Clinical research in China is regulated and overseen by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) (the Chinese name translates as “State Drug Administration”) and the National Health Commission (NHC).

National Medical Products Administration

As per the DRR, the NMPA-Org, the DAL, the RegImplemDAL, the RegImplemDAL-Amndt, the SC-Opinions-No44, the NMPA-No50-2018, and the NMPA-No230-2015, the NMPA is the regulatory authority responsible for national drug registration management, which includes regulation of clinical trials. Per the DRR, NMPA’s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) is responsible for the evaluation of drug clinical trial applications, drug marketing authorization applications, supplementary applications, and overseas drug production registration applications. The NMPA grants permission for clinical trials to be conducted in China in accordance with the provisions of the DAL, the VaccineLaw, the DRR, the SC-Opinions-No44, the NMPA-No50-2018, and the NMPA-No230-2015. The drug category in which an applicant chooses to register determines the clinical trial application review and approval or filing process.

Per the SC-IRP and the SAMR-Org, China established the State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR). The SAMR is a full ministry agency reporting directly to the State Council of the People's Republic of China. Under the SAMR is the NMPA, which regulates clinical trials.

As delineated in the NMPA-Org and CHN-78, the NMPA implements China’s guidelines, policies, and decision-making for the supervision and administration of drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics. It is responsible for safety supervision; standards management; drug registration; quality management; risk management; pharmacist licensing; inspection systems; international cooperation; guiding provincial and municipal drug administration; and other tasks assigned by the State Council and Party Central Committee. The NMPA is charged with accelerating the examination and approval of innovative drugs, establishing a system of listing license holders, promoting electronic review and approval, and improving efficiencies.

Per CHN-77, the following NMPA departments are involved with clinical trial application and drug registration:

• Drug Registration Management Department – formulates, supervises, and implements drug standards (including clinical trial quality management), technical guidelines, and registration
• Drug Administration Department – formulates and supervises the implementation of pharmaceutical production quality management standards for drugs, Chinese medicines, biological products, and special drugs (e.g., radioactive and toxic), and formulates and implements a drug adverse reaction monitoring and alert system

Per the DRR, the NMPA-No50-2018, and CHN-81, the NMPA includes the National Institutes for Food and Drug Control (NIFDC) and the CDE, which are directly involved in the clinical trial application and drug registration approval process. Other relevant institutes and organizations include the National Pharmacopoeia Commission, the Food and Drug Inspection Center, the Medical Device Technology Evaluation Center, the Administration Service Center, the Information Center, the Licensed Pharmacist Certification Center, the News and Publicity Center, and the International Exchange Center.

Further, the DRR delineates the responsibilities of the drug regulatory departments of provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government. With respect to clinical trials, they are responsible for organizing the daily supervision and investigation of institutions conducting drug clinical trials; participating in drug registration verification and inspection organized by the NMPA; and other matters entrusted by the NMPA.

The roles of the CDE and the NIFDC in the clinical trial application review and approval process are discussed further in the Scope of Assessment section.

National Health Commission

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the State Council’s NHC is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024). The NHC-HGRmgt states that the original application process and online platform (CHN-6) remain unchanged. As indicated in CHN-24, the NHC is responsible for formulating health policies and systems in China, including health services, hospitals, special populations, drugs, traditional Chinese medicines, and disease control and prevention. See CHN-24 for a comprehensive list of NHC responsibilities and functions. (Please note that the MgmtHumanGen was amended by SC-Order777 to reflect the transfer of HGR management from MOST to the NHC, but the Rules-MgmtHGR has not been amended yet to show the transfer.)

The MgmtHumanGen and the Rules-MgmtHGR stipulate that MOST’s (now the NHC’s) HGR responsibilities include employing experts in the fields of biotechnology, medicine, health, ethics, law, etc. to form an expert review committee to review and approve international cooperative research. The Rules-MgmtHGR indicates that MOST (now the NHC) should support the rational use of HGR to carry out scientific research, develop the biomedical industry, improve diagnosis and treatment techniques, strengthen management and oversight of HGR, improve approval services and efficiency, and advance the standardization of approvals and information disclosure. MOST (now the NHC) is responsible for national efforts such as the investigation, administrative licensing, supervision and inspection, and administrative punishments of HGR. Regarding administrative licensing, licenses must be obtained for the collection and preservation of Chinese HGR and for international collaborations in certain situations. As needed, MOST (now the NHC) entrusts relevant organizations to carry out formal reviews and technical reviews of application materials for administrative licensing of HGR, as well as efforts such as filing, prior reporting, supervision and inspection, and administrative punishments. The science and technology departments (committees and bureaus) of provinces, autonomous regions, and municipalities directly under the Central Government, and the Science and Technology Bureau of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps, are responsible for the management of the following HGR in their regions:

• Oversight and inspection and routine management of HGR
• Investigation and handling of illegal cases of HGR within the scope of their authority
• As entrusted by MOST (now the NHC), carry out other efforts such as administrative licensing of HGR in their region

See Rules-MgmtHGR-Interp for a policy interpretation of the Rules-MgmtHGR.

Per HGR-WorkUpdt, the NHC’s China Biotechnology Development Center was entrusted to implement technical work related to the management of HGR. As described in CHN-4, the functions of the Center are:

• Coordinate and supervise the implementation of the management of HGR
• Examine and approve international cooperation projects involving HGR
• Accept applications for the export of HGR, and handle exports and export certificates
• Register and manage important genetic lineages and genetic resources in specific regions
• Manage other work related to HGR

The Rules-MgmtHGR also state that applications must pass a security review organized by MOST (now the NHC) if the study’s provision or opening of HGR information to foreign entities may impact China’s public health, national security, or the social public interest. In addition, per the Bioscrty-Law, MOST (now the NHC) regulates biotechnology safety under the National Security Commission pursuant to a Coordination Mechanism for National Biosecurity (CMNB). The CMNB consists of the competent State Council departments for health, agriculture and rural affairs, science and technology, and foreign affairs, as well as relevant military agencies, to analyze national biosecurity issues, and organize, coordinate, and drive national biosecurity work. MOST (now the NHC) and the other agencies under CMNB establish safety monitoring/reporting requirements, an early warning system, and implementing regulations.

Regarding monitoring and protecting HGR, as delineated in MgmtHumanGen, NHC (formerly the MOST) is also authorized to strengthen the protection of HGR in China, which involves conducting surveys and implementing a declaration and registration system for important genetic families and human genetic resources in specific regions. MOST (now the NHC) will enforce the regulations and levy fines for illegal HGR activities which include:

• Collecting HGR from important genetic families and specific regions in China without approval, or collecting HGR of the types and quantities specified by MOST (now the NHC) through special regulation
• Preserving Chinese HGR without approval
• Conducting international cooperative scientific research using Chinese HGR without approval
• Failing to pass the security review that may affect China's public health, national security, and social public interest to foreign organizations, individuals, and institutions that they establish or actually control, and
• Failing to file with MOST (now the NHC) the type, quantity, and use of the HGR in China before an international cooperative clinical trial begins

Other Considerations

Per CHN-59, China is a regulatory member of the International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). CHN-49 summarizes the ICH guiding principles and provides Chinese translations, when available.

Please note: China is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (CHN-30), which may have implications for studies of investigational products developed using certain non-human genetic resources (e.g., plants, animals, and microbes). For more information, see CHN-55.

Contact Information

National Medical Products Administration (NMPA)

Per CHN-31, the following is the NMPA’s contact information:

National Medical Products Administration
No. 1 Beiluyuan Zhanlan Road
Xicheng District
Beijing 100037
P.R. China

Per CDE-Reloctn, the following is CDE’s contact information:

National Medical Products Administration
Center for Drug Evaluation
Building 1-5
District 2, No. 22 Guangde Street
Beijing Economic and Technological Development Zone
Beijing, 100076
P.R. China

Phone number: 010-68585566

National Health Commission

Per HGR-WorkUpdt, HGR-AppGuide, and CHN-4, following is the contact information for NHC’s HGR consultation:

National Health Commission
China Biotechnology Development Center
Rooms 1022 and 1001, Building 4
No. 16 West Fourth Ring Middle Road
Haidian District
Beijing, 100036
P.R. China

Contact: Zhu Min
Phone number: 010-88225151 or 010-88225168
Information system support: 17610386080
Email: ycb@cncbd.org.cn

Thai Food and Drug Administration

As per the DrugAct, ClinSampleProd, and ClinImprtOrdr, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) is the regulatory authority responsible for controlling the import of drugs for research purposes, and it also uses this authority to indirectly regulate drug clinical trials in humans. Per ClinSampleProd and DrugProdReqs, the Thai FDA is also responsible for approving requests for permission to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies. As set forth in the DrugAct, THA-33, and THA-49, the Thai FDA is a regulatory body under the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH)'s Cluster of Public Health Service Support, and is granted control by the MOPH to protect consumer health. The agency is also authorized to ensure the quality, safety, and efficacy of health products including foods, drugs, cosmetics, and medical devices in Thailand.

In addition, per the DrugAct’s 2019 amendments and according to THA-6, the MOPH has the authority to establish and/or amend drug research-related procedures, regulations, and conditions via Government Gazette announcements. The Thai FDA’s Secretary-General is also permitted to control drug research study activities by issuing temporary suspensions, requesting specific improvements, or completely discontinuing a study that fails to comply with the Minister’s published guidelines.

As indicated in the DrugAct, the Thai FDA’s Medicines Regulation Division is a member of the Drug Board (also referred to as the Drug Committee in the English translation of the DrugAct). Per the DrugAct, the board must consist of MOPH departmental directors-general and representatives from related organizations, as well as five (5) to nine (9) drug experts. Every two (2) years, the Minister of Public Health appoints the Committee, which is chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the MOPH. The DrugAct also indicates that the board should appoint a subcommittee to study the drug review and approval process. The subcommittee should include at least the following: an office representative and Office of Consumer Protection Board representatives including association, foundation, and drug industry representatives whose purpose is to produce, sell, import, or order drugs for use in Thailand.

THA-49 further explains that the Medicines Regulation Division is in charge of reviewing licenses to import or order drugs used for clinical research in Thailand that are exempt from drug registration, issuing licenses to produce drug samples for drug formula registration, and issuing licenses to import or order drug samples for research purposes in Thailand. See THA-49 for additional information on the Medicines Regulation Division’s responsibilities. (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for appendices included in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.)

As described in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr, the Thai FDA’s Medicines Regulation Division is responsible for application review and recommendation for approval. Per ClinSampleProd, and according to the Thai FDA’s organizational structure depicted in THA-33, the Secretary-General of the Thai FDA then makes the final decision to approve the application.

Division of Innovative Health Products and Services

As explained in THA-91, the Thai FDA’s Division of Innovative Health Products and Services is a service center that provides advice regarding health product authorization and research and development, product classification, and also accepts requests regarding health products. Its responsibilities include reviewing requests for one-stop service, locally researched and produced health products and innovative products. The Division also develops innovative health product authorization processes through electronic channels; conducts research to develop work systems, creates standards for innovative products as well as the locations and processes for production, import, sale, clinical research, and advertising; and develops policies, regulations, criteria, and practices regarding the licensing of health products. Per THA-66, the Division also houses the agency’s One Stop Service & Consultation Center (OSSC) (THA-35) within the Comprehensive Health Products Service Center. OSSC services include providing preliminary consultations, processing product application submissions (e.g., applications submitted to obtain drug import licenses for clinical research purposes), and handling payment services (e.g., permissions and licensing) for various health products including drugs. See the Submission Process section for more details on the import application submission process.

Contact Information

Per THA-72, the Thai FDA’s contact information is as follows:

Medicines Regulation Division
Food and Drug Administration
Ministry of Public Health
88/24 Tiwanon Road
Talat Khwan Subdistrict
Mueang District, Nonthaburi Province 11000

Email: drug@fda.moph.go.th
Email: saraban@fda.moph.go.th (General FDA Correspondence)
Phone: 0 2590 7000
Phone: 0 2590 1556 (FDA Call Center)
Fax: 0 2590 7116

Overview

National Medical Products Administration

In accordance with the DRR, the DAL, the NMPA-No50-2018, the SC-Opinions-No44, and the NMPA-No230-2015, the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) is responsible for reviewing and approving clinical trial applications for drugs to be registered in China, as required. The DRR clarifies that the NMPA regulates clinical trials for drugs in development that are ultimately seeking market approvals in China. Per the DAL and the DRR, and as explained in CHN-7, CHN-18, and CHN-1, China adopted a drug marketing authorization holders (MAHs) system across China. All entities or drug research institutions holding drug marketing authorizations must take responsibility for drug safety, effectiveness, and quality controllability in the whole process of drug research and development, production, distribution, and use. Based on this system, the MAHs are also named as applicants or sponsors during clinical trials. The scope of the NMPA’s assessment includes Phase I through Phase IV clinical trials and bioequivalence studies. As stated in the DRR, clinical trials of drugs must be reviewed and approved by an ethics committee (EC). The DRR indicates that EC review may be submitted in parallel to NMPA’s review, but the study cannot be initiated until after review and approval by the EC. The DRR emphasizes a risk-based approach to drug registration and clinical trial approvals, following the principles of openness, fairness, and justice. This is guided by demonstrating clinical value, encouraging research and creation of new drugs, and promoting the development of generic drugs.

As delineated in the DRR, the SC-Opinions-No44, and the NMPA-No51-2016, the drug classification in which an applicant chooses to register determines the clinical trial application review and approval process. Per the DRR, the registration of drugs must be classified and managed in accordance with three (3) broad categories of Chinese medicines, chemical medicines, and biological products. The NMPA-No44-2020 and CHN-1 delineate the classifications within the chemical medicine category as follows:

• Class 1: Innovative drugs that have not been marketed in China or overseas (i.e., drugs that contain new compounds with clear structures and pharmacological effects, and have clinical values)
• Class 2: Modified new drugs that have not been marketed in China or overseas (i.e., drugs that have their structure, dosage form, formulation, process, route of administration, and indications optimized on the basis of known active ingredients and have significant clinical advantages)
• Class 3: Drugs manufactured by domestic applicants by imitating the original drugs that have been marketed overseas but not yet in China; such drugs must have the quality and efficacy consistent with the reference listed drug
• Class 4: Drugs manufactured by domestic applicants by imitating the original drugs that have been marketed in China; such drugs must have the quality and efficacy consistent with the reference formulations
• Class 5: Drugs that have been marketed overseas and are under application for being marketed in China

As per NMPA-No21-2021, the NMPA provides additional technical support to expedite the review and approval process of domestically unlisted drugs that have been listed overseas in the above Classes 3 and 5.

Per the DRR, the registration of biological products is classified according to innovative biological products, new medicines of improved biological products, and already listed biological products (including biological similar drugs). As delineated in the NMPA-No43-2020, biological products refer to preparations that use microorganisms, cells, animal or human-derived tissues, and bodily fluids as starting materials, and are made with biological technology for the prevention, treatment, and diagnosis of human diseases. In order to standardize the registration and management of biological products, biological products are divided into preventive biological products, therapeutic biological products, and in vitro diagnostic reagents managed by biological products. Preventive biological products refer to vaccine-like biological products used for human immunization to prevent and control the occurrence and prevalence of diseases, including immunization program vaccines and non-immunization program vaccines. Therapeutic biological products refer to biological products used in the treatment of human diseases, such as proteins, polypeptides and their derivatives prepared from engineered cells (such as bacteria, yeast, insect, plant, and mammalian cells) with different expression systems; cell therapy and gene therapy products; allergen products; microecological products; biologically active products extracted from human or animal tissues or bodily fluids or prepared by fermentation, etc. The following are descriptions of biological product classifications for both preventive and therapeutic uses:

• Class 1: Innovative vaccines that have not been marketed at home or abroad
• Class 2: Improved vaccines that improve the safety, effectiveness, and quality controllability of new products by improving the domestic or overseas marketed vaccine products, and have obvious advantages
• Class 3: Vaccines that have been marketed at home or abroad

Per the VaccineLaw, the NMPA must approve vaccine clinical trials. The NMPA-No32-2019 explains that the VaccineLaw strengthens the supervision and enforcement of vaccines and deepens the reform of the drug review and approval system. This includes strengthening the management of vaccine clinical trial institutions and investigating and punishing illegal activities related to applying for vaccine clinical trials (e.g., false data).

National Health Commission

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024. SC-Order777 amends the MgmtHumanGen to reflect the transfer of HGR management from MOST to NHC, but the Bioscrty-Law and the Rules-MgmtHGR have not been amended yet to show the transfer). Per the Bioscrty-Law and the MgmtHumanGen, MOST’s (now the NHC’s) scope of assessment is the collection, preservation, utilization, and external provision of HGR to ensure these activities:

• Do not endanger the public health, national security, and social public interests of China
• Are in accordance with ethics principles and reviews per relevant regulations
• Respect the privacy rights of HGR donors, obtain their prior informed consent, and protect their legitimate rights and interests, and
• Comply with the technical norms formulated by MOST (now the NHC)

See the Rules-MgmtHGR for the prescribed conditions when MOST (now the NHC) licenses must be obtained for the collection of Chinese HGR.

As delineated in the Rules-MgmtHGR, MOST (NHC) licenses must be obtained for the preservation of HGR, which involves storing HGR with legal sources under appropriate environmental conditions, ensuring their quality and safety, and using them for future scientific research, excluding temporary storage for teaching purposes. If the preservation also involves the collection of HGR, applicants only need to apply for an administrative license for the preservation of HGR, and do not need to separately apply for a collection license. Next, the Rules-MgmtHGR require administrative licenses for international scientific research cooperation that use and export HGR. If there is no export, only prior filing/notification with MOST (now the NHC) is required before initiating the international research cooperation.

Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, where multicenter clinical research is carried out, the sponsor or the primary site/unit (either the Chinese unit or a foreign party unit) may apply for administrative licensing or filing after the primary site/unit passes the ethics review. After the sponsor or primary site/unit obtains the administrative license or completes the filing, the medical and health institution(s) participating in the clinical research must submit the ethics review approval document of their site/unit, or the certification materials for the ethics review approval provided by the primary site/unit, along with the letter of commitment issued by the site/unit, to MOST (now the NHC). Following those submissions, the international cooperative clinical research can be carried out.

As delineated in the HGR-AppGuide, the scope of the administrative license for the collection of HGR applies to the following activities to be carried out within the territory of China:

• HGR collection activities for important genetic pedigrees – applies to blood-related groups with genetic diseases and/or with special hereditary physical or physiological characteristics, as well as the members of the group with genetic diseases and/or special hereditary physical or physiological characteristics involving three (3) generations or more.
• HGR collection activities in specific areas – applies to HGR from populations who have lived in isolation or special environments for a long time and have special physical characteristics or adaptive traits in physiological characteristics. Specific areas are not divided based on whether they are ethnic minority concentrated areas.
• HGR collection activities for large-scale population research with a population of more than 3,000 – includes but is not limited to cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, clinical studies, and constitutional studies.

Clinical Trial Review Process

National Medical Products Administration

As delineated in the DRR, the NMPA is the regulatory authority responsible for national drug registration management, which includes management of clinical trial applications. The NMPA’s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) is responsible for evaluating drug clinical trial applications, drug marketing authorization applications, supplementary applications, and re-registration applications for drugs produced overseas. The DRR states that applicants may communicate with major technical institutions including the CDE at key stages, such as before submitting a drug clinical trial application.

