behalf. Because of their extreme vulnerability, unconscious persons should be excluded from all but minimally invasive observational research. When neither the prospective participant nor the legal representative/guardian is able to give consent in advance, the EC (i.e., the SLESRC) may approve a research project without prior consent if it is satisfied that:

Inclusion in the trial is not contrary to the interests of the participant
The research is intended to be therapeutic and poses no more risk than is inherent to the participant’s condition or would be caused by alternative methods of treatment
The participant and the legal representative/guardian will be informed as soon as is reasonably possible of the participant’s inclusion in the study and of the option to withdraw from the research project at any time
The research is based on valid scientific hypotheses and offers a realistic possibility of benefit over standard care

5.4, 5.4.3, and 5.4.6

Definition of Investigational Product

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

As delineated in the CanadaFDR, the G-GMP-Annex13, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), an investigational product is defined as a pharmaceutical form of an active ingredient or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial, including a product with a marketing authorization when used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a way different from the approved form. Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented CAN-52. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent.

For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

1.33

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

3.0

5.1

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

As delineated in the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, an investigational product (IP) is defined as a pharmaceutical form of an active ingredient or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial. This includes a product with a marketing authorization when it is used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a different way from the approved form, when used for an unapproved indication, or when used to gain further information about an approved use.

4.0

Manufacturing & Import

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Manufacturing

As specified in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), Health Canada (HC) authorizes the manufacture of investigational products (IPs) in Canada. HC approves the manufacture of IPs as part of the clinical trial application (CTA) approval. Per CAN-50, Canada has implemented CAN-52. Note that per CAN-50, HC-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. The G-QCM-PharmCTAs provides guidance and templates to assist sponsors in completing the quality portion of the CTA, which in turn, enables HC to assess IP characteristics adequately. The G-GMP-Annex13 requires the sponsor to ensure that IPs for clinical trials are manufactured and imported in accordance with its provisions and with CanadaFDR requirements. Per the G-CanadaCTApps, sponsors must file amendments or notifications to a previously authorized CTA when manufacturing changes are proposed that may affect the quality or safety of the clinical trial drug or biologic supplies.

Import

Per the CanadaFDR and the G-FDR-0100, HC authorizes the sponsor to import an IP. A sponsor who is not based in Canada must have a Canadian representative who is responsible for the import of the IP and demonstrates compliance with the applicable regulatory requirements. This representative should be the sponsor’s senior medical or scientific officer residing in Canada and is responsible for providing an attestation with respect to the CTA at the time of filing. Per the G-CanadaCTApps, the G-DrugApp, and CAN-4, if clinical trial drugs are to be imported into Canada, the authorization template (Appendix 1) in CAN-4 should be completed and submitted for each importer in Canada. The G-DrugApp states that Canadian importer(s) must be located within Canada. As additional importers are identified, additional copies of the authorization template in CAN-4 should be provided to HC. The G-FDR-0100, provides additional guidance on requirements if a sponsor plans to send the clinical trial IP(s) directly to each trial site:

Each party, including individual Canadian clinical trial sites, importing drugs directly (i.e., receiving drug shipment directly from outside of Canada) is identified on Appendix 1 of the Drug Submission Application Form (HC/SC 3011 form) (CAN-4) for Phase I-III trials (submitted with the application if known at the time or prior to importation at the site). Appendix 1 may be replicated as many times as necessary to capture all importing parties.
Clinical Trial Site Information (CTSI) forms (CAN-6) for each Canadian site conducting the clinical trial are submitted to HC for Phase I-III trials, prior to the start of the study.
Systems are in place, when appropriate, to monitor the transportation and storage conditions from the foreign source to the various clinical trial sites across Canada.
There is documented accountability of the imported drugs used in clinical trials and distributed to various clinical trial sites located in Canada, including the disposition of drugs returned from the clinical trial sites.
A written agreement is in place between the sponsor and the qualified investigator describing their specific responsibilities, and this agreement is available at the clinical trial site.
There is evidence that the drugs used in clinical trials conducted in Canada meet Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) requirements (e.g., certificates of manufacture, certificates of analysis, and/or evidence of approved lot release by a qualified individual).