Communications and Pre-Application Protocol Review

Per the NMPA-No50-2018, the NMPA-No48-2020, and the NMPA-No51-2023, with regard to chemical drugs and biological products, the applicant must first request a communication meeting with the CDE to determine the integrity of the clinical trial application data and the feasibility of conducting the clinical trial. The NMPA-No51-2023 reaffirms the required communications between the applicant and the CDE and review of the clinical trial protocol before submitting the clinical trial application. The CDE conducts a preliminary review of the information provided by the applicant according to relevant requirements. The review team reviews the science, completeness, operability, and risk controllability of the clinical trial protocol, focusing on the basis for the research, safety, and whether the risk management measures of the drug support the conduct of clinical trials. In addition to clearly responding to the specific questions raised by the applicant, the submitted clinical trial protocol is reviewed to ensure participant protection. For confirmatory, or critical clinical trials, CDE must also evaluate the suitability of the target population, the science of the dosage and cycle and the primary endpoint indicators, the acceptability of statistical assumptions, the rationality of sample size estimation, the operability of the risk management plan, and the benefit/risk assessment elements. CDE’s review team communicates its findings by holding a meeting (face-to-face or online) or by giving a written reply and must provide the applicant with the minutes of the communication meeting or the written reply. See NMPA-No51-2023 for additional details on the pre-application communications and protocol review.

Clinical Trial Application Review

Per the NMPA-No50-2018, the NMPA’s Drug Registration Management Department is responsible for conducting administrative reviews of clinical trial applications, and then forwarding the submissions to the CDE for technical review. (Deviations from this general process are described further below in this section.) The DRR states that after completing the pharmacology, toxicology, and other studies supporting the clinical trials of the drug, the applicant must submit relevant research materials in accordance with the application requirements (See Submission Process and Submission Content sections for details). If the application materials meet the screening requirements, NMPA’s pharmaceutical, medical, and other technical personnel review the clinical trial applications for drugs.

Per the DRR, when reviewing the application, the CDE will conduct an associated review of the chemical raw materials, auxiliary materials, and packaging materials and containers used in direct contact with the pharmaceutical preparations. The CDE makes a risk-based decision on whether to initiate an on-site inspection based on the registered varieties, processes, facilities, and previous acceptance verification. For innovative drugs, improved new drugs, and biological products, on-site verification of drug registration manufacturing and inspection of pre-market drug manufacturing quality management must be conducted. If manufacturing verification is required, the applicant and the drug regulatory department of the province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government where the applicant or manufacturer is located will be informed. The National Institutes for Food and Drug Control (NIFDC) (also referred to as the Procuratorate), or the drug inspection agency designated by the NMPA, will conduct the inspections and testing, as needed. The drug registration inspection of overseas-produced drugs must be implemented by the port drug inspection agency.

The NMPA-No51-2023 specifies that the CDE review team must evaluate the science, completeness, operability, and risk controllability of the clinical trial protocol in the application. If necessary, an expert consultation meeting may be held. For clinical trials that are approved after review, the technical review team’s conclusion and associated "Clinical Trial Approval Notice" must clearly state the indications, clinical trial protocol title, number, version number, version date, etc. The review team’s conclusion and notice may propose revisions or suggestions to the clinical trial protocol if necessary. For clinical trial protocols that require revisions, CDE will notify the applicant through a professional inquiry letter, clearly informing the applicant of the problems and revision opinions in the current protocol. The applicant must submit a revised clinical trial protocol within five (5) days, following the guidance in the Prcdrs-Changes. For clinical trial protocols that are deemed unfeasible, have participant safety risks, or other serious defects, and the applicant cannot revise and improve them within the time limit specified in the inquiry letter, the clinical trial application will not be approved. In the review team’s conclusion and the "Notice of Disapproval of Drug Clinical Trials", the applicant should be clearly informed of the reasons for the disapproval.

The NMPA-No51-2023 also states that before conducting subsequent phased drug exploratory clinical trials, a corresponding drug clinical trial protocol must be reviewed and approved by the EC. After completing exploratory clinical trials and before conducting confirmatory (or critical) clinical trials, an application for a communication meeting must be submitted to the CDE to evaluate the subsequent clinical trial protocol (if applicable).

With regard to vaccine clinical trials, the VaccineLaw indicates that the NMPA will review the clinical trial plan, the safety monitoring and evaluation system, the selection of participants, and whether there are effective measures according to the degree of risk to protect the legal rights of the participants. Vaccine clinical trials can only be carried out or organized by a tertiary medical institution that meets the conditions prescribed by the NMPA and the health and safety department of the State Council, or a disease prevention and control institution at or above the provincial level.

Per the DRR, the DAL, the NMPA-No50-2018, and CHN-14, a clinical trial application will be considered approved after 60 working days if the applicant does not receive a rejection or an inquiry for clarification from the NMPA. As specified in the DRR, drug clinical trials must be carried out within three (3) years after approval. If the drug clinical trial application is approved and no participant signs an informed consent form within three (3) years from the date of approval, the approval lapses. If it is still necessary to carry out the drug clinical trial, the applicant must re-apply. Upon approval/registration of the drug, the applicant receives a drug registration certificate, which is valid for five (5) years. An application for drug re-registration must be submitted six (6) months before the validity period expires.

The DRR states that to amend content in the original drug registration approval, the applicant must conduct sufficient research and verification on the change of the drug and fully evaluate the possible impact of the change on the drug. Data on the impact of safety, efficacy, and quality control must be submitted with the application for amendment. The NMPA-No51-2023 indicates that when changes to a clinical trial protocol are needed, the sponsor may first conduct a self-assessment of the changes in accordance with the relevant requirements of the DRR and the NMPA-No34-2022, and implement further work based on the results of the self-assessment. For substantial changes, the sponsor must submit materials in accordance with the relevant requirements of the NMPA-No34-2022. The CDE review team must review the supplementary application and notify the applicant of whether any/all of the proposed changes are approved. For changes that are not approved, CDE must clearly state the reasons. See NMPA-No51-2023 for definitions of substantial and non-substantial changes to a protocol. Also see Prcdrs-Changes for working procedures for other changes during the review of the clinical trial application.

Expedited Clinical Trial Review

The DRR authorizes regulatory pathways for priority review and approval (including for breakthrough therapeutic drugs), conditional approval, and special approval procedures. As per the SC-Opinions-No44, the NMPA-No230-2015, and the NMPA-No51-2016, a new drug classification system, priority review for innovative drugs and those deemed to have an urgent clinical need, and other changes help China to be more innovative and expedite reviews. With regard to priority review, per the NMPA-No230-2015 and the DRR, the NMPA may apply expedited review and approval procedures to applications for urgently needed drugs and vaccines that are intended to treat certain illnesses or patient populations (e.g., children or elderly people) that the State Council or the NMPA consider to be clinically in demand. The DRR expanded priority review to breakthrough therapeutic drugs, which are used to prevent and treat diseases with the following conditions: are seriously life threatening or seriously affect the quality of life, there are no effective prevention or treatment methods, and there is sufficient evidence to show that they have obvious clinical advantages. Applicants must apply to the CDE at the critical stage of the drug clinical trial. See CHN-69 for handling guidelines on priority review and approval.

The NMPA-No21-2024 describes NMPA’s pilot work plan for optimizing the review and approval of clinical trials for innovative drugs. This initiative aims to review and approve innovative drug clinical trial applications within 30 business days (a reduction from the 60 days as described above in the normal procedures). Pilot projects will be carried out in provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) that meet the conditions laid out in NMPA-No21-2024. The scope of the pilot project is clinical trial applications for Class 1 innovative drugs (excluding cell and gene therapy products, vaccine products, etc.). Applicants are not subject to regional restrictions and must have at least three (3) innovative drug clinical trial applications approved at home and abroad, have extensive experience in clinical trial implementation and pharmacovigilance management, and be able to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment of clinical trial projects and develop an effective risk management plan before submitting a clinical trial application. In principle, the pilot institution must be a national medical center or national clinical medical research center in the pilot area and must have established a work system to provide clinical trial project establishment, ethics review, and contract review services before the applicant submits a new drug clinical trial application. See NMPA-No21-2024 for additional requirements on application submission and applicant and institutional eligibility. The applicant must initiate the clinical trial within 12 weeks after the approval of the clinical trial application. The pilot work will last for one (1) year and the experience of the pilot work will be summarized in July 2025. One (1) pilot project has been approved in Beijing and Shanghai as indicated in NMPA-No55-2024.

According to the NMPA-No82-2020, the NMPA establishes working procedures for the review of breakthrough therapy drugs, conditional approval of drug marketing priority review, and approval of drug marketing authorization. Sponsors can apply for expedited status for breakthrough therapeutic drugs in Phase I and II clinical trials—usually no later than before the commencement of Phase III clinical trials. Breakthrough drug procedures are designed to be used during clinical trials of drugs to prevent and treat patients with conditions that may be severely life-threatening or that may severely affect their quality of life. There are also no existing effective prevention and treatment methods nor is there sufficient evidence to show that the investigational drugs being tested have obvious clinical advantages compared with existing treatment methods. Also see CondtlAppl-Drugs for technical guidelines on the conditional approval of drugs for marketing.

Per the NMPA-No79-2018, the NMPA established a special review channel for urgently needed drugs that were already on the market in the United States, Europe, and Japan since 2008. Applicants may apply for a drug listing and proceed to conduct the clinical trials while the CDE conducts a technical review of the application materials.

The DRR also authorizes the CDE to conditionally approve breakthrough therapeutic drugs for marketing during clinical trials and vaccines that are urgently needed for major public health emergencies and the benefits outweigh the risks. The applicant must communicate to the CDE on the conditions for marketing with conditional approval and the research work to be completed after marketing, and submit an application for drug marketing approval after communication and confirmation. For the conditionally approved drugs and vaccines, risk management measures must be implemented after the drug is marketed, and the drug clinical trial must be completed within the prescribed time limit. Finally, the DRR authorizes the NMPA to implement special approval procedures for drugs required for public health emergencies. The circumstances, procedures, time limits, and requirements for special approval, will be subject to the NMPA’s procedures for specific approval of drugs.

For background on China’s reformation of the review and approval system to encourage innovation of drugs, see the SC-Opinions-No42. China’s regulatory pathways for expedited approvals and other reforms to the clinical trial submission and review process are described in the Submission Process and Submission Content sections. NMPA-No52-2018-Interp describes the requirements for clinical trial and drug registration applications using trial data generated entirely overseas, as well as data generated from simultaneous research occurring in China and abroad. CHN-11 also provides useful information on the NMPA’s overall clinical trial application review and approval process.

Overseas Data and Waiving Local Clinical Trials

The NMPA-No35-2017 and interpretations in NMPA-No52-2018-Interp describe requirements for clinical trial and drug registration applications to the NMPA using trial data generated entirely overseas, as well as data generated from simultaneous research occurring in China and abroad. With regard to the latter, researchers can conduct Phase I of multi-regional clinical trials (MRCT) of imported investigational new drugs and therapeutic biological products (excluding vaccines) simultaneously in China.

As per NMPA-No52-2018, clinical trial and drug registration applications for imported new drugs or therapeutic biological products using trial data generated entirely overseas do not need to be registered first in their own country in order to enter China. Overseas clinical trial data is acceptable for direct China registration provided that:

• The data is reliable, authenticated, and complies with the requirements of the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37)
• The data can assess the efficacy and safety for the target indication
• There are no ethnic sensitivities to Chinese local populations influencing efficacy and safety
• The data meets China’s drug registration requirements

See the NMPA-No52-2018 for additional details on the review and approval of overseas clinical trial data. For overseas clinical trial data completed before the enactment of NMPA-No35-2017, the NMPA will consider exemption from conducting local clinical trials, with the condition that the applications meet all other Chinese drug regulatory requirements.

For a running list (in reverse chronological order) of NMPA guidance on drug regulatory requirements, please refer to CHN-60.

National Health Commission

The MgmtHumanGen and the Bioscrty-Law prohibit foreign entities or individuals from collecting or preserving Chinese HGR in China, or providing Chinese HGR for use abroad, except under prescribed conditions to carry out scientific research activities, which must be conducted through collaboration with Chinese scientific research institutions, higher education institutions, medical institutions, or enterprises. Per the MgmtHumanGen and the Rules-MgmtHGR, the foreign entity and the Chinese entity must jointly file an application for approval to MOST (now the NHC), and the research must pass an ethics review in the countries (regions) where the partners are located. The only exception to the approval requirement is international collaborations in clinical trials that do not involve the export of Chinese HGR materials such as organs, tissues, or cells comprising the human genome, genes, or other genetic substances. Such clinical trial collaborations, however, must be filed with MOST (now the NHC) on its online platform (CHN-6), which will generate a record number. See HGR-InfoSys for background on CHN-6. Per HGR-InfoSys, for help with the online platform, contact Zhu Min with the NHC’s China Biotechnology Development Center at 010-88225151 or 010-88225168; or the information system support at 17610386080.

Per the HGR-AppGuide, following administrative screening, the NHC will confirm receipt through CHN-6 and organize a technical review. NHC must conduct its review and issue a decision within 20 working days. If the application is approved, NHC notifies the applicant of the approval through CHN-6 and a letter. If there are missing materials, NHC gives the applicant a one-time opportunity to correct the application and resubmit. If the application exceeds the scope of the license, NHC informs the applicant that the application is not approved.

The Bioscrty-Law prohibits engaging in biotechnology research, development, and application activities that endanger public health, damage biological resources, or destroy ecosystems and biodiversity. Units engaged in biotechnology clinical trials must be responsible for the safety of their biotechnology research, development, and application; adopt biosafety risk prevention and control measures; and formulate biosafety training, follow-up inspections, regular reports, etc. China is implementing a classified management system for biotechnology research and development activities into three (3) categories: high-risk, medium-risk, and low-risk. The risk classification standards are to be formulated, adjusted, and announced by the competent State Council departments for science and technology (now the NHC), health, agriculture, and rural areas. High-risk and medium-risk biotechnology research and development activities must include risk assessments and risk prevention/control and emergency plans for biosafety incidents. The Rules-MgmtHGR also states that clinical trial applications must pass a security review organized by MOST (now the NHC) if the study’s provision or opening of HGR information to foreign entities may impact China’s public health, national security, or the social public interest.

For additional details, see the HGR-FAQs for frequently asked questions on HGR applications. Also see the Submission Process and Submission Content sections and the Specimens topic for additional information on HGR regulatory management.

Overview

In accordance with the DrugAct and ClinImprtOrdr, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) is responsible for overseeing the import or ordering of drugs for clinical research purposes, and also uses this authority to indirectly regulate drug clinical trials in humans. Per ClinSampleProd and DrugProdReqs, the Thai FDA is also responsible for approving requests for permission to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies. As per G-ResEthics, the scope of the Thai FDA’s assessment includes Phases I through IV clinical trials for new drugs (also referred to as “modern drugs”), traditional drugs (drugs intended for use in the practice of traditional medicine or to cure animal disease), unregistered drugs, registered drugs being studied in new doses or for indications not previously approved, and locally produced drugs that require efficacy testing.

As indicated in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and ECRegProc, the Thai FDA’s approvals of a drug import license and of a request for permission to produce sample drugs for human research studies are dependent upon obtaining proof of ethics committee (EC) approval to conduct the clinical trial by a Thai FDA approved EC. ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr further specify that for both types of approval requests, the application is either submitted to the Thai FDA after the research project and all of the research site(s) have been approved by an EC, or in parallel, pending review by the relevant EC.

Clinical Trial Review Process

As set forth in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and G-CT-DIPApp, the Thai FDA coordinates the review of applications submitted to obtain drug import licenses for clinical research purposes (N.Y.M.1) and applications submitted to request permission to produce drug samples for human research studies (P.Y.8). Per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, an applicant should submit the application along with supporting documents to the Medicines Regulation Division.

Per G-CT-DIPApp, upon receipt of a drug import license application (N.Y.M.1) package, the Thai FDA’s One Stop Service & Consultation Center (OSSC) (THA-35) sends the application package to an officer in the Thai FDA’s International Affairs and Investigational Drug Section. After administrative processing and troubleshooting, the officer will send the application package to the assigned reviewer to proceed. The reviewer then receives the application package and performs a technical assessment. If the reviewer determines the package is technically correct, then it will be forwarded to the Thai FDA for approval. ClinImprtOrdr specifies that the Secretary-General is responsible for authorizing all drugs to be imported into the country. (See Submission Process and Timeline of Review sections for details on the administrative and technical processing and review timelines.)

According to the DrugAct, the Thai FDA’s approval of a drug import license application for clinical research purposes also serves as an import license that allows the sponsor to import investigational drugs into Thailand. The license will remain valid until December 31^st of the year of issue. The license holder who would like to renew the license must file an application for renewal prior to the license expiration date. (See the Manufacturing & Import section for detailed license renewal instructions).

Per G-CT-DIPApp, after the import license is granted, the applicant must inform or request permission from the Thai FDA prior to initiating the following:

• Changes to clinical trial drug supplies
• Changes to an approved protocol (protocol amendment) or changes related to or affecting participant safety

In cases where the sponsor is required to immediately make one (1) or more amendments because the clinical trial or the use of investigational products in the trial endangers the health of a clinical trial participant or other person, the applicant may immediately make the amendment without prior review by the Thai FDA. A corresponding notification clearly identifying the change and the rationale for immediate implementation of the change must be filed within 15 working days after the amendment implementation date. A corresponding notification letter referring to the related approved import license along with supplemental documents to be provided in the Form for Requesting Corrections/Additional Clarifications are also required (see ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 12) and THA-18 (Appendix 12)).

Per G-CT-DIPApp, after the import license is granted, the applicant must also notify the Thai FDA of changes to the protocol that do not affect the safety of the trial participants.

No information is currently available on the review process for P.Y.8 application submissions.

Per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) may also establish an academic committee or subcommittee for certain drugs requiring special supervision (e.g., the Academic Subcommittee on AIDS Vaccine Trials).

As delineated in ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, the Thai FDA has procedures to monitor the research project before, during, and after the trial ends or is terminated. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd specify that the authorized Thai FDA officer will contact the licensee to schedule an inspection appointment and provide a letter notifying the licensee at least seven (7) days in advance, except in those cases where the Thai FDA has a special request to carry out an inspection immediately and does not notify the licensee in advance. Refer to ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd for detailed licensee information on preparing for the inspection. See also THA-18 (Appendix 11) and THA-76 (Appendix 7) for the self-examination form containing the Thai officer’s inspection summary).

Refer to the Submission Process section for submission requirements.

National Medical Products Administration

In accordance with the DRR, the applicant is required to pay a fee after the drug registration is approved by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA). As per the NMPA-No75-2020 and CHN-14, the NMPA charges the following drug registration fees to review and approve clinical trials as part of the drug registration process (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• New drugs made in China: 192,000 Yuan
• New drugs made outside China: 376,000 Yuan
• Generic drugs made in China: 318,000 Yuan
• Generic drugs made outside China: 502,000 Yuan
• One-time import of drugs: 2,000 Yuan

As specified in NMPA-No75-2020 and CHN-14, the fees are based on one (1) active pharmaceutical ingredient or one (1) preparation as one (1) variety. If another specification is added, the registration fee will be increased by 20% according to the corresponding category.