The G-CanadaCTApps, the G-HlthProdImprtExptReqs, the G-FDR-0100, and CAN-32 state that if a sponsor wants to import a drug into Canada for a clinical trial, a copy of HC’s authorization (i.e., the No Objection Letter (NOL)) issued by either the Pharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (PDD) or the Biologic and Radiopharmaceutical Drugs Directorate (BRDD) must be included for the applicable trial with the shipment. A copy of this authorization must be provided at the port of entry. The G-HlthProdImprtExptReqs states that drugs without a Drug Identification Number may be imported where authorized for a Canadian clinical trial and a NOL was issued. The G-FDR-0100 further states that if 30 days have passed and the NOL was not issued, specific requests to import IPs should be directed to the Health Product Border Compliance Program at the following email account: hc.hpbcp-pcpsf.sc@canada.ca. Note that a sponsor does not have to submit a CTA for authorization to import an IP used in a Phase IV clinical trial.

Per CanadaFDR, the sponsor can make the following changes to the authorized use or importation of drugs if the sponsor notifies HC in writing within 15 days after the date of the change:

A change to the chemistry and manufacturing information that does not affect the quality or safety of the drug
A change to the protocol that does not alter the risk to the health of a clinical trial subject

Other changes must follow the amendment requirements delineated in the CanadaFDR. See the G-FDR-0100 for additional HC interpretations of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR.

Appendix 1

2.12 and 5.13

Drug Importation

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

1.0

2.3 and 2.7

5.2-5.3 and 5.6

I, S Drug Substance, and P Drug Product

Section # Block D and Appendix 1 Guidance

Importer’s Role, Table 1, and Human Drugs

Part C (Divisions 2-5)

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Manufacturing

As set forth in the PDA2001, the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) is responsible for authorizing the manufacture of all drug products in Sierra Leone. According to the SL-GCPs, the sponsor must ensure that the investigational product (IP) is manufactured in accordance with applicable good manufacturing practice (GMP).

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that a GMP certificate from the national competent authority of the country of origin is required when the IP has no marketing authorization in Sierra Leone, or has marketing authorization but its original indication is modified for the purpose of the trial. The GMP certificate should conform to the World Health Organization (WHO) format.

Import

The G-SLAppClinTrial states that the PBSL is responsible for authorizing the import of IPs. A request to import an IP may be submitted after the PBSL has approved the clinical trial application.

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that the import application submission must include the following documentation:

Letter stating the name/description and quantities of each IP, placebo, and trial related product to be imported as well as the details of the location where the product is coming from and details of the recipient in Sierra Leone
Certificate of analysis of IP and placebo for all batches to be imported
Lot release certificate (where applicable) for all batches to be imported
Investigator, sponsor, and recognized clinical research entity’s name and address

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL’s processing time for IP import permits is 10 working days. Imported IPs may be inspected by PBSL officials at the port of entry before they are released to the recognized clinical research entity. The PBSL may order for destruction or re-exportation of the IPs if it has any reason to believe that there is a protocol violation resulting in the termination of the study. See the G-SLAppClinTrial for detailed IP import requirements.

As per the G-FastReg, if a product being registered in Sierra Leone is going to be used in a clinical trial, the registration application may be expedited. If the conditions for expedited registration are fulfilled, the PBSL will process the application and communicate its decision within 21 calendar days.

Please note: Sierra Leone is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (SLE-2), which may have implications for studies of IPs developed using certain non-human genetic resources (e.g., plants, animals, and microbes). For more information, see SLE-18.

5.32

5.1, 5.9, and Appendix XI

Parts V and IX

Quality Requirements

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Investigator’s Brochure

In accordance with the CanadaFDR and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the sponsor is responsible for providing the investigators with an Investigator’s Brochure (IB). The CanadaFDR and CAN-52 specify that the IB must contain all of the relevant information on the investigational product(s) (IPs), including significant physical, chemical, pharmaceutical, pharmacological, toxicological, pharmacokinetic, metabolic, and clinical information. The sponsor must ensure that an up-to-date IB is made available to the investigator(s), and the investigator(s) must provide an up-to-date IB to the ethics committee. Note that per CAN-50, Health Canada (HC)-implemented ICH guidance takes precedence over other HC guidance when they are not consistent. For HC’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100.