For further guidance on fees associated with submitting supplementary applications and registering renewals for imported drugs and more, please refer to NMPA-No75-2020.

Payment Instructions

NMPA-No37-2022 indicates that to register a drug, the applicant should submit the drug registration application to NMPA’s Government Service Portal (CHN-71). The relevant center will conduct an administrative review. Next, the non-tax income collection management system of the Ministry of Finance will send an electronic payment code to the applicant in the form of a text message. The applicant can pay through the counter payment, self-service terminal, online payment, self-service POS card, bank exchange, or transfer and payment. The applicant will receive confirmation of electronic payment via email within 10 working days. Electronic payment documents have the same legal effect as paper instruments.

National Health Commission

Per HGR-AppGuide, the National Health Commission (NHC) does not charge a fee for an application for a human genetic resources (HGR) license in China.

Thai Food and Drug Administration

In accordance with ClinDrugFees, the applicant is required to pay a fee to the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) to submit an application to request permission to import or order drugs for research purposes in Thailand. The ClinDrugFees states that the Thai FDA requires an administrative processing fee of 1,000 Baht to review and verify the correctness of certain application requests related to authorization, including:

• Applications to request permission to import or order drugs into the Kingdom for research purposes without registering a drug formula (N.Y.M.1 form) (See ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 2) and THA-18 (Appendix 2) for N.Y.M.1 form)
• Applications for drug samples produced for research studies (P.Y.8 form) (See ClinSampleProd (Appendix 1) and THA-76 (Appendix 1) for P.Y.8 form)

In addition, per ClinDrugFees and THA-78, the Thai FDA charges the following fees for the technical evaluation of documents of any application request related to authorization:

• Application for permission to import or order drugs for research purposes in the country (N.Y.M.1) or to request permission to register and produce sample drugs for human research studies (P.Y.8): 4,000 Baht
• Application to expand the scope of a license to produce drug samples and register new drugs for human research studies (for drugs in bioequivalence studies): 1,000 Baht
• New research drug application to expand the scope of a license to produce drug samples and register a new drug for human research studies (for drugs other than those in bioequivalence studies): 4,000 Baht
• Application to amend and request specific changes related to the application requests listed in the preceding bullets: 500 Baht
• Requesting a certificate of pharmaceutical product (Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product/Certificate of Free Sale): 500 Baht
• Request for review of accuracy and translation of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) assessment report from Thai version to English version: 1,500 Baht

In addition, per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, in the case of the applicant designating a power of attorney to submit a paper application in person or via PDF file, the Stamp Duty fee is 30 Baht per attorney designation.

Payment Instructions

According to the Thai FDA’s One Stop Service & Consultation Center (OSSC) (THA-35) and THA-66, the OSSC’s finance section provides payment services in cases where expenses need to be paid for various submissions, and accepts multiple payment methods including the cash payment counter, cashier’s check, credit cards, and mobile banking applications for the processing of application fees. However, per THA-79, in order to submit an electronic payment using the Thai FDA’s Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54), the applicant must first submit documentation and supporting evidence to request access as required by the OSSC. Once the OSSC approves e-submission system access, the applicant can submit a payment electronically to request a drug importation waiver via THA-54. See Submission Process section for detailed submission instructions and documentation requirements to access THA-54. Refer to THA-57 for the Skynet e-submission user manual and THA-87 for a guide to request a drug importation waiver via THA-54.

Overview

As per the Measures-Ethics, the RegEthics, the EC-Guide, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the DRR, and the DAL, an ethics committee (EC) must approve a clinical trial application prior to a sponsor initiating a clinical trial. Per the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019, each institution that conducts biomedical research is required to have an EC that is responsible for reviewing the scientific and ethical rationality of drug clinical trial programs, reviewing and supervising the qualifications of drug clinical trial researchers, supervising the development of drug clinical trials, and ensuring the ethics review process is independent, objective, and fair. Per the Measures-Ethics, institutions conducting life sciences and medical research involving people must establish ECs to carry out ethics reviews of such research. When the institution does not establish an EC, or the EC is unable to meet the needs of the review, the institution may entrust another institutional EC or a regional EC and implement extended supervision through follow-up reviews.

As described in the EC-Guide, China’s ethics review landscape comprises ethics expert committees and institutional ECs. Ethics expert committees are divided into the National Medical Ethics Expert Committee and provincial medical ethics expert committees. They are mainly responsible for guidance, consultation, and training, and generally do not undertake specific ethics review tasks. Institutional ECs are established by medical and health institutions in accordance with relevant requirements, and are mainly responsible for ethics review, training, and consultation in their institutions. Per the Measures-Ethics, provincial-level health departments establish and manage regional ECs. The EC-Guide states that the regional ECs and institutional ECs have the same status and are subject to the same requirements. ECs at different levels and in different institutions should strictly perform their respective duties, carry out effective communication and collaboration, adhere to the independence, impartiality, and objectivity of ethics review, and ensure that all medical research complies with ethical standards and requirements to fully protect the safety and rights of research participants. Following are brief overviews of each type of EC:

• The National Medical Ethics Expert Committee formulates standards for the construction of institutional ECs and ethics review guidelines, including review content, review procedures, additional protection for special groups, and review time limits; publishes ethics review requirements for high-risk activities in scientific and technological ethics; and formulates standard requirements for ethics review application materials.
• The provincial medical ethics expert committees promote the implementation of the above-mentioned ethics review standards and operating guidelines within the administrative region, promotes the construction and operation of the institutional ECs in the region, and standardizes the work of ethics review. The provincial medical ethics expert committees can make supplementary adjustments to the above-mentioned ethics review standards and operating guidelines in light of the cultural customs of the region.
• The institutional EC establishes and improves the ethics review work system and operating procedures in accordance with the guidance of the national and the provincial medical ethics expert committees, improves the conflict of interest management and quality control mechanisms, and ensures that the ethics review process is independent, objective, and fair. ECs at different levels and in different institutions should strictly perform their respective duties, which includes conducting and ensuring ethics reviews that protect the safety and rights of research participants.

Note that per the Measures-Ethics-Interp, the main framework and provisions of the Measures-Ethics and the RegEthics are generally consistent and both regulations should be followed. Some provisions in the newer Measures-Ethics have been refined and improved in combination with the requirements of new laws and regulations and the actual conditions of colleges, universities, and research institutes. The RegEthics will be reviewed and revised to closely align with the Measures-Ethics. (ClinRegs will monitor and update the China profile, as needed.)

Ethics Committee Composition

Pursuant to the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the EC composition must meet health authority requirements, and include members of various categories with different gender compositions. The EC members must be trained in ethics review and be able to review ethical and scientific issues related to clinical trials.

Per the Measures-Ethics, the EC-Guide, and the RegEthics, ECs should have at least seven (7) members. The EC-Guide and the RegEthics state that the ECs should be composed of multidisciplinary specialists in biomedicine, management, ethics, law, sociology, statistics, and other areas that collectively represent the qualifications and experience to provide a fair scientific and ethics review. The RegEthics states that in areas where minority ethnic groups reside, the institution should consider including members of those groups on the EC. The EC-Guide indicates that there should be one (1) member who does not belong to the institution and has no close relationship with the project researchers (the same member can meet both requirements). As delineated in the Measures-Ethics, EC members must be selected from experts in the fields of life sciences, medicine, bioethics, law, and people from outside the institution, and there must be members of different sexes. Ethnic minority members must be considered in ethnic minority areas. EC members must have the corresponding ethics review capabilities, and regularly receive training on ethical knowledge of life sciences and medical research and knowledge of relevant laws and regulations.

The Measures-Ethics, the EC-Guide, and the RegEthics provide that the EC can hire an independent consultant if necessary. The Measures-Ethics and the RegEthics state that the independent consultant advises on specific project issues under review and does not participate in the voting. The EC-Guide further indicates that there should be clear institutional regulations on the qualifications, hiring procedures, and job responsibilities of independent consultants, and the hiring process of independent consultants should be recorded and filed.

The EC-Guide and the RegEthics provide that the EC composition should include a chairperson and vice chairpersons, who are elected by committee members. The number of vice chairpersons is not specified in the guidelines. When the chairperson is absent, the deputy chair performs the chairperson’s duties. ECs should not accept any research project applications that do not comply with national laws and regulations. In addition, the EC should refuse to review any projects in which they have a conflict of interest. See the EC-Guide for additional guidance on managing ECs.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

As per the Measures-Ethics, the RegEthics, the EC-Guide, and the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, each institution must have written SOPs, including a process to be followed for conducting reviews. To ensure the independence, objectivity, and impartiality of the ethics review process, the Measures-Ethics stipulates that the SOPs must include conflict of interest management and quality control mechanisms. Further, the EC must formulate an ethics review system in emergency situations (e.g., epidemic outbreaks) and clarify the time limit for review.

Per the Measures-Ethics, scientific research managers and other relevant personnel must conduct bioethics education and training. The EC-Guide specifies that all committee members should undergo basic professional training in scientific research ethics before starting their EC service at a provincial or above-level scientific research course and receive an ethics training certificate. Participation in continuing education should be on a continuous basis to ensure improvement.

As delineated in the Measures-Ethics, the term of office for members of ECs that review life sciences and medical research involving people must not exceed one (1) year, and they may be re-elected. The EC must have one (1) chairman and several vice chairmen, who must be elected by EC members through consultation and then appointed by the institution. EC members, independent consultants, and their staff must sign confidentiality agreements on sensitive information learned during ethics review work. The EC must accept the supervision of the institution's management. The EC may decide to approve, disapprove, approve after revision, re-examine after revision, continue research, suspend, or terminate the research under review, and must explain its reasons. The decision must be approved by more than one-half of all members of the EC. Members must vote after full discussion of the ethical issues involved in the study, and opinions inconsistent with the review decision must be recorded in detail.

The RegEthics states that EC members should agree to disclose their names, occupations, and affiliations, and to sign the reviews, confidentiality agreements, and a conflict of interest declaration. Each EC member term is five (5) years, after which they can be reappointed. Each institution that establishes an EC should also provide financial compensation to its committee members. EC review and approval decisions must take place during formal meetings. The majority of the total EC membership should be present to conduct reviews.

In addition, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 requires the EC to establish and implement the following written documents:

• Provisions on the composition, establishment, and filing of the EC
• The meeting schedule, meeting notice, and meeting review process sequence
• The initial review and follow-up review procedures of the EC
• A rapid review and approval procedure for minor amendments to the experimental protocol agreed to by the EC
• Procedures for promptly notifying researchers of review opinions
• Procedures for appealing ethics review opinions

The RegEthics and the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 state that written records of all meetings and resolutions should be preserved for five (5) years following the completion of a clinical trial.

Overview

As per ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and ECRegProc, clinical trials require ethics committee (EC) approval for each trial site from an EC recognized by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA). ECRegProc indicates that an EC may function as a committee under a government agency (e.g., the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH)); as a committee affiliated with a private hospital/institution licensed to comply with the HospitalAct; or, as a committee operating as a part of a non-profit partnership between a government agency and a private organization(s) (e.g., the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC)). ECRegProc states that the Thai FDA posts a list of the approved/renewed ECs on its website (see THA-90), and as noted in THA-3, this usually occurs every two (2) years. According to THA-4, the ECMOPH and the CREC are both government ECs whose approvals are still active. As discussed in THA-63, the ECMOPH and the CREC are also collaborating on a multi-institutional clinical research project to reduce redundancy during the review process and to develop joint human research ethics guidelines. (See THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.) (Note: The ECMOPH website is not accessible to users residing outside of Thailand.)

Per THA-1, the ECMOPH and the CREC represent the two (2) central ECs recognized by the Thai FDA to review and approve clinical research protocols involving humans. THA-1 further explains that both the ECMOPH and the CREC are categorized as central ECs because they can accept all clinical research studies for review, regardless of the trial sites involved.

Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health

Per THA-39, the ECMOPH is responsible for controlling, supervising, and monitoring research in accordance with international ethical principles; developing research policies; suspending unethical research programs; creating a national database of clinical research; establishing a regional/international committee network system; developing personnel capacity to support clinical research in Thailand; and other related or assigned academic projects. See THA-13 for additional details about the ECMOPH, and THA-13 and THA-39 for requirements specifically related to studies approved by the ECMOPH.

Central Research Ethics Committee

Per THA-1, the CREC was formed in 2014 through the cooperative efforts of 26 public and private institutions in Thailand, including the Thai FDA. THA-44 explains that the focus of the CREC is on reviewing multi-center clinical research projects to improve the efficiency of the EC review and to reduce the duplicative review of multi-institutional studies. See THA-44 for additional information on the CREC, and the Submission Process and Submission Content sections for detailed CREC submission requirements.

Ethics Committee Composition

As per G-ResEthics, institutional ECs should consist of at least five (5) members, both male and female, with the following qualifications:

• At least one (1) member with knowledge and experience in research fields regularly reviewed (e.g., medicine, public health, social science, etc.)
• At least one (1) member who is a lawyer or has legal expertise
• At least one (1) member who is unaffiliated with the institution, and, if possible, that member should be selected from the community where the institution is based
• At least two (2) members who have patient care, counseling, and treatment knowledge and experience
• At least one-third of the total EC should be knowledgeable or trained in human research ethics

ECRegProc, by comparison, also requires institutional ECs to have at least five (5) members who are experts on science, medicine, and ethics. In addition, the committee must include members representing the following qualifications:

• At least three (3) members who are medical professionals
• At least one (1) member must be an expert in a non-scientific category
• At least one (1) member from outside of the institution where the trial is taking place

The International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28) similarly indicates that ECs should be composed of medical personnel, scientists, and non-scientists, and also notes that while these committees may have differences in legal status, composition, and function, the duties of an EC should be consistent with THA-28. Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28.

Because each EC has its own requirements, it is recommended that the individual ECs be contacted to confirm their specific requirements.

No information is available on ECMOPH and CREC composition requirements.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

As delineated in G-ResEthics and ECRegProc, ECs must conduct clinical protocol reviews according to THA-28 using written standard operating procedures (SOPs) that are periodically updated, and develop a process for conducting reviews. The SOPs should include information on EC composition, meeting schedules, timeframes for protocol reviews, quorum requirements, decision-making procedures, channels of communicating the decision(s), complaint processes, reviewing fees (if any), protection of protocol confidentiality, and prevention of possible conflicts of interests. The G-ResEthics also states that each EC must establish the composition, member terms of service, and criteria for selecting the committee members, as appropriate. The members must also be appointed officially as evidenced by a written document.

Additionally, per ECRegProc, ECs must meet the following requirements:

• Have the legal qualifications or comply with the government regulations related to providing research or research-related services
• Have a clearly defined structure with proof of appropriately appointed members, including the secretary and secretariat
• Have voting rights and the right to issue independent research opinions without investigator/sponsor involvement, and with no direct or indirect interest or conflict of interest with the investigator or clinical research study
• Have members who are trained in conducting research and clinical trials in human participants, and who participate in ethics training or other related training at least once every two (2) years while serving on the committee
• Have experience in reviewing human research involving experimental drugs for at least 10 studies

For detailed EC requirements and information on other administrative processes, see G-ResEthics and ECRegProc.

Also, refer to THA-47 for a list of CREC forms needed to prepare for initial protocol submission, and THA-37 for a complete list of CREC SOPs.

No information is available on the ECMOPH’s terms of reference, review procedures, and meeting schedule.

Overview

According to the EC-Guide, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, and the NMPA-No11-2017, the primary scope of information assessed by the ethics committee (EC) relates to maintaining and protecting the dignity and rights of research participants and ensuring their safety throughout their participation in a clinical trial, in accordance with the requirements set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (CHN-84). Per the Measures-Ethics and the RegEthics, ethics reviews and relevant personnel must comply with the Constitution of the People's Republic of China and Chinese laws and regulations. The Measures-Ethics indicates that life science and medical research involving humans must respect research participants and follow the principles of beneficence, non-harm, and fairness, and protect privacy and personal information. Per the RegEthics and the EC-Guide, the EC must also pay special attention to reviewing informed consent and to protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed to be vulnerable (See the Vulnerable Populations section for additional information about these populations). In addition, the EC is responsible for ensuring a competent review of all ethical aspects of the clinical trial protocol; evaluating the possible risks and expected benefits to participants; confirming the suitability of the investigator(s), facilities, and methods; and verifying the adequacy of confidentiality safeguards.

Per Measures-Ethics, life science and medical research involving humans is defined as research activities using biological samples and information data (including health records and behaviors) of research participants, specifically including the following:

• Activities that use methods such as physics, chemistry, biology, and traditional Chinese medicine to conduct research on human reproduction, growth, development, aging, etc.
• Activities that use methods such as physics, chemistry, biology, traditional Chinese medicine, psychology, and other methods to conduct research on human physiology, psychological behavior, pathological phenomena, disease etiology and pathogenesis, as well as disease prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation
• Activities using new technologies or products to conduct experimental research on the human body
• Activities that use methods such as epidemiology, sociology, and psychology to collect, record, use, report, or store biological samples, information data, and other scientific research materials (including health records, behaviors, etc.) related to life sciences and medical issues

The GeneEdit-Ethics states that human genome editing research should have important scientific and social value, and should be limited to medical interventions for treatment or prevention. Non-medical genomic changes to research participants are prohibited. Researchers and institutions should follow the GeneEdit-Ethics for principles and ethical behavior to guide human genome editing research.

Note that per the Measures-Ethics-Interp, the main framework and provisions of the Measures-Ethics and the RegEthics are generally consistent and both regulations should be followed. Some provisions in the newer Measures-Ethics have been refined and improved in combination with the requirements of new laws and regulations and the actual conditions of colleges, universities, and research institutes. The RegEthics will be reviewed and revised to closely align with the Measures-Ethics. (ClinRegs will monitor and update the China profile, as needed.)

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

As per the RegEthics, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the DRR, the DAL, and the SC-Opinions-No42, the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) and the EC must approve a clinical trial application prior to a sponsor initiating a clinical trial. As stated in the DRR, clinical trials of drugs must be reviewed and approved by an EC. The DRR indicates that the EC review may be submitted in parallel to the NMPA’s review, but the study cannot be initiated until after review and approval by the EC. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the RegEthics also state that the EC must review and approve any protocol amendments prior to those changes being implemented.

Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, the collection, preservation, use, and external provision of China’s human genetic resources (HGR) must comply with ethical principles and pass the ethics review of ECs that have been registered with the relevant management departments. Further, applications for administrative licenses for international scientific research cooperation on HGR must pass an ethics review in the respective countries (regions) where both parties are located. Where the foreign party is truly unable to provide the ethics review certification materials of the country (region) where it is located, it may submit the proof that the foreign party unit recognizes the ethics review opinions of the Chinese unit.