The CanadaFDR and CAN-52 require the IB to provide coverage of the following areas:

Physical, chemical, and pharmaceutical properties and formulation parameters
Non-clinical studies (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, toxicology, and metabolism profiles)
Effects of IP in humans (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and pharmacodynamics; safety and efficacy; and regulatory and post-marketing experiences)
Summary of data and guidance for the investigator(s)

See Section 7.3 of CAN-52 for detailed content guidelines.

In accordance with the G-CanadaCTApps and CAN-22, the sponsor must submit annually to HC an updated IB, which serves as the annual report, including all safety information and global status. Revisions that are more frequent may be appropriate depending on the stage of development and the generation of relevant new information.

Quality Management

Pursuant to CAN-52, the sponsor must maintain a Certificate of Analysis to document the identity, purity, and strength of the IP(s) to be used in the clinical trial. As specified in CAN-52, G-GMP-CAN, and G-GMP-Annex13, the sponsor must ensure that the products are manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP). The G-GMP-CAN requires a quality management system, incorporating GMP, to ensure that IPs are of the quality required for their intended use. Per the G-GMP-Annex13, the manufacturer’s quality system should be described in written procedures and available to the sponsor, taking into account GMP principles and guidelines.

2.12, 5.13, 7.3, and 8.2

Information on ICH guidelines implemented by Health Canada and Efficacy guidelines

4

2.8

5.1, 5.5, and 5.12

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.005, and C.05.012))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Investigator’s Brochure

In accordance with the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs, the Investigator’s Brochure (IB) is a compilation of the clinical and nonclinical data on the investigational product(s) (IP(s)) which is relevant to the study of the IP(s) in human participants.

As per the SL-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for providing the investigators with an IB, and the sponsor should update the IB as significant new information becomes available. The G-SLAppClinTrial further specifies that an updated IB should be submitted at least once a year, or whenever it is updated within this period. Additional information and any changes that have been incorporated in the updated IB should be highlighted for ease of review and evaluation.

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the content and structure of the IB must comply with the SL-GCPs and the International Council for Harmonisation’s (ICH) Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (SLE-24). Accordingly, the IB must provide coverage of the following areas:

Physical, chemical, and pharmaceutical properties and formulation parameters
Non-clinical studies (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, toxicology, and metabolism profiles)
Effects of IP in humans (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and pharmacodynamics; safety and efficacy; and regulatory and post-marketing experiences)
Summary of data and guidance for the investigator(s)
Toxicological effects in any animal species tested under a single dose study, a repeated dose study, or a special study

See the SL-GCPs and SLE-24 for detailed content guidelines.

Quality Management

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, a good manufacturing practice (GMP) certificate from the national competent authority of the country of origin is required when the IP has no marketing authorization in Sierra Leone, or has marketing authorization but its original indication is modified for the purpose of the trial. The GMP certificate should conform to the World Health Organization (WHO) format.

4.0, 5.24, 5.31, and 5.62

4.0, 5.1, 5.1.6, and 5.1.16

Labeling

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Investigational product (IP) labeling in Canada must comply with the requirements set forth in the CanadaFDR, the G-CanadaCTApps, the G-GMP-Annex13, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52). The CanadaFDR and the G-CanadaCTApps state that for an IP to be used in a clinical trial, it must be properly labeled in both official languages: English and French. The CanadaFDR requires that IPs be packaged and labelled under the supervision of personnel who have had satisfactory technical, academic, and other training. The packager and/or labeler must have written procedures and ensure that the IP is packaged, labelled, and tested in compliance with those procedures. For Health Canada (HC)’s interpretation of the relevant provisions of the CanadaFDR, see the G-FDR-0100. Per CAN-50, Canada has CAN-52.

As delineated in the CanadaFDR and the G-GMP-Annex13, the following information must be included on the IP label:

A statement indicating that the drug is an investigational drug to be used only by a qualified investigator
Name, number, or identifying mark
Expiration date
Recommended storage conditions
Lot number
Sponsor’s name and address
Protocol code or identification
Radiopharmaceutical information, if applicable

With regard to the expiration date, the G-GMP-Annex13 further states that if it becomes necessary to change the expiration date, an additional label should be affixed to the IP. This additional label should state the new expiration date and repeat the batch number. It may be superimposed on the previous expiration date, but for quality control reasons, not on the original batch number. This operation should be performed at an appropriately authorized manufacturing site. However, when justified, it may be performed at the investigational site by or under the supervision of the clinical trial site pharmacist, or other health care professional in accordance with national regulations and with the sponsor’s requirements. Where this is not possible, it may be performed by the clinical trial monitor(s) who should be appropriately trained. The operation should be performed in accordance with good manufacturing practice (GMP) principles, specific and standard operating procedures and under contract, if applicable, and should be checked by a second person. This additional labelling should be properly documented in both the trial documentation and in the packaging records.