The Measures-Ethics, the EC-Guide, and the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 provide that the EC’s scope of review must include the following (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Whether the institutions and researchers are competent; the qualifications and experience of the investigator meet clinical research requirements
• Whether the research plan meets the required scientific and ethical principles, has scientific and social value, does not violate the provisions of laws and regulations, and does not harm the public interest
• The degree of risk compared to the expected study benefit
• The informed consent process and whether the relevant information provided is complete and easy to understand, and whether the method for obtaining consent was appropriate
• Whether confidentiality measures have been taken to protect the participants’ privacy, personal information, and data
• Whether the guidelines for the selection and exclusion of participants are appropriate and fair
• Whether the participants are clearly informed of their rights in the research, including the right to equal treatment and that they can withdraw from the research at any time without reason and not be treated unfairly because of this
• Whether the participant received reasonable compensation for participating in the research, and in case of damage or death, whether the treatment and compensation measures are appropriate; participants must not be charged research-related fees for participating in the research
• Whether there is a designated contact for handling and obtaining informed consent and answering questions related to participant safety
• Whether appropriate measures are taken to minimize participant risks
• Potential conflicts of interest
• When conducting non-therapeutic clinical trials, if the participants’ informed consent is implemented by their guardians instead, whether the trial protocol gives full consideration to the corresponding ethical issues, laws, and regulations
• Whether the corresponding ethical issues, laws, and regulations are fully considered in the trial plan if the trial protocol clearly states that the participants or their guardians cannot sign an informed consent form (ICF) before the trial in an emergency
• Whether participants are forced or induced to participate in clinical trials due to improper influence, including whether the ICF has content that waives legal rights or exempts researchers, institutions, or sponsors from being responsible
• Whether the method, content, and timing of the release of research results are reasonable

Per the Measures-Ethics and the EC-Guide, the EC will make one (1) of the following decisions (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Approval: The EC unconditionally approves an initial review of the research protocol and will conduct follow-up reviews. The research can start immediately after approval.
• Approval after modification: The EC conditionally approves a research protocol if the research leader accepts the EC’s proposed amendments.
• Review after modification: If the EC needs more substantive information about the research project under review, it will decide to suspend the deliberation until the committee receives new information.
• Approve continuation of research.
• Not approved: The EC votes against a research proposal. The reasons for disapproval must be communicated to the research leader, who is given an opportunity to defend the research.
• Suspension or termination of research: The EC suspends or terminates a research project.

The Measures-Ethics specifies that the EC must conduct the review and issue its opinion within 30 days of acceptance of the materials.

The Measures-Ethics states that before the implementation of research approved by the EC, researchers, ECs, and institutions must truthfully, completely, and accurately upload information to the registration platform (CHN-53), including research, ethics review opinions, and institutional review opinions in accordance with the requirements of the national medical research registration and filing information system, and promptly update the information according to the progress of the research. Researchers, ECs, and institutions are encouraged to upload information in real time during the study management process.

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 specifies that the EC must pay attention to and clearly require investigators to report in a timely manner the following: deviations or modifications to the trial protocol to eliminate emergency hazards to participants; changes that increase the risk to participants or significantly affect the implementation of clinical trials; all suspicious and unexpected serious adverse reactions; and new information that may adversely affect the safety of participants or the implementation of clinical trials. The EC has the right to suspend or terminate clinical trials, as needed. Finally, the EC must accept and properly handle requests from participants. Per the EC-Guide, if there are accidental injuries or violations during the research project, the EC has the right to request the suspension or termination of an approved research project. Further, the EC reviews amendments to the protocol and informed consent form, and reviews serious adverse events and violations of the protocol. The Measures-Ethics states that when a serious adverse event is reported, the EC must conduct a timely review to determine whether the measures taken by researchers to protect the personal safety and health rights and interests of research participants are adequate, reassess the risk-benefit ratio of the research, and issue review opinions.

As delineated in the NMPA-No34-2022, protocol changes that result in updating the investigator’s brochure, ICF, or other relevant documents should be reported to the EC by the sponsor. The Measures-Ethics indicates that if approved research requires revision of the research plan, informed consent, recruitment materials, or other materials provided to research participants, the researcher must submit the revised documents to the EC for review. Further, the EC must conduct follow-up reviews at least annually in accordance with relevant reports submitted by the investigators. The follow-up review must include the following considerations:

• Whether the research is conducted in accordance with the approved research plan and reported in a timely manner
• Whether the research content was changed without authorization during the research process
• Whether changes or new information increase the risk to research participants or significantly affect the implementation of the research
• Whether it is necessary to suspend or terminate the research early
• Other content that needs to be reviewed

Per the EC-Guide, the EC has the right to request regular follow-up reviews of approved research projects based on the possibility and degree of research risks. The RegEthics provides that the EC must designate members to conduct follow-up examinations of approved research projects. The number of members for follow-up review must not be less than two (2), and the review is required to be reported to the EC. Further, the EC may apply to the provincial medical ethics expert committees to provide advice on the ethics review of research that involves a relatively high-risk or special population.

Expedited Review

As delineated in the Measures-Ethics, the EC may conduct expedited review of research in the following circumstances:

• Research whose risk is not greater than the minimum risk
• Research in which the approved research protocol is slightly modified and does not affect the risk-benefit ratio of the research
• Follow-up review of approved research
• Research conducted by multiple institutions, when the EC of the participating institution confirms the ethics review opinion issued by the lead institution, etc.

Where the situation is urgent, an ethics review must be promptly carried out. In the case of emergencies such as outbreaks, ethics reviews and review opinions are generally carried out within 72 hours, but the requirements and quality of ethics reviews must not be reduced. For expedited review, the EC chairman designates two (2) or more members to conduct the ethics review and issue review opinions. The review opinions must be reported at the EC meeting. If it is discovered during this review that there is a change in the risk-benefit ratio of the research, there is a disagreement among the review members, or the review members propose that a meeting review is required, etc., then a full review procedure must be held.

During an outbreak of an epidemic, the EC-Guide advises ECs to adhere to the highest scientific and ethical standards for independent review of the research project to ensure balancing of quality and timeliness. The materials provided by the researcher can be simplified according to the situation. The EC should pay special attention to the informed consent process as participants may be improperly exploited due to their obvious vulnerability, especially when it involves high-risk and risk-uncertain research. It should be ensured that participants choose to participate voluntarily and independently after being fully informed and fully understanding the possible risks of research. Research participants or the legal representative/guardian must be allowed to withdraw from research unconditionally at any stage. See the EC-Guide for additional guidance on the EC review when there is a major epidemic risk.

Multicenter Studies

Per the Measures-Ethics, research carried out in multiple institutions may establish collaborative mechanisms for ethics review, ensuring that all institutions follow the principles of consistency and timeliness. Both the lead institution and the participating institution must organize an ethics review. The EC of the participating institution must conduct a follow-up review of the research in which the institution participates. Where establishments cooperate with enterprises and other institutions to carry out life science and medical research involving humans, the institutions must fully understand the overall situation of the research, clarify the scope of use and handling methods of biological samples and information data through agreements subject to ethics review and follow-up review, and supervise their proper disposal after the research is completed.

Per the EC-Guide, the review of international cooperative research projects requires ethics review by the lead unit. For cooperative research projects conducted in China, the trial protocols should be submitted to the EC for a single-review process and should be consistent, though the EC will accept that informed consent may vary slightly in different institutions. The RegEthics also provides that multicenter research may establish a collaborative review mechanism to ensure that the research institutions of each project follow the principles of consistency and timeliness. The lead agency EC is responsible for project review and confirmation of the ethics review results of participating institutions. ECs of the participating institutions must conduct an ethics review of the research in which the institution participates in a timely manner and provide feedback to the lead agency for review.

Exemption from Ethics Review

The Measures-Ethics states that ethics review may be exempted where human information data or biological samples are used to carry out life science and medical research involving humans if the research does not cause harm to the human body or does not involve sensitive personal information or commercial interests. This is to reduce unnecessary burdens on scientific research personnel and promote the development of life science and medical research involving people. The exemption may apply in the following circumstances:

• Using lawfully obtained public data or conducting research through data generated by observing and not interfering with public conduct
• Using anonymized information and data to carry out research
• Using existing human biological samples to carry out research, and the source of the biological samples complies with relevant laws and regulations and ethical principles; the relevant content and purpose of the research are within the scope of the informed consent; and the research does not involve the use of human germ cells, embryos, reproductive cloning, chimerism, and heritable gene manipulation
• Carrying out research using human-derived cell lines or cell lines derived from biobanks, where the relevant content and purpose of the research are within the scope authorized by the provider, and do not involve activities such as human embryonic and reproductive cloning, chimerism, and heritable gene manipulation

Overview

As delineated in G-ResEthics, ECRegProc, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28), the primary scope of information assessed by Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) recognized ethics committees (ECs) relates to maintaining and protecting the dignity and rights of research participants and ensuring their safety throughout their participation in a clinical trial. According to THA-10, clinical research and trials (i.e., research studies and experiments on humans) are subject to the medical ethics standards delineated in the Regulations of the Medical Council on Maintaining the Ethics of the Medical Profession (B.E. 2549) (MCEthics), the Declaration of Rights and Code of Conduct for Patients (THA-11), and the Researcher’s Code of Ethics (THA-14).

MCEthics explains that ECs are established to review the ethical aspects of research studies and human trials to protect the rights, safety, and well-being of participants in research studies and human trials. THA-14 further states that researchers should treat all research participants, whether animate or inanimate, with appropriate respect and consideration and should take full responsibility for the impact and consequences of their research. Researchers should also have respect for the dignity and rights of their human participants. THA-11 indicates that every patient has the fundamental right to receive professional medical and health care from health professionals without discrimination as provided for in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand (B.E. 2560). Per G-ResEthics, ECRegProc, and THA-28, ECs must also pay special attention to reviewing informed consent and protecting the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed to be vulnerable. Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. (See the Vulnerable Populations; Children/Minors; Pregnant Women, Fetuses, and Neonates; Prisoners; and Mentally Impaired sections for additional information about these populations).

In addition, per G-ResEthics, ECRegProc, and THA-28, ECs are also responsible for ensuring an independent, timely, and competent review of all ethical aspects of the clinical trial protocol. ECs must act in the interests of the potential research participants and the communities involved, evaluating the possible risks and expected benefits to participants; confirming the suitability of the investigator(s), facilities, and methods; and verifying the adequacy of confidentiality and privacy safeguards. G-ResEthics further states that ECs should review the ethical aspects of the protocol in compliance with current international ethical guidelines while taking into account local or national laws, religions, traditions, and cultures. Per G-ResEthics, the appointed EC is also responsible for ensuring that research conducted within the institution adheres to ethical principles including those established in the Declaration of Helsinki (THA-45), the Council for International Organizations of Medical Science (CIOMS)’ International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects (THA-7), and the World Health Organization (WHO)’s Operational Guidelines for Ethics Committees that Review Biomedical Research (THA-64). See G-ResEthics, ECRegProc, and THA-28 for detailed ethical review guidelines. MCEthics further states that the medical practitioner who conducts or participates in the research study on humans must only undertake such study or experiment after it is approved by the EC responsible for the study. The medical practitioner must also conform to G-ResEthics and THA-14 when conducting the research study.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

Pursuant to ClinImprtOrdr and ECRegProc, Thai FDA-recognized ECs are responsible for reviewing and approving protocols for clinical research related to drugs to be imported into Thailand. Per ClinSampleProd and DrugProdReqs, the Thai FDA is also responsible for approving requests for permission to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies. As stated in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and ECRegProc, the Thai FDA’s approvals of a drug import license and of a request for permission to produce sample drugs for human research studies are dependent upon obtaining approval by a Thai FDA approved EC. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd further specify that for both types of approval requests, the application is either submitted to the Thai FDA after the research project and all the research sites have been approved by an EC, or in parallel, pending review by at least one (1) EC involved in the study. THA-5 further notes that if an approval is obtained from the EC of the research institute or university conducting the trial, an approval from the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) is usually optional (unless it is further required by the internal rules and regulations of that research facility).

In the instance of a multicenter clinical trial, G-ResEthics indicates that protocols submitted to each institution’s EC should contain the same content substance and details, and should specify the quality control techniques to ensure that research practices are the same in each institution. Although each institutional EC may independently approve or disapprove an application, G-ResEthics advises the committees from each participating institution to consult with one another to reach a clearly agreed upon decision.

There is no stated expiration date for an EC approval in G-ResEthics, in the ECMOPH guidelines (THA-13), or on the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) website (THA-36). Per ECRegProc, ECs must provide continuous supervision and monitoring, and conduct inspections to ensure that clinical trial operations are carried out in compliance with all approved research projects and research sites without any deviations or changes from those approved by the committee, unless otherwise specified according to THA-28. ECs must also supervise and monitor research projects to ensure that participants’ rights, safety, and well-being are protected (e.g., in the case of an adverse event, etc.).

Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health

According to THA-13, an application submitted to the ECMOPH is initially reviewed by at least two (2) advisors, followed by a final review by the ECMOPH at its regular meeting. At this meeting, the advisors present a summary of the proposal to the committee along with their recommendations. The committee discusses the proposal and sends a list of comments to the principal investigator (PI) for clarification. Once the PI provides the requested information, the committee makes a final decision, and this is reported to the ECMOPH Chairman and the Permanent Secretary for Public Health respectively. A letter of notification signed by the Permanent Secretary for Public Health is then forwarded to the PI and the responsible organization. As earlier stated, this review and approval process is specific to the ECMOPH. However, it can be used to obtain a better understanding of the EC process within Thailand.

Central Research Ethics Committee

As indicated in THA-44 and THA-24, a research project is eligible to apply for CREC review when it meets one (1) of the following criteria:

• It is a pharmaceutical-sponsored multi-center clinical trial
• It is an investigator-initiated multi-site study granted by a research funding organization (e.g., the National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT), the Thai Health Promotion Foundation, the Health Systems Research Institute (HSRI), etc.)
• It is assigned by the Thai Health Board of Directors for review
• It is a single center, multi-site study of researchers at partner institutions with co-researchers from each site (THA-24)

Per THA-44, when a research proposal is submitted to the CREC for review, the committee will cooperate with all the participating ECs to confirm the researchers are qualified, the institution has adequate facilities, and the proposed research is compliant with institutional regulations, applicable laws, local contexts, and standards of professional conduct and practice. The CREC will also consider the concerns and attitudes of the various communities participating in the project. Once the review process is completed, the decision will be documented in a formal letter. The issued decision letter will be sent to the PI, the contract research organization, and all of the participating ECs. Refer to THA-44 and THA-24 for additional CREC requirements.

No applicable requirements.

As explained in G-ResEthics, Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA)-recognized ethics committees (ECs) should review their research budgets to ensure that fee information is addressed. In general, the sponsor will pay the investigator based on the number of research participants. The Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) and the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) are both ECs recognized by the Thai FDA to review and approve clinical trial protocols.

G-ResEthics further states that research conducted in public hospitals or public health care facilities involves expenditures such as laboratory tests and lump sum fees determined by the institution. The disclosure of these payments and other budget items enables the EC to evaluate any conflict of interest and helps the investigator to decide whether to conduct the trial.

Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health

No information is currently available on ECMOPH fees.

Central Research Ethics Committee

As set forth in CRECFees, the CREC requires investigators to pay a nonrefundable fee to submit a clinical trial research protocol for ethical review and approval.

CRECFees and THA-50 specify the following fees for the ethical review of research projects funded by private capital (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• New research project: 50,000 Baht

· Request for certification renewal of old research project: 20,000 Baht

• Amendments to the research project (research outline amendments/adding a research location): 10,000 Baht
• Report requesting amendments to the research outline: Amendment certified by the local EC of the joint research institute in the CREC-certified research project, followed by a report submitted for CREC consideration (site-specific amendment): No fees charged
• Reporting adverse events, reporting non-compliance, notifying the CREC of a research project closure, and various other reports: No fees charged
• Edit the Certificate of Approval (COA) document: 1,000 Baht
• Edit certification/acknowledgement: 500 Baht
• Edit document with certified seal: 500 Baht

For research projects funded by government agencies, royal colleges, medical professional associations, or personal capital, CRECFees and THA-50 delineates the following fees:

• New research project: 25,000 Baht
• Request for certification renewal of old research project: 10,000 Baht
• Amendments to the research project (research outline amendments/adding a research location): 5,000 Baht
• Report requesting amendments to the research outline: Amendment certified by the local EC of the joint research institute in the CREC-certified research project, followed by a report submitted for CREC consideration (site-specific amendment): No fees charged
• Reporting adverse events, reporting non-compliance, notifying the CREC of a research project closure, and various other reports: No fees charged
• Edit the Certificate of Approval (COA) document: 500 Baht
• Edit the certification/acknowledgement: 250 Baht
• Edit document with certified seal: 250 Baht

Payment Instructions

THA-42 explains that investigators should submit ethics application fee payments to the following bank:

Bank Name: Krungthai Bank
Bank Address: 2/1 SOI Phahonyothin, Phahonyothin Road 40, Sena Nikhom, Jatujak, Bangkok 10900
Swift Code: KRTHTHBK
Branch: Phahonyothin 39
Account Type: Savings Account
Account Name: Foundation for Human Research Promotion in Thailand
Account number: 981-2-84782-0

Per CRECFees and THA-25, the investigators must submit proof of payment with the application submission. CRECFees indicates that the investigators and research sponsor are responsible for paying the fees and preparing the documentation to submit to the research institute. In the case of an investigator having transferred fees for a project that has been cancelled, the investigator may request a refund. The Foundation will deduct 20% of the transferred fee. The investigator should contact the bank for any service fee applied.

THA-50 and THA-25 indicate that any questions regarding the payment submission process may be directed to the following contact:

Miss Netdao Kanseecha
Financial Officer
Phone: 061-089-9966
Email: natdown@crecthailand.org

Per THA-25, if the CREC has no evidence of payment, the application submission will be considered incomplete. See THA-50 for additional information on fee rate based on funding source and fee receipts.

Overview

Per the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019, the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) oversees and supervises the registration and filing of clinical trial institutions. Drug clinical trials must be conducted in registered clinical trial institutions that meet the applicable requirements, which include having an ethics committee (EC).

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

The RegEthics states that all biomedical research institutions in China should establish their own ECs. Per SC-Opinions-No42, the NMPA adopted a registration system for institutions with qualifying conditions to be entrusted to conduct clinical trials and operate ECs. An institution is entrusted to conduct clinical trials if it has an EC and the main investigators of clinical trials have senior professional titles and have participated in more than three (3) clinical trials, among other conditions. To apply for qualification, institutions must submit an application via the online filing system (CHN-82) and fulfill the requirements pursuant to the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019. Per the Measures-Ethics, institutions must register the EC within three (3) months of its establishment and upload the information to CHN-82. Medical and healthcare institutions must register with the appropriate oversight authority. Other institutions must register with the competent department at a higher level according to their administrative affiliation. The EC must submit the previous year's work report to the appropriate institutional department before March 31^st of each year, including:

• A list of personnel and resumes of committee members' work
• The EC charter
• Work systems or relevant work procedures
• Other relevant materials required by the appropriate department

When the above information changes, the institution must promptly update the information to the appropriate institutional department.

As delineated in the RegEthics and interpreted in CHN-41, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for managing ECs nationwide, organizing the inspection and management of the national ethics review of biomedical research involving human beings, establishing the National Medical Ethics Expert Committee, and for developing policies relating to ethics review. The National Medical Ethics Expert Committee conducts research on major ethical issues in research involving humans and provides policy advice and guides the provincial ECs. Per CHN-3, China established a National Science and Technology Ethics Committee to strengthen the ethics governance system. Further, the SC-EthicalGov establishes principles and guides the committee in its responsibility to develop and coordinate the ethics governance system.

The EC-Guide describes the inspection and oversight mechanisms among the ECs in China. The National Medical Ethics Expert Committee formulates an inspection and evaluation indicator system for institutional ECs, including review quality, review efficiency, committee member capabilities, conflict of interest management, etc., to guide provincial medical ethics expert committees in carrying out ethics inspections within the region. The National Medical Ethics Expert Committee also inspects, evaluates, and supervises the work of provincial medical ethics expert committees. The provincial medical ethics expert committees are responsible for conducting regular inspections and evaluations of the ethics review work of medical institutions and regional ECs within the administrative area at the same level, making recommendations on how to manage non-standard ethics review work, and may establish an information disclosure mechanism based on actual conditions. Institutional ECs should check and evaluate the indicator system, continuously improve their operations, and actively cooperate in completing various inspections and evaluations. Regular self-evaluation is encouraged to improve work quality and review efficiency.

As delineated in the RegEthics, the provincial, autonomous regional, and municipal health authorities also have ECs set up under their own administration. The provincial medical ethics expert committees assists in promoting the institutionalization and standardization of the ethics review work of human biomedical research in its administrative region, and guides, inspects, and evaluates the work of the institutional ECs in the administrative region. It also performs training and consulting work. The local health administrative department at or above the county level supervises and manages the ethics review work of biomedical research involving people in its administrative region. Per the Measures-Ethics, provincial-level health departments, in conjunction with relevant departments, must formulate measures for the establishment and management of regional ECs. The regional EC must file with the provincial health department and upload information in CHN-82.

For additional information about oversight of ECs, including inspections, see the RegEthics.

Overview

As indicated in ECRegProc, ClinImprtOrdr, and ClinSampleProd, institutional ethics committees (ECs) and other types of ECs, including the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) and the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC), must be authorized by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) to conduct ethical reviews of drug clinical trial protocols. ClinImprtOrdr and ECRegProc specify that authorized ECs are responsible for reviewing and approving protocols for clinical research involving drugs to be imported into Thailand. (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices relating to EC authorization in ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd.)

As per ECRegProc, an acceptance letter issued to the ECs by the Thai FDA is valid for two (2) years and may be obtained by applying to the agency using the Jor Thor Form EC-1 (THA-23). Each EC is also required to submit an annual report (THA-21) to the Thai FDA, and to apply for an acceptance extension no later than 60 days before the expiration date.

ECRegProc states that the Thai FDA posts a list of the approved/renewed ECs on its website (see THA-90) and as noted in THA-3, this usually occurs every two (2) years. These ECs are approved in addition to the centralized ECMOPH and the CREC.

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

Pursuant to EC-QualAccredReq, in addition to the ECRegProc approval and renewal of approval documentation requirements, the Thai FDA requires ECs to submit proof of accreditation based on an evaluation by a quality accreditation agency in compliance with international accreditation standards. The following organizations are approved by the Thai FDA to provide quality accreditation reviews:

• National Ethics Committee Accreditation System of Thailand (NECAST)
• The Strategic Initiative for Developing Capacity in Ethical Review (SIDCER)/The Forum for Ethical Review Committees in Asian and Western Pacific Region (FERCAP)
• The Association for the Accreditation of Human Research Protection Programs (AAHRPP)
• Other Thai FDA-approved quality accreditation agencies

Per EC-QualAccredReq, EC submissions will be reviewed and completed within one (1) business day.

Overview

As per the DRR, the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) grants permission for clinical trials to be conducted in China pursuant to the drug registration process, in accordance with the DAL, the VaccineLaw, and other laws and regulations. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the DRR, the DAL, and the SC-Opinions-No44 require the sponsor to obtain NMPA and ethics committee (EC) approvals of a clinical trial application. As stated in the DRR, EC review may be submitted in parallel to the NMPA’s review, but the study cannot be initiated until after review and approval by the EC.

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024). The NHC-HGRmgt states that the original application process and platform (CHN-6) remain unchanged. Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, the collection, preservation, use, and external provision of China’s HGR must comply with ethical principles and pass the ethics review of ECs that have been registered with the relevant management departments. Further, with applications for administrative licenses for international scientific research cooperation, the HGR project must pass an ethics review in the respective countries (regions). As part of the application filing for international cooperative clinical trials, NMPA approvals, notices, and/or filing registration must be obtained in advance, along with the EC approvals. Therefore, EC and MOST (now the NHC) review cannot occur in parallel. (Please note that SC-Order777 amends the MgmtHumanGen to reflect the transfer of HGR management from MOST to the NHC, but the Rules-MgmtHGR has not yet been amended to show the transfer.)

Regulatory Submission

National Medical Products Administration

The NMPA-No50-2018 establishes the broad submission procedures for clinical trials, which are detailed below through implementing regulations and guidance. The DRR states that a Chinese legal entity must submit the drug registration application. Clinical trial applications are also considered drug registration applications. Overseas drug manufacturers without legal representation in China must apply for drug registration through Chinese legal persons to handle relevant drug registration matters.

The applicant should prepare materials and apply for a communication meeting with the NMPA’s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) in accordance with the requirements of the NMPA-No48-2020, which includes requirements for different categories of meetings involving applications for new drugs. The NMPA-No48-2020 includes the application form (Appendix 1) and communication meeting materials (Appendix 2). The meeting’s purpose is to determine the integrity of the clinical trial application data and the sponsor’s ability to ensure the participant’s safety. If existing or supplemental data can support the clinical trial, then the applicant can submit a clinical trial application after the meeting or after supplementing the data. The NMPA-No51-2023 reaffirms the required pre-trial meeting and states that the applicant must submit a communication application to the CDE before 1) applying for the first clinical trial of a new drug and 2) before completing the exploratory clinical trial and conducting the confirmatory (or critical) clinical trial. The NMPA-No23-2023 provides guidance on common issues and general requirements for the Phase III pre-clinical trial meeting with the CDE in regards to innovative drugs.

Per the NMPA-No50-2018, the applicant may directly submit a clinical trial application without requesting a communication meeting with the CDE in the following cases: they clearly understand the technical guidance; have sufficient experience in drug clinical trials; can ensure the quality of data in the application; or the application is for a multicentered international clinical trial being conducted in parallel that has permission to conduct the clinical trials in countries or regions with an established and functional regulatory and monitoring infrastructure. In addition, the NMPA-No48-2020 stipulates that the application for conditional approval and/or the application for priority review and approval procedures must be communicated and confirmed with the CDE before submittal. (See below for procedures on priority review and approval.)

CHN-14 states that Chinese legal entities must submit application materials to the NMPA/CDE for a formal process review (including checking the electronic materials as described below). NMPA will process clinical trial applications within five (5) working days if the study falls within the scope of its authority; the application materials are complete and comply with the prescribed format; and if all required supplementary materials are submitted. If accepted, the CDE then organizes and conducts its review of the clinical trial application on behalf of the NMPA. As required in the ElectronicApps-Rqts and the NMPA-No110-2022, all documents for drug registration applications (including clinical trial applications, letters of commitment, declarations, and supplemental material) must be submitted electronically on CD-ROM to the CDE, in accordance with the current regulations, technical requirements for electronic CD-ROMs of application materials, and electronic file structure of drug registration applications. The ElectronicApps-Rqts clarifies that the CDE no longer accepts paper documents for administrative licensing by mail, except for applications that were accepted before January 1, 2023 and must continue to submit supplementary material in paper format. The applicant or registered agent is required to electronically sign the electronic declaration materials; the application and electronic seal can be found in the CDE’s Applicant Window (CHN-58). For details on the cover requirements for CD-ROM cases and the cover of the file bag, refer to Annex 1 in ElectronicApps-Rqts.

As indicated in CDE-Reloctn, the applicant should fill in and submit the relevant information in the "Online Appointment for Submission of Materials" module under the "Online Appointment" item in the "Applicant's Window" column of CDE’s Applicant Window (CHN-58). To mail CDs and other application materials in electronic format, applicants should use the following mailing address:

Business Management Office of the Center for Drug Evaluation
State Drug Administration
Room 102, Building 2
District 2, No. 22 Guangde Street
Beijing Economic and Technological Development Zone
Beijing, 100076
P.R. China

Per the ElectronicApps-Rqts, after receiving the disc submitted by the applicant, the CDE will determine if the disc can be read normally, passes the electronic signature verification, and has no computer viruses. If the disc does not pass these reviews, the CDE will notify the applicant and request resubmittal; the original disc will be disposed of in accordance with the CDE’s destruction procedures. If accepted, the CDE will push the electronic documents to the "Drug Business Application System" and "Drug eCTD Registration System" and the applicant is notified by SMS.

The ElectronicApps-Rqts provides additional requirements on the arrangement of discs:

• Submit one (1) complete set of electronic application materials on CD-ROM (including clinical trial database, if applicable) for review
• Submit one (1) complete set of electronic declaration materials on CD-ROM (including clinical trial database, if applicable) for verification at the same time.
• For clinical trial database data, the relevant materials must be prepared in a separate set of CD-ROMs.

Additionally, the ElectronicApps-Rqts states that within five (5) working days after the acceptance of the drug registration application, the applicant must upload a Microsoft Word file of the application materials (e.g., pharmacy, non-clinical, and clinical reviews) through the CDE’s Applicant Window (CHN-58). The documents related to pharmaceutical materials (active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs), pharmaceutical excipients, and pharmaceutical packaging materials) should be uploaded as PDF files. Further, per the DRR, supplementary materials (e.g., clinical trial research materials, consultations, and data submittals) are handled via the CDE’s Applicant’s Window (CHN-58).

Note that per CHN-14, all application materials must be in Chinese with the original language attached, and materials in other languages can be attached as reference. Chinese translations should be consistent with the original text.

The NMPA-No44-2020, the NMPA-No43-2020, and the NMPA-No10-2018 require applicants to apply the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s M4: Common Technical Document for the Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (CTD) (CHN-38) to the registration applications for drugs, therapeutic biological products, and vaccines. See the NMPA-No16-2018 for guidance on Phase I clinical trial applications. To standardize the submission of drug clinical trial data, meet the newly revised drug registration application data requirements, and improve the efficiency of drug review, the NMPA-No16-2020 provides guidance on the content and format of clinical trial data. The guidance is based on the data submission requirements of international regulatory agencies, including the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC).

For administrative support, applicants can request a meeting and/or consult the NMPA’s Government Service Portal (CHN-71).

Bioequivalent Studies

Per the NMPA-No230-2015, for generic drugs, a bioequivalence study will only need to be filed with the NMPA. The applicant should submit record filing materials to the NMPA 30 days before submitting the bioequivalence studies. For the generic drug filing, the applicant must obtain EC approval and sign a clinical study agreement with the clinical site prior to filing the bioequivalent study. See CHN-70 for handling guidelines for bioequivalent drugs.

Priority and Special Procedures

In addition, the DRR authorizes regulatory pathways for priority review and approval (including for breakthrough therapeutic drugs), conditional approval and special approval procedures. Per CHN-69, after the registration application is transferred to the CDE, applicants can apply for accelerated review directly to the CDE at CHN-58. CHN-69 contains the application and additional procedures for submitting applications for priority review and approval. As per the SC-Opinions-No44, the NMPA-No230-2015, and the NMPA-No51-2016, a new drug classification system, priority review for innovative drugs and those deemed to have an urgent clinical need, and other changes help China to be more innovative and expedite reviews. As delineated in the NMPA-No23-2018, for drugs listed overseas and that treat seriously life-threatening conditions, if there is no ethnic difference in the study, they can submit the clinical trial data obtained overseas and directly apply for the drug listing registration.

Protocol Changes

As delineated in the NMPA-No34-2022, when there is a protocol change during a clinical trial, the sponsor should follow these submission guidelines:

• For substantial changes that may significantly increase the risk to participant safety, the sponsor must submit a clinical trial application as per the instructions above
• For substantial changes that do not significantly increase participant safety risk, but may significantly affect the scientific validity and the reliability of the data, the sponsor should submit a communication meeting application to the CDE (see above)
• Non-substantive changes can be implemented after being approved by the EC and filed with the NMPA
• After the protocol is changed, the sponsor must update the drug clinical trial registration (See the Initiation, Agreements & Registration section) and submit the relevant updates in progress reports

National Health Commission

Per the MgmtHumanGen and the Rules-MgmtHGR, the foreign entity and the Chinese entity must jointly file an application for approval to MOST (now the NHC) and pass an ethics review in the partners’ countries. The only exception to the MOST (now the NHC) approval requirement is international collaboration in clinical trials that do not involve the export of Chinese HGR materials such as organs, tissues, or cells comprising the human genome, genes, or other genetic substances—these must be filed with MOST (NHC), which will generate a record number (see below for steps) and pass an ethics review in the partners’ countries.

As stated in the HGR-AppGuide, the HGR license application must be submitted to NHC via the Human Genetic Resources Service System (CHN-6), including application information and supporting materials. After verification, the system posts updates for the applicant.

See HGR-InfoSys for background on the online platform and contact information. For help with the online platform, contact Zhu Min, NHC’s China Biotechnology Development Center, at 010-88225151 or 010-88225168; or the information system support at 17610386080.

Ethics Review Submission

Each institutional and regional EC has its own required submission procedures.

Overview

In accordance with ClinImprtOrdr and G-CT-DIPApp, the sponsor or the contract research organization (CRO) is responsible for submitting a drug import license application for clinical research purposes to the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA). Per ClinSampleProd and DrugProdReqs, the Thai FDA is also responsible for approving requests for permission to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies.

As set forth in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and ECRegProc, the Thai FDA’s approvals of a drug import license and of a request for permission to produce drug samples for human research studies are dependent upon obtaining proof of ethics committee (EC) approval from the Thai FDA to conduct the clinical trial. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd further specify that for both types of approval requests, the application is either submitted to the Thai FDA after the research project and all the research sites have been approved by an EC, or in parallel, pending review by at least one (1) EC involved in the study. (Note: Per ClinImprtOrdr, the sponsor is also referred to as the applicant or importer.)

Regulatory Submission

OSSC Pre-Submission Permission

According to THA-77 and THA-75, prior to submitting a drug import license application (N.Y.M.1 form), an applicant must first request permission from the Thai FDA’s One Stop Service & Consultation Center (OSSC) (THA-35) to use the OSSC’s online consultation system (E-Consult) (THA-77). Per THA-65, requesting E-Consult permission is a two-part process that initially requires applicants who are Thai citizens to create a user account and register via Digital ID (THA-89) which enables Thai citizens to access all government agency electronic services using a single user account/password. The user account can then be used to submit applications and supporting documentation to the Thai FDA’s Medicines Regulation Division via the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54).

Per THA-65 and THA-77, once registered in THA-89, Thai applicants (i.e., the general public, entrepreneurs, or researchers) are subsequently required to provide documentation to E-Consult (THA-77) to confirm that they, or representatives authorized to act on their behalf, are authorized to use the FDA’s Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54). Although non-citizens cannot register directly with THA-89, they can request permission to authorize a juristic person who receives power of attorney (i.e., agency representatives, registration agents, or researchers who submit applications on behalf of an agency). Documentation should be submitted to E-Consult (THA-77) either in person or via email (econsultcenter@fda.moph.go.th) specifying in the subject line: “Request to open the right to use the information system.”

Per THA-77, for Thai applicants, this documentation includes:

• Form for Requesting Permission to Use the Health Product Consultation Information System (E-Consult) (THA-80)
• Copy of identity card

Per THA-77, for juristic applicants with power of attorney, this documentation includes:

• Form Requesting Power of Attorney Permission to Use the Health Product Consultation Information System (E-Consult) (THA-81)
• Copy of juristic person certificate (if any)
• Power of attorney form
• Copy of identity card of grantor (the national identity card issued to Thai citizens)
• Copy of identity card of attorney-in-fact (refers to a passport)

THA-66 indicates that when an applicant completes the process of submitting an in-person request within one (1) day at the service center, a service provider can then forward the request for review and may receive a response within one (1) day. For requests that take more than one (1) day to be reviewed, the service center will forward the application to the Product Division for consideration. See also THA-51 for additional information on services provided by the OSSC’s E-Consult Service.

Import and Export Division Pre-Submission Permission

Per THA-79, the Thai FDA’s Import and Export Inspection Division also requires applicants to request permission to access the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54) prior to being permitted to submit a drug import waiver application for clinical trial purposes. Applicants requesting access may submit documentation via email to bie.thaifda@gmail.com to open temporary rights first. After reviewing the emailed documentation for correctness/completeness, the officer will reply to the email and request original copies of the documents. A request for permission can also be mailed to the OSSC (THA-35), 4th floor. Also, per THA-87, Thai applicants may register and submit authorization documentation via THA-54 once they have obtained access.

THA-79 states that for Thai applicants, the required authorization documentation includes:

• Copy of the registration certificate of the company or partnership, or a copy of the commercial registration (which has been issued no more than six (6) months and has a grantor to sign)
• Copy of grantor’s identity card (which has not expired on the date of document submission along with a signature to certify the copy)
• Copy of the identity card of the attorney-in-fact (which has not expired on the date of document submission along with a signature to certify the copy)

THA-79 further notes that the applicant has the right to use the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54) for import/export purposes for no more than one (1) year. The following forms are also provided on the Import and Export Inspection Division webpage (THA-85) to complete these requests: Form Requesting Access to the FDA E-Submission System for Permission to Import Drugs for Other Purposes (THA-83), Form Requesting Power of Attorney Access to the FDA E-Submission System for Permission to Import Drugs for Other Purposes (THA-82), and Application Form for Medicine Importation (THA-84). See also THA-85 for additional related forms that may be useful.

Submissions

N.Y.M.1

As delineated in ClinImprtOrdr, the Thai FDA accepts paper and electronic clinical trial application submission packages for requests to import or order drugs for clinical research. However, paper applications are only to be submitted at the discretion of an agency officer when it is determined that the application process cannot be completed electronically via the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54) for Medicines Regulation Division review and approval (see Submission Content section for content details).

As per ClinImprtOrdr, for paper submissions, sponsors must submit two (2) original sets with real signatures of the completed N.Y.M.1 form (ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 2) and THA-18 (Appendix 2)) with the required attachments to the Thai FDA. For paper submissions, the applicant must also submit an MS Word template file for importing the data electronically, so that the file can be connected to the information in the drug importation and clinical research sections in the information system. A copy of all the submitted documents should also be provided in PDF format. G-CT-DIPApp also states that two (2) sets of the application package must be submitted to the Thai FDA. Per ClinImprtOrdr, if the Thai FDA reviewer determines that submitted documents require correction or additional documentation needs to be submitted, the applicant must make corrections/clarifications based on the evaluation results within the specified time by submitting a correction/clarification request form (see ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 12) and THA-18 (Appendix 12)).

Additionally, per ClinImprtOrdr, the non-local applicant must authorize a qualified person through a power of attorney to submit an application and respond to requests to provide clarification, amend, and/or receive documents related to the submission. The attorney-in-fact should be someone who has knowledge in pharmacy or a related medical field as well as an understanding of requests, permissions, etc. relating to the application submission and associated documentation. The scope and responsibilities of the attorney-in-fact must be specified in the authorization to include filing application submission clarifications and corrections. The authorization documentation should be submitted with the paper application. ClinImprtOrdr further notes that one (1) set of power of attorney submission documentation may only be used for one (1) application submission request.