In addition, CAN-52 state that the IP must be coded and labeled in a manner that protects the blinding, if applicable.

5.13

Efficacy guidelines

8.7

2.8.7

5.11

Part C (Divisions 2 (C.02.006, C.02.011, C.02.015-016) and 5 (C.05.011))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Investigational product (IP) labeling in Sierra Leone must comply with the requirements set forth in the G-SLAppClinTrial and the SL-GCPs. As stated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, all label information should be in English and the print should be clear, legible, and indelible.

As set forth in the G-SLAppClinTrial, the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) requires the following information be included on the labels:

Sponsor details
Pharmaceutical dosage form, route of administration, quantity of dosage units, and in the case of open trials, the name/identifier and strength/potency
Batch number
Trial reference number
Trial subject identification number
Name and address of the clinical trial site and the principal investigator
Directions for use and any warnings or precautions that may be necessary
Statement indicating “For clinical trial/research use only”
Storage conditions
Period of use (use-by date, expiry date, or re-test date as applicable), in month/year format and in a manner that avoids any ambiguity as well as date of dispensing, if applicable
Statement indicating “Keep out of reach of children” except when the product is for use in trials where the product is not taken home by participants

The SL-GCPs further states that in blinded trials, the coding system for the IP(s) should include a mechanism that permits rapid identification of the product(s) in case of a medical emergency, but does not permit undetectable breaks of the blinding.

5.32

5.9 and Appendix IX

Product Management

Last content review/update: October 1, 2024

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

Per CanadaFDR, drugs must be manufactured, handled, and stored in accordance with good manufacturing practice (GMP). As defined in the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CAN-52), which Canada has implemented per CAN-50, the sponsor must supply the investigator(s) with the investigational products (IP(s)), including the comparator and placebo, if applicable. The sponsor should not supply the IP(s) until approvals from Health Canada (HC) and the institutional ethics committee (EC) are obtained. CAN-52 specifies that the sponsor must ensure the following:

Timely delivery of the IP(s)
Records maintained for IP document shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction
Written procedures including instructions for IP handling and storage, adequate and safe receipt of the IP(s), dispensing of the IP(s), retrieval of unused IP(s), return of unused IP(s) to the sponsor, and disposal of unused IP(s) by the sponsor
IP product quality and stability over the period of use
IP manufactured according to any application of GMP
Proper coding, packaging, and labeling of the IP(s)
Acceptable IP handling and storage conditions and shelf-life

For IP packaging, the G-GMP-Annex13 provides the following guidance:

The risk of product mix up must be minimized by using appropriate procedures, specialized equipment, and relevant staff training.
To prevent errors, particularly when IPs are blinded, use heightened precautions, such as label reconciliation, line clearance, and in-process control checks by appropriately trained staff.
The packaging must ensure that the IP remains in good condition during transport and storage at intermediate destinations; any opening or tampering of the outer packaging during transport should be readily discernible.

The G-Storage provides principles and interpretations on the environmental control of clinical trial drugs during storage and transportation, including packaging. See G-Storage for information regarding compliance with the CanadaFDA and the CanadaFDR, as it relates to packaging clinical trial drugs for human use, such as the role of environmental controls, quality risk management, and special considerations for active pharmaceutical ingredients. In addition, CAN-52 state that the IP must be packaged in a manner that will prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage. Refer to CAN-52 for detailed sponsor-related IP requirements.

Record Requirements

As set forth in the CanadaFDR, the G-FDR-0100, and the CanadaFDR1024, the sponsor must record, handle, and store all trial-related information to allow complete and accurate reporting, interpretation, and verification. The CanadaFDR states that the sponsor should maintain all trial-related records for a period of 15 years. Pursuant to CanadaFDR1024, the sponsor must submit requested records to HC within 48 hours if safety concerns arise. Additionally, to facilitate inspection of a site, the sponsor must submit information to HC within seven (7) days of a request.

The G-Storage provides that when contracted parties, such as warehouses or commercial carriers, store or transport drugs, there should be a written agreement that outlines all relevant conditions.

5.5, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14, and 7

Efficacy guidelines

8.6

5.1, 5.5, 5.10, and 5.12

Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement

Part C (Division 5 (C.05.001, C.05.005, C.05.010, and C.05.012))

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

As delineated in the SL-GCPs, the sponsor must supply the investigator(s)/institution(s) with the investigational product(s) (IP(s)). The sponsor should not supply either party with the IP(s) until obtaining approval from the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL).

The SL-GCPs specifies that the sponsor must:

Ensure timely delivery of the IP(s) to the investigator(s)

Maintain records that document shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction of the IP(s)

Maintain a system for retrieving IPs and documenting this retrieval
Maintain a system for the disposition of unused IP(s) and documenting this disposition

Take steps to ensure IP stability over the period of use
Maintain sufficient quantities of the IP(s) to reconfirm specifications, if needed, and maintain records of batch sample analyses and characteristics

Ensure the IP is manufactured according to any applicable good manufacturing practice (GMP)

Ensure proper coding, packaging, and labeling of the IP(s)

Refer to the SL-GCPs for detailed sponsor-related IP requirements.

Per the SL-GCPs, the IP(s) should be packaged to prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage. Additionally, per the G-SLAppClinTrial, the PBSL requires the IP packaging to comply with the following requirements:

The container in which the product is contained should be of good quality
The container and closure should be properly sealed in order to protect the product from the impact of outside environmental factors
Each sample should contain an insert

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial, the principal investigator (PI) must notify the PBSL of each consignment of IP batches received on site. The notification must include the product name(s), quantities received, and batches received. The PBSL must approve destruction of IPs, which should be carried out in such a manner that all operations may be accounted for. These documents should clearly identify, or allow traceability to, the batches and/or participant numbers involved, and the actual quantities destroyed. A destruction certificate will be issued by the PBSL.

Record Requirements

The G-SLAppClinTrial indicates that for IPs purchased locally, the PI must document the source, proof of purchase, quantities purchased, and the Certificate of Analysis for each batch of IPs. Copies of all documents on the IP(s), whether purchased locally or imported, must be kept on site for verification and accountability during good clinical practice (GCP) inspections.

As per the SL-GCPs, the sponsor should retain all sponsor-specific essential documents in conformance with the applicable regulatory requirement(s) of the country(ies) where the product is approved, and/or where the sponsor intends to apply for approval(s). All sponsor-specific essential documents should be retained for at least two (2) years after formal discontinuation of the trial or in conformance with applicable regulatory requirements. In addition, all clinical and experimental data (electronic or paper) should be kept in a secure place for a period of five (5) years, and 20 years for a new drug application after a trial’s completion, and be readily available for review upon request by the PBSL.

5.23, 5.32-5.33, and 5.59

4.0, 5.1, 5.9, and Appendix IX

Definition of Specimen

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

In Canada, a specimen is referred to as “human biological material” or “biological material.” According to the G-TCPS2, human biological materials include tissues, organs, blood, plasma, skin, serum, DNA, RNA, proteins, cells, hair, nail clippings, urine, saliva, and other body fluids. The term also comprises materials related to human reproduction, including embryos, fetuses, fetal tissues, and human reproductive materials. The G-TCPS2 breaks down human biological material further into the following categories: anonymized, anonymous, coded, and identified human biological materials. Refer to the G-TCPS2 for more detailed information on these categories.

In addition, CAN-2 defines biological material as pathogenic and non-pathogenic microorganisms, proteins, and nucleic acids, as well as any biological matter that may contain microorganisms, proteins, nucleic acids, or parts thereof. Examples include, but are not limited to, bacteria, viruses, fungi, prions, toxins, genetically modified organisms, nucleic acids, tissue samples, diagnostic specimens, live vaccines, and isolates of a pathogen (e.g., pure culture, suspension, purified spores).