ClinImprtOrdr also states that the application submission should include documentary evidence for quality control and drug production separated by drug. The identification of the manufacturer of each drug included in the submission must match the one specified in the Microsoft Excel files for the Logistics System (See ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 7) and THA-18 (Appendix 7) for the manufacturer’s form).

As indicated in ClinImprtOrdr and G-CT-DIPApp, Thai and English are the preferred languages for use in preparing an application package for requests to import or order drugs for clinical research. The following requirements are specified (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Research project name and summary of research project in Thai
• Drug packaging documents for already registered drugs presented in Thai or English (Note: if drug formula documentation from abroad is in a foreign language other than English, then it should be translated into Thai or English and certified that the text matches the Thai/English language version)
• Protocol synopsis in Thai
• Detailed study protocol specification (completed version of study protocol) in Thai or English
• Patient information sheet in Thai or translated to an appropriate language and certified the text matches the Thai version
• Drug labels for every package size in Thai or English
• EC approval document in Thai
• Certificate of Free Sale in English and translated by a trusted certification authority and any other language in which it has been originally issued
• Progress report in Thai

Additionally, as explained in THA-79, once the applicant has obtained permission from the Import and Export Inspection Division to access the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54), a drug import waiver application (N.Y.M.1) may be submitted electronically. Per THA-87, following official review of the submitted documentation, a response will sent within one (1) business day. THA-87 and THA-79 indicate that once the request is approved, a License Per Invoice (LPI) number will be used in making a goods declaration with the Thai Customs Department. See THA-48, THA-86, and THA-88 for additional information and instructions on submitting an LPI to Customs). Refer to THA-57 and THA-87 for detailed instructions on submitting a drug importation waiver request via the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54).

P.Y.8

As indicated in ClinSampleProd, the Thai FDA also accepts paper and electronic clinical trial application submission packages for requests for permission to produce sample drugs for human research studies. However, if the electronic system is not available, the application must be submitted in paper form, along with the appropriate supporting documentation (see Submission Content section for content details). In the case of filing via the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54), information will be filled in the system in a P.Y.8. form, and the research project information will be created automatically. If the Thai FDA reviewer determines that submitted documents require correction or additional documentation needs to be submitted, the applicant must make corrections/clarifications based on the evaluation results within the specified time by submitting a correction/clarification request form (see ClinSampleProd (Appendix 8) and THA-76 (Appendix 8)). The paper documentation should be submitted to the New Drugs and Drug Research Promotion Group within the Medicines Regulation Division or submitted electronically via THA-54. When submitting a paper application, the applicant must also submit a template file for importing the data via THA-54 to serve as a starting point for operators in the electronic process and for use in overseeing the trial. A copy of all the submitted documents should also be provided in PDF format.

Additionally, per ClinSampleProd, the non-local applicant must authorize a qualified person through a power of attorney to submit an application and respond to requests to provide clarification, amend, and/or receive documents related to the submission. The attorney-in-fact should be someone who has knowledge in pharmacy or a related medical field as well as an understanding of requests, permissions, etc. relating to the application submission and associated documentation. The scope and responsibilities of the attorney-in-fact must be specified in the authorization to include filing application submission clarifications and corrections. The authorization documentation should be submitted with the paper application, or via the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54), if the application is being submitted electronically. ClinSampleProd further notes that one (1) set of power of attorney submission documentation may only be used for one (1) application submission request.

As indicated in ClinSampleProd, Thai and English are the preferred languages for use in preparing an application package to request permission to produce investigational drugs for clinical research. The following requirements are specified:

• Research project name in Thai and English
• Summary of research project in Thai
• Drug labels for every package size in Thai or English
• Patient Information Sheet in Thai
• EC approval document in Thai
• Complete research project details in Thai or English

OSSC Contact Information for Application Submissions

Per THA-74, THA-65, and THA-77, the following is contact information for submitting an application to the OSSC (THA-35) in person or via email, and for requesting permission to access the Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54):

One Stop Service Center (OSSC) 
Building 6, 5^th Floor
Food and Drug Administration Building
Ministry of Public Health
88/24 Tiwanon Road
Talat Khwan Subdistrict
Mueang District, Nonthaburi Province 11000

Email (E-Consult): econsultcenter@fda.moph.go.th
Phone: 02 590 7614 (Consultation E-service for general inquiries, reporting usage problems, and issues related to requesting permissions)

See also THA-52 for the Medicines Regulation Division staff list.

Ethics Review Submission

Per G-ResEthics, each institutional EC should establish its own requirements for protocol submission along with the required documents including the application, number of research protocol copies to be submitted, the patient information sheet, the informed consent form, and the case report form. Each EC should also communicate these requirements to personnel or staff within the institution.

According to THA-4, if a trial site is not affiliated with a Thai FDA-recognized EC, the investigator(s) usually needs to apply to two (2) ECs for approval—the unaffiliated local EC and a central EC approved by the Thai FDA. THA-1 further explains that both the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) and the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) are categorized as central ECs because they can accept all clinical research studies for review, regardless of the trial sites involved.

Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health

According to THA-13, the ECMOPH requires one (1) original and 20 copies of the protocol submitted in Thai, and one (1) copy submitted in English for review purposes.

Per THA-41, investigators can electronically submit applications to the ECMOPH to obtain approval for new research projects or to request other services via the ECMOPH e-submission login page (THA-40).

Central Research Ethics Committee

THA-36 and THA-29 indicate that investigators applying for a new research project should submit an application to the CREC for review via its Online Submission System (THA-43).

THA-29 further explains that in some cases, hard copies may be requested by the CREC officer, with the number of additional hard copies requested subject to the reviewer’s requirements. Per THA-29, one (1) set of hard copy documents, consisting of a project folder and a CD with project information should be submitted. Documents should be placed in a folder indicating the correct number of files in order to avoid processing delays.

THA-29 also states that if a local EC requires a hard copy for the local assessment, the CREC will prepare an introduction letter and local issue assessment form. These documents will be sent to every local EC by email; the researcher/coordinator will be copied on this email. The researcher/coordinator will attach the local CREC introductory letter and assessment form to the hard copy submission package for the local EC.

See also THA-34 for detailed application package documentation submission requirements, and THA-37 for a comprehensive list of all the CREC Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).

Per THA-34 and THA-38, in the case where the research project is in English, a brief research outline should be provided in Thai as well. In addition, an explanation about the research participants and letter of intent to consent should be provided, if the master version of the informed consent documents are written in English.

Regulatory Authority Requirements

National Medical Products Administration

As delineated in the NMPA-No51-2023, the applicant must submit the following materials to the National Medical Products Administration’s (NMPA) Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) to have a communication meeting prior to submitting a clinical trial application for an exploratory clinical trial:

• The overall clinical development plan
• A complete first clinical trial protocol
• A risk management plan
• A subsequent clinical trial protocol, if applicable
• Non-clinical research review
• Pharmaceutical research review, etc.
• A clear statement of the issues to be communicated

Next, the NMPA-No51-2023 states that prior to completing the exploratory clinical trial, the applicant must submit the following to CDE for another meeting to discuss conducting the confirmatory (or critical) clinical trial and the subsequent clinical trial protocol:

• A preliminary analysis of the results of the early clinical trials that have been conducted
• A scientific, reasonable, complete, and feasible confirmatory (or critical) clinical trial protocol based on the existing clinical trial data
• A risk management plan
• A review of non-clinical studies
• A review of pharmaceutical studies, etc.

Per the DRR, after completing the pharmacology, toxicology, and other studies supporting the clinical trials of the drug, the applicant must submit relevant research materials to the NMPA. When applying for drug registration, the applicant must provide true, sufficient, and reliable data, materials, and samples to prove the safety, effectiveness, and quality controllability of the drug. In cases where overseas research materials and data are used to support drug registration, its source, research institution, or laboratory conditions, quality system requirements, and other management conditions should conform to prevailing international principles and applicable Chinese drug registration management requirements. CHN-14, CHN-70, and CHN-69 contain application materials and handling guidelines covering domestic drug and biological product clinical trial applications; imported drug and biological product clinical trial applications; priority review application procedures; and bioequivalence filing procedures. In general, the applications require information about the drug (e.g., names, formulation and ingredients, indications, and packaging), patents, the applicant, and the institution(s). In addition, the applications require a declaration attesting that the application and associated materials comply with the DAL, the DRR, and other applicable laws and regulations. The application and submitted data and samples must be true and legal, and they should not infringe on the rights and interests of others. The content of the electronic file submitted must be the same as the printed file. If any data is found to be false, the applicant bears the legal consequences caused by it.

The NMPA-No51-2023 requires the applicant to submit the following materials with the clinical trial application, in accordance with the NMPA-No44-2020 and the NMPA-No43-2020:

• A complete clinical research and development protocol
• A complete plan for the proposed clinical trial
• A risk management plan
• A framework for the subsequent clinical trial plan (if applicable)

The NMPA-No16-2018 provides guidance on technical information to be included in the application dossier for Phase I clinical trials:

• Introductory description and overall research plan
• Researcher’s manual (Investigator’s Brochure (IB))
• Clinical trial plan
• Pharmacy research information
• Pharmacology and toxicology information
• Description of previous clinical use experience
• Overseas research material

Per the SC-Opinions-No42, the NMPA-No10-2018, and CHN-14, that applicants should apply the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s M4: Common Technical Document for the Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (CTD) (CHN-38) to the registration applications for drugs, therapeutic biological products, and vaccines.

See CHN-20 for additional analyses and overview of the China clinical trial application submission content.

National Health Commission

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024. Please note that SC-Order777 amends the MgmtHumanGen to reflect the transfer of HGR management from MOST to the NHC)). The NHC-HGRmgt states that the original application process and platform (CHN-6) remain unchanged.

The MgmtHumanGen requires that applications for a license to collect or preserve HGR meet the following conditions:

• Applicants prove legal person status
• The purpose of collection and/or preservation is clear and legal
• The collection and/or plan is reasonable
• In the case of preservation, the premises where the HGR will be deposited is legal
• Proof of passing ethics review
• Having a department and management system responsible for the management of collecting and/or preserving the HGR
• Having premises, facilities, equipment, and personnel suitable for collection and/or preservation activities

As delineated in the MgmtHumanGen, the application for international collaborative scientific research using China’s HGR must demonstrate:

• The research is not harmful to the public health, national security, or social public interests of China
• The two (2) parties to the cooperation are a Chinese entity and a foreign entity with legal person status and have the basis and ability to carry out relevant work
• The purpose and content of the cooperative research are clear and legal, and the duration is reasonable
• The cooperative research plan is reasonable
• The HGR to be used are of legal origin, and their types and quantities are consistent with the research content
• The research passed an ethics review of the respective countries (regions) of the cooperation parties
• The ownership of the research results is clear, and there is a reasonable and clear profit distribution plan

Information on the submission content for the HGR export license is summarized in the Specimen Import & Export section.

Ethics Committee Requirements

Each ethics committee (EC) has its own application form and clearance requirements that can differ significantly regarding the number of copies to be supplied and application format requirements.

The following list was compiled from the Measures-Ethics and the RegEthics to exemplify the common elements shared by the various application forms (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Application for Human Research Ethics Review (See CHN-27 for a sample institutional application)
• Application Protocol for Results of Research or Related Technologies
• Protocol
• Sample ICF (See Children/Minors section for additional information)
• Case Report Form
• Principal investigator(s) CV(s)
• NMPA approval letter
• Certificate of Analysis for the drug issued by the National Institutes for Food and Drug Control (NIFDC) or corresponding provincial, autonomous region, or municipal institutes
• IB
• Any additional feedback from other ECs participating on the protocol
• Statement of planned tasks
• Letter of intention for cooperation
• Letter of commitment on the reliability of research materials
• Scientific opinions
• Statement of no conflict of interest
• Proof of the source of biological samples and information data
• Site list
• Site profile(s)
• Product literature
• Insurance policy (if any)
• Materials provided to participants
• Information on the lead research investigator; the legal qualification certificate of the institution; and the source of research funding
• Recruitment advertisements and their release forms
• An explanation of the form of publication of research results
• Other relevant materials that the EC believes need to be submitted

Clinical Protocol

As delineated in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the ICH’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), the clinical protocol should include the following elements (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• General information
• Background information
• Trial topic, purpose(s), and objective(s)
• Sponsor name and address
• Trial site location
• Principal investigator(s) name(s), qualification(s), and address(es)
• Trial design, random selection method, and blinding level
• Inclusion criteria; participant treatment, inclusion, exclusion, and release procedures; and method of grouping participants
• Form, dosage, route, method, and frequency of administration; treatment period; usage order of concomitant medicines; and packaging and labeling description
• Investigational product registration, usage record, delivery, handling and storage conditions (See Investigational Products topic for detailed coverage of this subject)
• Efficacy assessment
• Safety assessment
• Statistics
• Direct access to source data/documents
• Quality control/quality assurance
• Ethics
• Data handling/recordkeeping
• Financing/insurance
• Clinical observations, on-site visits, and measures to ensure the participant’s compliance with trial procedures
• Rules regarding clinical trial termination and completion
• Adverse event recording requirements, and serious adverse event reporting methods (See Safety Reporting section for additional information)
• Proposed trial schedule and completion date
• Publication policy

For complete protocol requirements, please refer to Chapter 6 of the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and Section 6 of CHN-37.

Regulatory Authority Requirements

N.Y.M.1

As per ClinImprtOrdr and G-CT-DIPApp, sponsors must submit the following documents to the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) to request a drug import waiver request (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Cover letter
• Application for Permission to Import or Order Drugs for Research Purposes in the Kingdom (N.Y.M.1 form) (see ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 2) and THA-18 (Appendix 2))
• Checklists and Attached Documents for N.Y.M.1 form (see appendices in ClinImprtOrdr and THA-18)
• Drug labels for every package size in Thai or English
• Package inserts (for registered drugs)
• Prescriptions (for registered drugs)
• Investigator’s Brochure (IB) (for unregistered drugs)
• Informed Consent Form in Thai
• Patient Information Sheet in Thai
• Research project summary in Thai
• Completed version of study protocol in Thai or English
• Chemistry, manufacturing, and control (CMC) information
• Ethics Committee (EC) approval from a Thai FDA-recognized institutionally-based EC and/or an independent EC. If waiting for approval from the relevant EC, instead submit the latest protocol version under consideration.
• Estimates of the amount of study drug, comparators, or other goods to be imported
• Certificate of Analysis
• Certificate of Free Sale in English and other language used
• Drug registration authorization document
• Summary of product characteristics
• Literature review
• Description (name and content) and pictures of lab/materials to be imported
• Power of attorney
• Investigational medicinal product (IMP) information

Per ClinImprtOrdr, when an applicant authorizes a qualified person through a power of attorney to submit an application package, the following documents must also be included with the submission:

• Copy of identity card of the grantor and the attorney-in-fact with signatures to certify that they are true copies
• Stamp duty in the amount of 30 Baht per one (1) power of attorney designation

As delineated in G-CT-DIPApp, applicants are also required to submit the following documents to the Thai FDA regarding EC approval:

• Protocol title
• List of principal investigator(s) (PIs)
• Proposed study site
• List of documents reviewed and approved by the EC, including the document version
• Period of approval and/or date of expired approval

As noted in ClinImprtOrdr, the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) may also establish an academic committee or subcommittee for certain drugs requiring special supervision (e.g., the Academic Subcommittee on AIDS Vaccine Trials to review AIDS vaccines, etc.). Therefore, when submitting an application to request permission to import or order a specialized drug for clinical research requiring this type of oversight, an additional approval letter from the relevant committee is also required. Additional information on obtaining the approval for the committee is not available.

P.Y.8

Per ClinSampleProd, applicants must submit the following documents to the Thai FDA to request permission to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies:

• Application for Permission to Produce Drug Samples for Drug Formula Registration (P.Y.8. Form) (see ClinSampleProd (Appendix 1) and THA-76 (Appendix 1))
• Research project summary in Thai
• Certification of compliance with the terms and conditions related to the production of drug samples for use in human research studies
• Certificate of Compliance for Principal Investigators
• Evidence of insurance or compensation
• Power of attorney (for paper submissions)
• A copy of the license to produce modern drugs (for paper submissions)
• Drug labels for every package size in Thai or English
• Copy of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Certificate
• Drug leaflet (for bioequivalence study drugs)
• IB (for research drugs)
• Patient Information Sheet in Thai
• EC approval from a Thai FDA-recognized institutionally-based EC and/or an independent EC, except in the case of waiting for approval from the relevant EC
• Drug quality control and pharmaceutical production documentation
• Documents approved by relevant technical committees (if any)
• Complete research proposal in Thai or English
• Document self-verification form (see ClinSampleProd (Appendix 7) and THA-76 (Appendix 7))

Per ClinSampleProd, when an applicant authorizes a qualified person through a power of attorney to submit an application package, the following documents must also be included with the submission:

• Copy of identity card of the grantor and the attorney-in-fact with signatures to certify that they are true copies
• Stamp duty in the amount of 30 Baht per one (1) power of attorney designation

As noted in ClinSampleProd, the MOPH may also establish an academic committee or subcommittee for certain drugs requiring special supervision (e.g., the Academic Subcommittee on AIDS Vaccine Trials to review AIDS vaccines, etc.). Therefore, when submitting an application to request permission to import or order a specialized drug for clinical research requiring this type of oversight, an additional approval letter from the relevant committee is also required. Additional information on obtaining the approval for the committee is not available.

Ethics Committee Requirements

Per G-ResEthics, each institutional EC should establish its own requirements for protocol submission along with the required documents including the application, number of research protocol copies to be submitted, the patient information sheet, the informed consent form, and the case report form. Each EC should also communicate to personnel or staff within the institution.

Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health

Per THA-13, the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) requires investigators (applicants) to submit the following documentation for ethics approval:

• One (1) original set and 20 copies of the protocol in Thai and one (1) copy in English for review
• Ethical considerations
• Combined information sheet and informed consent certificate for research participants
• Budget details and funding source
• Curriculum Vitae (CV) for each research team member
• Letter of approval from implementing institution
• Results of ethical review by EC of implementing institution, if available
• Data collection/questionnaire tools
• Letter signed by PI’s supervisor
• For an international project, Thai and foreign PIs required for each side
• Material transfer agreement for transfer of blood or biomedical samples
• References

Refer to THA-13 for detailed ECMOPH submission requirements respectively.

Central Research Ethics Committee

According to THA-34 and THA-38, investigators applying for an initial research project review by the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) should submit the following:

• Books/memorandum for research presentation signed by investigator (Word and PDF files required)
• Ethics Consideration Proposal Form for Biomedical Research Projects (CREC form AP 04-S04) signed by investigator (Word and PDF files required)
• Complete research proposal
• Brief research proposal in Thai
• Documents clarifying information about research participants and letter of intent to consent (in the case of a master informed consent form (ICF) version, single document in English is used for all institutions; alternatively, each institution may also use their own documents) (See also THA-46 for ICF template and checklist links)
• Case report form
• IB (including Investigator’s Guide; a certificate that the drug has been approved by the Thai FDA; invoice in the case of a drug that has been registered with the Thai FDA; and a drug leaflet)
• Other documents (including questionnaire or interview form; notebook; documents for invitation to participate in the research, such as brochures, posters, public relations scripts; other documents applicable to volunteers/research participants; documents requiring issuance of a certificate)
• Research injury compensation insurance documents
• Material transfer agreement (MTA) (must be uploaded according to each institution’s form)
• (Draft) Research project budget
• Letter of approval from the junior supervisor (separate documents by institution) (including a list of researchers at all data collection institutes in Thailand)
• Investigator CVs and evidence of good clinical practice (GCP) training or research ethics training
• Conflict of Interest Form completed by PIs/co-investigators (CREC form AP 06-S04) (separate documents by institution)
• Research Outline Completeness Check Form (CREC form AO 01-S04)
• PI for clinical trial phase I/II research projects (CREC form AP02-S04)
• Proof of fee payment

Refer to THA-34 and THA-38 for detailed CREC submission requirements.