Glossary

Chapter 12 and Glossary

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

In Sierra Leone, a specimen is referred to as a biological specimen or a biological sample. As delineated in the G-SLAppClinTrial, a biological specimen or a biological sample is defined as material derived from various animal and human sources (e.g., blood, tissues, and cells) used to treat and prevent diseases.

SLE-1 further defines biological material as original material, progeny, and unmodified derivatives, but not new intellectual property. The terms referenced in this definition are explained as follows:

Progeny refers to an unmodified descendant from the original material, such as a virus from a virus, a cell from a cell, or an organism from an organism
Unmodified derivatives refer to substances and other materials created by the recipient that constitute an unmodified functional subunit or product expressed by the original material, including subclones of unmodified cell lines, purified or fractionated subsets of the original material, proteins expressed by DNA/RNA supplied by the provider, or monoclonal antibodies secreted by a hybridoma cell line

New intellectual property includes the following:

Modifications (but not the material that is contained or incorporated therein)
Other substances and materials created by the recipient through the use of the material or modifications, but that are not progeny, unmodified derivatives, or modifications (i.e., do not contain the original material, progeny, or unmodified derivatives)
Any new use of the material, modifications, or the substances and materials created by the recipient, and
Any new or improved process, method, or technique conceived or developed by the recipient through the use of the material, modifications, or the substances and materials previously described

1

4.0

Specimen Import & Export

Last content review/update: July 26, 2024

Import/Export

According to the G-HlthProdImprtExptReqs, Health Canada (HC) does not have jurisdiction over human biological materials to be imported for testing or research purposes. The G-HlthProdImprtExptReqs further states that all blood samples as well as cultures, diagnostic specimens, or research tissue are considered to be potential carriers of human or animal pathogens, and are regulated by the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Per CAN-24, CAN-2, and CAN-9, the PHAC’s Centre for Biosecurity oversees the licensing process under the authority of the HPTA and the HPTR. The HPTA states that a license must be issued by the Minister that authorizes the import or export of human pathogens or toxins.

As specified in the HPTA, the HPTR, and CAN-2, individuals planning to conduct controlled activities (including producing, possessing, handling, using, storing, providing access to, transferring, disposing of, releasing, abandoning, or importing/exporting) with a human pathogen or toxin, whether imported or domestically acquired, must obtain a license. Per CAN-2, because all human biological materials are potential carriers of human pathogens, the PHAC has categorized these materials by risk group based on risk to the individual/animal and risk to the community. Risk Group 1 consists of microorganisms, nucleic acids, or proteins that are unable or unlikely to cause human or animal disease so they are generally not considered to be pathogens, and are therefore exempt from the HPTA and the HPTR licensing requirements. Risk groups 2 through 4 are considered to be pathogens or toxins with moderate to high individual risk and low to high community risk, and are subject to the HPTA and the HPTR licensing requirements. See CAN-2 and CAN-9 for detailed information and instructions on how to obtain a license for activities associated with Risk Groups 2 through 4.

Chapter 21

Chapters 1 and 2

Blood and blood components for transfusion

Purpose of the Act, Interpretation and Application, Obligation, Prohibitions, and Licenses

Licenses

Last content review/update: January 7, 2025

According to the G-SLAppClinTrial and SLE-23, the Pharmacy Board of Sierra Leone (PBSL) is responsible for authorizing the import and export of all biological specimens in Sierra Leone. However, the G-SLAppClinTrial does not have any additional information regarding specimens import.

Export

As set forth in the G-SLAppClinTrial, all institutions or individuals that wish to export any clinical information, medical records, and/or biological samples from Sierra Leone to an institution outside of the country must complete the PBSL’s requirements for material transfer authorization. The sponsor must provide annual updates on the use of, and results obtained from, biological samples exported out of Sierra Leone.

Per the G-SLAppClinTrial and the G-MTA, the local principal investigator or study lead must submit an application for an export permit submitted through the Ministry of Health and Sanitation (MoHS) to the PBSL. All applications must be accompanied by the following documents:

Evidence of informed consent for use of medical records, clinical information, and biological samples from living participants
MoHS authorization for deceased patients
Memorandum of understanding (MOU) between MoHS and the applicant
Signed and dated Material Transfer Agreement (MTA)
Payment of PBSL prescribed export permit fee

Please refer to SLE-1 for the materials transfer template.

5.11 and Appendix X

Consent for Specimen