Clinical Protocol

As delineated in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, G-ResEthics, and G-CT-DIPApp, the clinical protocol should include the following elements (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Protocol summary/synopsis
• General information (e.g., sponsor and investigator(s) name(s) and address(es))
• Background information (e.g., investigational product name and description)
• Trial objectives and purpose
• Trial design
• Number of trial participants
• Participant selection/withdrawal criteria
• Participant treatment
• Safety and efficacy assessments
• Quality control/quality assurance
• Adverse event reporting requirements (See the Safety Reporting section for additional information)
• Statistics and methods to track trial data
• Sponsor specifications for direct access to source data/documents
• Ethical considerations
• Data management and recordkeeping
• Financing and insurance details
• Publication policy
• Supplements
• Information about each research facility in Thailand
• Number of institutions participating in the research in Thailand
• Other countries where the research project is being conducted
• IMPs to be used

For complete protocol requirements, refer to ClinImprtOrdr and Annex 6 of G-ResEthics, which is directly based upon the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28) and the ICH guideline Structure and Content of Clinical Study Reports (E3) (THA-27). Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. Both of these ICH guidelines are also referenced in G-ResEthics.

G-CT-DIPApp also provides protocol synopsis requirements for submission to the Thai FDA. Please refer to G-CT-DIPApp for detailed information.

In the instance of a multicenter clinical trial, G-ResEthics indicates that protocols submitted to each institutional EC should contain the same content and should specify the quality control techniques to ensure that the research practices are the same in each institution.

Also, see THA-13 for ECMOPH and THA-29 for CREC protocol submission requirements. (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.)

Overview

As stated in the DRR, ethics committee (EC) review may be submitted parallel to the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) review, but the study cannot be initiated until after review and approval by the EC.

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024). The Bioscrty-Law, the MgmtHumanGen, and the Rules-MgmtHGR, delineate that MOST (now the NHC) is responsible for China's management of HGR, which includes reviewing and approving research. Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, the collection, preservation, use, and external provision of China’s HGR must comply with ethical principles and pass the ethics review of ECs that have been registered with the relevant management departments. As part of the application filing for international cooperative clinical trials, NMPA approvals, notices, and/or filing registration must be obtained in advance. In addition, EC approvals must be submitted with the filing, so therefore cannot occur in parallel. (Please note that SC-Order777 amends the MgmtHumanGen to reflect the transfer of HGR management from MOST to the NHC, but the Bioscrty-Law and the Rules-MgmtHGR have not been amended to show the transfer.)

Regulatory Authority Approval

National Medical Products Administration

Per the DRR, upon application submittal, the NMPA will complete the administrative examination for completeness within five (5) days of receiving the application, and issue a notice of acceptance. If the application does not meet the technical requirements for review, the NMPA will notify the applicant, who must submit the additional information within five (5) days of the notice. According to CHN-14, the NMPA will process clinical trial applications within five (5) working days if the study falls within the scope of its authority; the application materials are complete and comply with the legally-prescribed format; and the applicant submits all supplementary application materials in accordance with the NMPA’s requirements. Per the DRR, the NMPA-No50-2018, and CHN-14, a clinical trial application will be considered approved after 60 working days if the applicant does not receive a rejection or an inquiry for clarification from the NMPA. These procedures do not apply in every situation and additional reforms are provided below.

The DRR indicates that the following is not included in the above time limits:

• Time taken by the applicant for supplementary information, rectification after verification, and verification of production processes, quality standards, and instructions as required
• Delays in the time of verification, inspection, and expert consultation meetings
• If the review and approval procedure is suspended, the time occupied during the period of suspension of the review and approval procedure
• Time taken by the initiation of overseas verification

The application review by the Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) and inspections and testing by National Institutes for Food and Drug Control (NIFDC) can affect the timeline beyond 60 days, as needed. The CDE conducts technical reviews and the NIFDC tests drug samples. The NMPA-No51-2023 specifies that if necessary, an expert consultation meeting may be held. For clinical trials that are approved after review, the technical review team’s conclusion and associated "Clinical Trial Approval Notice" must clearly state the indications, clinical trial protocol title, number, version number, version date, etc. The review team’s conclusion and notice may propose revisions or suggestions to the clinical trial protocol if necessary. For clinical trial protocols that require revisions, CDE will notify the applicant through a professional inquiry letter, clearly informing the applicant of the problems and revision opinions in the current protocol. The applicant must submit a revised clinical trial protocol within five (5) days, following the guidance in the Prcdrs-Changes.

According to the NMPA-No82-2020, the NMPA timelines for review and decisions for expedited applications are as follows: The CDE will review the application for breakthrough drug procedures submitted by the applicant and, if necessary, organize an expert advisory committee for demonstration. The CDE must report the review results to the applicant within 45 days after receiving the application. If it is necessary to extend the review time limit, the extended time limit must not exceed one-half of the original review time limit. The CDE must publicize the specific information and reasons for the types of drugs to be included in the breakthrough therapy program, including the name of the drug, the applicant, the proposed indication (or functional indication), the application date, and the reason for the proposed inclusion. If there is no objection within five (5) days of the public announcement, it will be included in the breakthrough treatment drug program; if an objection is raised against the publicly announced product, a written opinion must be submitted to the CDE within five (5) days; the CDE must organize another review and make a decision within 15 days and notify all relevant parties.

Per the NMPA-No79-2018, for applications to conduct clinical trials with drugs treating rare diseases with urgently needed drugs already on the market in the United States, Europe, and Japan in the past decade, the CDE completes the technical review within three (3) months after acceptance; for other overseas new drugs, the technical review is completed within six (6) months after acceptance.

The NMPA-No21-2024 describes NMPA’s pilot work plan for optimizing the review and approval of clinical trials for innovative drugs. This initiative aims to review and approve innovative drug clinical trial applications within 30 business days (a reduction from the 60 days as described above in the normal procedures). The applicant must initiate the clinical trial within 12 weeks after the approval of the clinical trial application. The pilot work will last for one (1) year and the experience of the pilot work will be summarized in July 2025. For application and eligibility details see NMPA-No21-2024 and Scope of Assessment section.

For additional details on other expedited review pathways, see the Scope of Assessment section.

National Health Commission

Per the HGR-AppGuide, for HGR license applications, the NHC will pre-screen the electronic application to ensure it is complete. If the application does not pass, then the applicant will have one (1) opportunity to correct the submission. Per Rules-MgmtHGR, MOST (now the NHC) must make an administrative licensing decision on HGR license applications within 20 working days of acceptance. HGR-AppGuide reiterates the 20 working-day deadline by NHC, the agency currently authorized to approve HGC licenses. The Rules-MgmtHGR states that where an administrative licensing decision cannot be made within 20 working days, it may be extended by 10 working days with the approval of MOST (now the NHC), and the reason for the extension must be notified to the applicant. If it is necessary to conduct hearings, inspections, testing, quarantine, appraisals, and technical reviews, this additional time required must not be counted within the time limit, and the applicant must be notified in writing of the required time.

Ethics Committee Approval

In accordance with the Measures-Ethics, the EC must carry out an ethics review and issue its opinion within 30 days of acceptance. In urgent situations, an ethics review must be promptly carried out. In the case of emergencies such as outbreaks, ethics reviews and review opinions are generally carried out within 72 hours, and the requirements and quality of ethics reviews must not be reduced. Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), the institutional EC should review a proposed clinical trial within a reasonable time. The EC’s recommendations should be issued in writing and should indicate an approval; an approval after necessary modifications have been made; a disapproval; or a decision to terminate or suspend an already approved trial.

Overview

ClinImprtOrdr specifies that a drug import license application for clinical research purposes is submitted to the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) after the research project and all the research sites have been approved by the ethics committee (EC), or in parallel, pending review by at least one (1) EC involved in the study. Per ClinSampleProd and DrugProdReqs, the application to produce drug samples for the registration of drug formulas for human research studies must also be submitted to the Thai FDA either after the research project and all the research sites have been approved by an EC, or in parallel, pending review by at least one (1) EC involved in the study.

Regulatory Authority Approval

As specified in THA-78, the Thai FDA has 60 working days to evaluate an application to import or order drugs in the country for clinical research (N.Y.M.1); 60 working days to evaluate an application to produce drug samples to request modern drug registration for human research studies (P.Y.8); 20 working days to review an application to amend a N.Y.M.1 or P.Y.8 submission; one (1) working day to review an application for a certificate of pharmaceutical product (Certificate of Pharmaceutical Product/Certificate of Free Sale); and 30 working days to evaluate the accuracy and translation of a Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) assessment report from a Thai version to an English version.

Per G-CT-DIPApp, upon receipt of an application package, the Thai FDA’s One Stop Service & Consultation Center (OSSC) (THA-35) sends the application package to an officer in the Thai FDA’s International Affairs and Investigational Drug Section. The officer then screens the package for completeness and informs the eligible sponsor of the results within five (5) working days from the date the application was received. If deemed complete, the officer sends the package to the assigned technical reviewer to proceed. If the officer finds the package to be incomplete, a “Screening Result Notification form” will be sent to the applicant or the applicant’s attorney for correction. If the applicant or the applicant’s attorney fails to fully correct the package within five (5) working days, then the Thai FDA will send a rejection letter and return all the documents to the applicant. However, the applicant may later correct or amend the application package and resubmit it to the OSSC. Once the correction is completed, the officer will send the application package to the assigned reviewer to proceed.

Per G-CT-DIPApp, the reviewer then receives the application package and performs a technical assessment. If the reviewer determines the package is technically correct, then it will be forwarded to the Thai FDA’s Secretary-General for approval. If the reviewer finds the application package technically incorrect, then it will be forwarded to the Thai FDA’s Secretary-General for rejection. If the reviewer finds the technical information to be incomplete, then the applicant or the applicant’s attorney will be asked to clarify and/or submit additional documents/information. If the documentation or amended information is not submitted within five (5) working days, the Thai FDA will issue a rejection letter and return the package to the applicant. However, the applicant may resubmit a corrected package to THA-35 (timeline not specified in G-CT-DIPApp). If the applicant can completely correct the application package, the officer will forward the package to the assigned reviewer for re-assessment.

In addition, ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd further specify that once the Thai FDA receives the EC approval documentation, the agency will complete its review within 15 days. See also THA-18 (Appendix 13) and THA-76 (Appendix 9) for the form to submit results of EC review to the Thai FDA. Refer to the Submission Process and Submission Content sections for detailed submission requirements.

Ethics Committee Approval

The review and approval process by a Thai FDA recognized EC will vary by institution. However, according to THA-13, which provides the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) requirements, and THA-5, which provides more general EC requirements, the EC review and approval process can take between two (2) and three (3) months.

Per G-ResEthics, each EC should establish its own requirements for protocol submission and timeline of review.

Overview

Per the DRR, clinical trials must be conducted in institutions conducting drug clinical trials that comply with relevant regulations, and abide by the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, including written approval from the ethics committee (EC) to the researcher before clinical trial implementation. Further, clinical trials of vaccines must be implemented or organized by China’s designated three-level medical institutions or disease prevention and control institutions at or above the provincial level that meet the prescribed conditions.

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024). The Bioscrty-Law, the MgmtHumanGen, and the Rules-MgmtHGR delineate that MOST (now the NHC) is responsible for China's management of HGR, which includes reviewing and approving research before initiation. Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, clinical trials involving the collection, preservation, use, and export of China’s HGR must be approved by ECs in the relevant institutions. Further, applications for administrative licenses for international cooperation clinical trials (without exports) using HGR must pass an ethics review in the partner countries and be filed with MOST (now the NHC) before initiating the study. The Rules-MgmtHGR also state that clinical trial applications must pass a security review organized by MOST (now the NHC) if the study’s provision or opening of HGR information to foreign entities may impact China’s public health, national security, or the social public interest.

Clinical Trial Agreement

As delineated in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), the sponsor must sign an agreement or contract with the participating institution(s). The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 also states that before the trial begins, the sponsor and the investigator must sign a written agreement regarding the trial protocol, monitoring, auditing, and standard operating procedures, as well as each party’s responsibilities during the trial.

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the agreement must include the following elements:

• Compliance with this specification and relevant clinical trial laws and regulations during the implementation of clinical trials
• Implementation of the trial protocol agreed to by the sponsor and investigator, and approved by the EC
• Compliance with data recording and reporting procedures
• Consent to supervision and inspection
• Retention period of necessary documents related to clinical trials
• The agreement on publishing articles and intellectual property rights

Clinical Trial Registration

Per the DRR, the sponsor must register the drug clinical trial plan and other information on the drug clinical trial registration and information disclosure platform before launching the drug clinical trial. The NMPA-No9-2020 requires the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA)'s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) to establish and maintain this registry (CHN-53). Before starting a clinical trial, the clinical trial information must be registered in any of these situations:

• The clinical trial has been approved by the NMPA
• The clinical trial of a chemical drug bioequivalence test was recorded and the record number obtained
• Phase IV clinical trials and post-marketing studies were conducted in accordance with the requirements of the drug registration certificate or NMPA notice
• Other situations required for registration according to the NMPA

Also see the handling guideline for clinical trial registration (CHN-13) for more information and frequently asked questions.

Governance

Pursuant to the NHC-ClinProjMgmt, medical institutions must develop internal rules and standard operating procedures (SOPs) for administering clinical studies; centralize financial management of clinical study projects; and maintain a project-based approval system and supervision throughout the study process. In addition to having an EC, medical institutions must also establish a Clinical Study Administration Committee and a subordinate body, and a Clinical Study Administration Division to handle daily project administration. For detailed requirements, see the NHC-ClinProjMgmt.

Overview

In accordance with ClinSampleProd, ClinImprtOrdr, and ECRegProc, a clinical trial can only commence after a sponsor receives approval of a drug import application for clinical research purposes or of a request to produce drug samples for human research studies from the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA), as well as approval to conduct the clinical trial from a Thai FDA recognized ethics committee (EC). No waiting period is required following the sponsor’s receipt of these approvals. (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd.)

Additionally, the clinical trial should be conducted in compliance with the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28). Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is now implementing THA-28.

Clinical Trial Agreement

G-ResEthics and THA-28 require the sponsor to sign a letter of agreement with the participating institution(s) before the trial begins. THA-28 also notes that any agreements between the sponsor and the investigator(s)/institution(s) and any other parties involved with the trial should be in writing either as part of the protocol or in a separate agreement.

Per THA-14, researchers should also abide by research obligations and agreements specified by and entered into with fellow researchers, funding agencies, and their affiliates.

Clinical Trial Registration

The ClinImprtOrdr application document checklist (Appendix 3) includes clinical trial registry information as one (1) of the items to be included in the application submission package, specifying that sponsors may register with either the Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) (THA-31) or a foreign registry. Sponsors may register in more than one (1) location.

Safety Reporting Definitions

In accordance with the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of China’s safety reporting requirements:

• Adverse Event (AE) – All adverse medical events that occur after participants receive the experimental drugs. They can be manifested as symptoms and signs, diseases, or abnormal laboratory tests, but they may not be causally related to the experimental drugs
• Serious Adverse Event (SAE) – Any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or causes a congenital anomaly/birth defect after the participant receives the experimental drug during a clinical trial
• Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – Any adverse or undesired reactions that may be related to the experimental drugs that occur during clinical trials. There is at least a reasonable possibility of the causal relationship between the experimental drug and the adverse event (i.e., the correlation cannot be ruled out)
• Suspicious and Unexpected Serious Adverse Reactions (SUSAR) – Suspicious and unexpected serious clinical manifestations that exceed the existing information, such as the Investigator's Brochure (IB) of the trial drug, the instructions of the marketed drug, or the summary of product characteristics

In addition, the G-SftyRptStds includes “Serious Adverse Drug Reactions” (SADRs) as well as other important medical events, which require medical judgement to determine if measures are needed to prevent the occurrence of one (1) of the preceding.

See the NMPA-No31-2024 for NMPA’s guidance on evaluating the correlation between AEs and drugs used in clinical trials.

Safety Reporting Requirements

Investigator Responsibilities

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the investigator should immediately report all SAEs in writing to the sponsor, and then provide a detailed and written follow-up report in a timely manner. However, this does not include SAEs that do not need to be reported immediately per the trial protocol or other documents (such as the investigator’s brochure). SAE reports and follow-up reports should indicate the participant’s identification code in the clinical trial, not the participant’s real name, citizenship number, and residential address. AEs and abnormal laboratory values that are important for the safety evaluation specified in the test plan must be reported to the sponsor in accordance with the requirements and time limit of the test plan. For reports involving deaths, the investigator should provide the sponsor and the ethics committee (EC) with other required information, such as autopsy reports and final medical reports.

The Measures-Ethics state that for research that has been approved for implementation, researchers must immediately report SAEs that occur during the research process to the EC. The EC must conduct a timely review to determine whether the measures taken by researchers to protect the personal safety and health rights and interests of research participants are adequate, reassess the risk-benefit ratio of the research, and issue review opinions.

Sponsor Responsibilities

Per the DRR, the sponsor must regularly submit a safety update report to the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA)'s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) via the Applicant’s Window (CHN-58). The safety update report during the research and development period should be submitted once a year, and within two (2) months after the full year following approval of the drug clinical trial. The CDE may require the sponsor to adjust the reporting cycle based on the review situation. Additional guidance on the safety update report is provided in the NMPA-No7-2020 and the NMPA-No65-2021. For international multicenter clinical trials, NMPA-No2-2015 states that sponsors should unify the collection and evaluation methods of AEs, use a unified glossary to code AEs, and establish a unified safety database for the collection and evaluation of SAEs. AE or SAE reports should comply with the relevant national and regional requirements.

The DRR requires the sponsor to report SUSARs and other potentially serious safety risks to the CDE in a timely manner in accordance with relevant requirements. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the G-SftyRptStds specify that the sponsor is responsible for the safety assessment of the drugs during the trial period. The G-SftyRptStds and the NMPA-No65-2021 state that during the clinical trial, the sponsor judges whether SUSARs are related to the drug. When the sponsor and the investigator cannot agree on the causal relationship between the AE and the drug, the experimental drug should not be ruled out and it must be reported. Also see NMPA-No102-2019 for guidelines on classifying AEs in clinical trials of investigational vaccines.

The NMPA-No16-2023 and the NMPA-No5-2020 state that a sound pharmacovigilance system should be established to monitor safety risks during drug clinical trials, which should include comprehensive drug data collection and risk monitoring, identification, assessment, and control. In addition, safety problems and risks should be discovered in a timely manner, and necessary risk management measures should be taken proactively, such as adjusting clinical trial plans, and suspending or terminating clinical trials, etc. The NMPA-No5-2020 provides guidance on evaluating and managing safety issues and requires sponsors to actively cooperate with clinical trial institutions and other relevant parties to strictly implement the main responsibility of safety risk management.

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 requires the sponsor to promptly notify the investigator, the clinical trial institution, and the drug regulatory authority of issues discovered in the clinical trial that may affect the safety of participants, the implementation of the clinical trial, and the consent of the ECs. Further, the sponsor must promptly report SUSARs to all participating investigators, clinical trial institutions, and ECs; sponsors must also report SUSARs to drug regulatory and health authorities. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 states that after receiving safety information from the sponsor, the investigator should sign the documentation and consider whether to treat the participant and make corresponding adjustments to the protocol.

The NMPA-No65-2021 and the G-SftyRptStds specify reporting timelines for unexpected death or serious life-threatening adverse reactions. The sponsor must submit the report as soon as possible after first learned, but not more than seven (7) days; and detailed follow-up information should be submitted within the next eight (8) days. For SUSARs, the report should be submitted as soon as possible after the first notification, but not more than 15 days. In addition to individual SUSAR reports, other potentially serious safety risk information should be reported to the CDE as soon as possible, and medical treatments should be decided upon for each situation. Generally, information that significantly affects the evaluation of the drug’s risks and benefits, changes in drug usage, or information that affects the overall drug development process, falls into this category. Domestic and foreign safety reports should be reported in Chinese. Further, the DAL states that if there is a safety problem or risk during the clinical trial, the sponsor must adjust the clinical trial plan, suspend or terminate the clinical trial, and report the issue to the NMPA.

See NMPA-No60-2021 for guidance on writing safety reference information in the investigator’s manual.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

As per the NMPA-No50-2018, the NMPA-No10-2018, and the G-SftyRptStds, investigators must comply with the rapid reporting requirements in the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s E2A Guideline, Clinical Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting (CHN-39), and ICH E2B(R3), Electronic Transmission of Individual Case Safety Reports (CHN-40). As indicated in the G-SftyRptStds, all SUSARs from clinical trials should be reported in compliance with E2A and E2B(R3). To comply with these requirements, the project’s electronic safety database must meet the E2B(R3)’s XML format and be submitted to the CDE in Chinese (CHN-58). Potentially serious security risks can be sent as a “Quick Report” through e-mail to: lcqjywjj@cde.org.cn. See NMPA-No17-2023 for frequently asked questions and answers related to rapid safety reporting. Additional questions pertaining to rapid reporting can be sent to ywjjxtwt@cde.org.cn.

According to the NMPA-No230-2015, in clinical trials of new drugs, which now only require a one-time approval, after the completion of Phase I and Phase II trials, the applicant should submit all test results and demonstrate that no safety problems were found before beginning the next phase of the trial. Furthermore, NMPA-No230-2015 states that the applicant must submit all adverse event data on time.

Safety Reporting Definitions

In accordance with ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, G-AEReptReqs, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28), the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of Thailand’s safety reporting requirements:

• Adverse Event (AE) – Any untoward or unfavorable medical occurrence in a research participant to whom a drug product was administered, and which does not necessarily bear a causal relationship to the treatment
• Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – All dangerous and adverse reactions resulting from any dose of an investigational drug, for which it is at least reasonably likely that the adverse reaction is attributable to the drug being studied, that is, a relationship cannot be ruled out
• 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
• Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reaction (SUSAR) – An unexpected SAE/SADR given the nature of the research procedures and the population being studied
• Unexpected Adverse Event/Adverse Drug Reaction – A reaction where the nature or severity is inconsistent with the applicable product information

Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. THA-28 also notes that the ICH Guideline for Clinical Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting (E2A) (THA-26) should be referenced for additional safety terms not defined in this list.

Safety Reporting Requirements

Investigator Responsibilities

As stated in G-AEReptReqs, the principal investigator (PI) is responsible for reporting all SAEs/SADRs to the sponsor and the ethics committee (EC) no later than 24 hours after the PI becomes aware of the event. The PI must also report all AEs/ADRs to the sponsor and the EC no later than seven (7) calendar days following first knowledge.

For safety reporting requirements specific to the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) and the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC), please see THA-13 and THA-37 respectively.

Sponsor Responsibilities

As delineated in THA-28, sponsors who are permitted to import or order drugs for research in Thailand and those who are licensed to produce drug samples for human research studies, must comply with the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA)’s safety monitoring and reporting requirements. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd state that the following information is viewed as urgent and is required to be reported:

• SAEs/SADRs that never occurred before because the research team used safety reporting information from other countries to substantiate investigational product (IP) use
• Other safety and security information useful to evaluating IP risk-benefit assessment, IP changes to the method of administration, or changes required to the overall research process
• Unexpected SAE/SADR incidents that never occurred before, with an increased incidence or severity and considered to be of clinical importance
• Significant harm to the participant, such as the ineffectiveness of an IP used to treat a life-threatening disease
• Significant new information about experimental animal safety studies, such as carcinogenicity

Per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, an ADR report must be filed in the following specified timelines:

• Unexpected SAEs/SADRs that are fatal or life-threatening must be reported to the Thai FDA within seven (7) days from the first knowledge of the incident’s occurrence. Any additional relevant information should be sent within eight (8) days of the initial report
• Unexpected SAEs/SADRs that are not fatal or life-threatening must be reported to the Thai FDA within 15 days from the date of SAE/SADR notification. A report must also be submitted periodically with any additional information.
• AEs/ADRs that occur following the research participant’s participation in the study or after the study has been completed must be reported within 15 days from first knowledge of the event

According to G-AEReptReqs and G-ResEthics, the sponsor is also required to report all SUSARs to the EC as soon as possible, but no later than seven (7) calendar days for all fatal or life-threatening events, and no later than 15 calendar days for any non-fatal or non-life-threatening events. The sponsor must include the main points of concern. In addition, the sponsor must report to the EC any other non-local adverse reactions that may increase risks to participants within 15 days. Additionally, the sponsor must report any non-local SAEs/SADRs including SUSARs at least every six (6) months to the EC.

G-ResEthics and THA-28 state that the sponsor is responsible for expediting the reporting of all SUSARs to the investigator(s)/institution(s) participating in the trial, the EC(s), and to the Thai FDA. These reports should comply with G-AEReptReqs and the ICH Guideline for Clinical Safety Data Management: Definitions and Standards for Expedited Reporting (E2A) (THA-26). See G-AEReptReqs for detailed reporting requirements for the investigator and sponsor.

Other Safety Reports

THA-28 indicates that the sponsor should submit to the Thai FDA all safety updates and periodic reports as required by applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor is also responsible for the ongoing safety evaluation of investigational drug(s) and should promptly notify all concerned parties of findings that could adversely impact the safety of research participants, the conduct of the trial, or alter the EC’s approval or favorable opinion to continue the trial.

Per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, annual and end of study safety reports must be provided to the New Drugs and Drug Research Promotion Group within the Thai FDA’s Medicines Regulation Division. The annual report must be submitted as a document within three (3) months of the one (1) year anniversary of the study, and the final safety report must be submitted as a document within six (6) months after the study has concluded. In addition, a list of all SAE/SADR incidents involving research participant(s) should be included in the annual report. A detailed summary table with the number of SAEs/SADRs organized by terminology (symptoms and diagnosis) should be provided. See Appendix 21 in ClinImprtOrdr (Appendix 21 in THA-18) and Appendix 17 in ClinSampleProd (Appendix 17 in THA-76) for an example of the reporting form.

ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd further notes that other reports must be made in writing with information such as summary of risk assessment issues and related details for submission to the New Drugs and Drug Research Promotion Group.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

As per G-AEReptReqs, all SAEs/SADRs and SUSARs must be reported on the Thai FDA’s Health Product Vigilance Center (HPVC) (THA-30) SAE reporting form (THA-22) or the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS)’ form (THA-20). According to THA-37 and THA-20, AEs/ADRs and SAEs/SADRs must be reported to the Thai FDA. THA-22 indicates that the SAE form should be sent to the HPVC via mail, fax, or email at:

Health Product Vigilance Center
Food and Drug Administration
Ministry of Public Health
88/24 Tiwanon Road
Nonthaburi 11000
Thailand

Fax: 02 590 7253 or 02 591 8457
Email: adr@fda.moph.go.th

Pursuant to ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, individual reports should be submitted electronically via the Thai FDA’s HPVC (THA-30), unless the system is unavailable. The report may also be submitted as a document to the New Drugs and Drug Research Promotion Group within the Thai FDA’s Medicines Regulation Division.

Individual report data should include at minimum the following information:

• Research participant information for those that can be identified (e.g., participant codes)
• Investigational drugs used in research study
• AE/ADR symptoms or results suspected of being connected to the drugs
• Source of follow-up reports
• Research project code or name
• Reporting numbers (e.g., report number specified by sponsor)

Per ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, for research studies involving participants whose identities are disclosed, submitted AE/ADR reports should include the participant codes unless the Thai FDA’s Office of the Board of Directors deems it necessary to reveal the code immediately.

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37) require the investigator to submit an annual report on the clinical trial to the ethics committee (EC). In addition, the investigator must provide a progress report in accordance with requirements established by the EC. When there is a situation that significantly affects the implementation of clinical trials or increases the risks to participants, the investigator should report it in writing to the sponsor, the EC, and the clinical trial institution as soon as possible. The Measures-Ethics reiterates that the researcher must submit progress reports. The NMPA-No2-2015 requires sponsors and researchers to submit the progress of international multicenter clinical trials to the EC, including but not limited to enrollment, important decisions of the independent data supervision committee (if applicable), and safety information in their own countries and other countries/regions, so as to facilitate the EC’s understanding of the overall situation of the trial, conduct follow-up reviews, and protect the safety and rights of participants.

According to the NMPA-No230-2015, in clinical trials of new drugs, which now only require a one-time approval, after the completion of Phase I and Phase II trials, the applicant should submit all test results and demonstrate that no safety problems were found before beginning the next phase of the trial. Furthermore, NMPA-No230-2015 states that the applicant must submit an annual report on time.

CHN-37 states that 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. In addition, the investigator should submit written summaries of the trial status to the institutional EC annually, or more frequently, if requested by the institutional EC. Per the Measures-Ethics researchers must promptly submit reports on suspension, termination, and completion to the EC.

Final Report

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, after the clinical trial is completed, the investigator must report to the clinical trial institution. The investigator must provide the EC with a summary of the clinical trial results and provide the sponsor with the clinical trial related reports required by the drug regulatory authority. Per the DRR, the sponsor must register clinical trial results on the Applicant’s Window (CHN-58).

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

As delineated in G-ResEthics, the investigator(s) must submit progress reports on the status of the trial to the ethics committee (EC) at the designated interval (not specified). For high-risk research protocols, investigator(s) should report the progress more frequently than for a low-risk protocol. The investigator should also provide a proposed schedule to submit a progress report to the EC from the date of protocol submission for ethical review, which should be at least once a year.

The International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28) further notes that investigator(s) should submit a research summary report in writing to the EC once a year, or more often, as required by the EC. Investigator(s) should send a written report to the EC and the institution, if applicable, regarding any changes that may impact the research process and/or cause increased risk to the research participants. Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28.

In addition, according to ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, the sponsor must submit a study progress report annually to the Director of the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA)'s Medicines Regulation Division between October 1 and 31 every year until the study ends. Per ClinImprtOrdr, for N.Y.M.1/investigational product (IP) import applications, this report should be submitted using the progress report form in Appendix 15 in THA-18, and accompanied by a delivery letter to the Thai FDA’s Director of the Bureau of Medicine using the format in Appendix 14 in THA-18. Per ClinSampleProd, for P.Y.8/IP sample production applications, the report should be submitted using the progress report form in Appendix 11 in THA-76, and accompanied by a delivery letter to the Thai FDA’s Director of the Bureau of Medicine using the format in Appendix 10 in THA-76.

Requests that already have information in the FDA’s Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54) must submit documents according to the system’s procedures. See Submission Process section for detailed information on submitting information via the FDA’s Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54).

Final Report

As specified in ClinImprtOrdr, in the event of early termination of the research study, the sponsor must submit a summary report (Appendix 19 of ClinImprtOrdr) to the Thai FDA within 60 days after the closeout of the last study site.

G-ResEthics also requires investigator(s) to submit a final report to the EC upon the trial’s termination.

For reporting requirements specific to the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH), please see THA-13. Also, refer to THA-37 for Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) reporting requirements. The ECMOPH and the CREC are both ECs recognized by the Thai FDA to review and approve clinical trial protocols.

Individual ECs should be contacted to confirm their specific requirements.

As per the DRR, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), a sponsor is defined as a company, institution, or organization that initiates a clinical trial, and is responsible for managing, financing, and monitoring the trial. The DRR further specifies that the enterprise or institution applicant must be able to bear corresponding legal responsibilities. Per the DRR, applicants who are approved to carry out clinical trials of drugs are referred to as “sponsors” of clinical trials. If the sponsor changes, the changed sponsor must bear the relevant responsibilities and obligations of the drug clinical trial.

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37, a sponsor can authorize a contract research organization (CRO) to carry out certain work and obligations regarding the clinical trial. The sponsor can entrust part or all of the work and tasks of its clinical trial to the CRO, but the sponsor is still the ultimate person responsible for the quality and reliability of the clinical trial data and should supervise the various tasks undertaken by the CRO. The CRO must implement quality assurance and quality control measures. Any work entrusted by the sponsor to the CRO must be documented in a signed agreement. The sponsor is still responsible for work and tasks that are not clearly entrusted to the CRO. The requirements for sponsors in this specification apply to CROs that undertake the work and tasks related to sponsors.

A sponsor may be domestic or foreign; however, per the DRR and CHN-11, a Chinese legal entity must submit the clinical trial application.

Per the DAL, the sponsor is also referred to as the “holder” of the drug registration certificate, which is an entity that has obtained a drug registration certificate and includes institutions that are responsible for clinical trials. The legal representative and principal person holding the drug registration certificate is fully responsible for the quality of the drug used in a clinical trial. When the holder of the certificate is an overseas entity, their designated legal person in China must fulfill the same obligations as the holder of the drug registration certificate and bear joint and several liability with the holder of the drug registration certificate.

Definition of Foreign Entities in Regard to Collecting or Preserving Human Genetic Resources

For purposes of obtaining a human genetic resources (HGR) license, the HGR-AppGuide defines foreign entities as institutions established or actually controlled by overseas organizations or individuals including the following:

• A foreign organization or individual that holds or indirectly holds more than 50% of the shares, equity, voting rights, property shares, or other similar interests of an institution
• A foreign organization or individual that holds or indirectly holds less than 50% of the shares, equity, voting rights, property shares, or other similar rights and interests of the institution, but the voting rights or other rights and interests they enjoy are sufficient to control or exert significant influence on the decision-making, management, and other behaviors of the institution
• Foreign organizations or individuals, through investment relationships, agreements, or other arrangements, are able to control or exert significant influence on the decision-making, management, and other behaviors of the institution
• Other circumstances prescribed by laws, administrative regulations, and rules.

The HGR-AppGuide indicates that domestically-invested actual controlling institutions located in Hong Kong and Macao are regarded as Chinese units.

In accordance with G-ResEthics, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28), a sponsor is defined as an individual, company, institution, or organization that takes responsibility for the initiation, management, and/or financing of a clinical trial. Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28.

Per G-ResEthics and THA-28, the Thai government also permits a sponsor to authorize a contract research organization (CRO) to perform one (1) or more of a sponsor’s trial-related duties and functions. However, the ultimate responsibility for the trial data’s quality and integrity always resides with the sponsor. Any trial-related responsibilities to be transferred and assumed by a CRO should be specified in a written agreement or contract. A sponsor may be domestic or foreign.

Per THA-65 and THA-77, although applicants residing outside Thailand cannot register directly with Digital ID (THA-89), they can request permission to authorize a juristic person who receives power of attorney to use the OSSC’s online consultation system (E-Consult) (THA-77) and to submit applications to the FDA’s Skynet E-Submission System (THA-54).

THA-28 also states that the sponsor may be a sponsor-investigator if the individual both initiates and conducts, alone or with others, a clinical trial, and under whose immediate direction the investigational product is administered or dispensed. The sponsor-investigator’s obligations include both those of a sponsor and those of an investigator.

According to THA-13, the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH) requires the sponsor and/or CRO to be legally registered in Thailand. The ECMOPH is one (1) of the ethics committees approved by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) to approve clinical research protocols. See THA-13 for additional ECMOPH sponsor requirements.

Per ClinImprtOrdr, the sponsor is also referred to as the applicant or importer, and in ClinSampleProd, the sponsor is also referred to as applicant.

Overview

Per the DRR, drug clinical trials must be conducted in institutions conducting drug clinical trials that comply with relevant regulations and abide by the clinical trial quality management standards. As set forth in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), the sponsor is responsible for selecting the investigator(s) and 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. 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 (IB). Additionally, the sponsor must define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the relevant parties participating in the study. Furthermore, the sponsor must sign an agreement or contract with the participating institution(s). The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 indicates that for clinical trials involving multiple institutions, the sponsor must be responsible for selecting the team leader unit. (See the Submission Content section for additional information on clinical trial application requirements). See the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 for additional details on investigator and clinical trial institution requirements.

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 states that investigators and clinical trial institutions must possess the appropriate qualifications, training, and experience to assume responsibility for the trial. Further, they must be familiar with the trial protocol, IB, and related materials and information provided by the sponsor. They must be familiar with and abide by clinical trial regulations and laws and keep an authorization form for the division of responsibilities signed by the investigator. Researchers and clinical trial institutions must accept the supervision and inspection organized by the sponsor as well as by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA). In addition, with the sponsor’s consent, investigators and clinical trial institutions can authorize qualified individuals or units to undertake clinical trial-related responsibilities and functions.

With regard to institutions, the DRR further delineates that drug clinical trials must be conducted in institutions that have the corresponding required conditions and are registered. For example, vaccine clinical trials must be implemented or organized by China’s designated three-level medical institutions or disease prevention and control institutions at or above the provincial level that meet the required conditions.

Institutional Registration

Per the SC-Opinions-No42 and the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019, the NMPA adopted a registration system for institutions with qualifying conditions to be entrusted to conduct clinical trials and operate ethics committees (ECs). This reform eases institutional burdens by removing the pre-approval accreditation requirements. Among other conditions, the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019 specifies that an institution is entrusted to conduct clinical trials if the main investigators of clinical trials have senior professional titles and have participated in more than three (3) clinical trials. The main investigator must supervise the implementation of drug clinical trials and the performance of each researcher in the performance of their work duties and take measures to implement the quality management of drug clinical trials to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the data. Institutions conducting drug clinical trials must submit a work summary report of clinical trials in the previous year before January 31 of each year. NMPA-No1-2024 provides guidance and templates to institutions conducting drug clinical trials on filling out this annual work summary report. NMPA-NHC-No101-2019 indicates that the NMPA is establishing a record management information platform for the registration and operation management of institutions conducting drug clinical trials, as well as the supervision and inspection by drug regulatory agencies.

For additional details on the registration conditions, operations management, supervision, and inspection of institutions, see the NMPA-NHC-No101-2019. Also see CHN-12 for additional details on registering institutions to carry out clinical trials in China.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

The DRR requires foreign applicants/sponsors to designate Chinese legal entities to handle relevant drug registration matters.

Per the NHC-HGRmgt, the National Health Commission (NHC) is responsible for China’s management of human genetic resources (HGR). (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) to NHC, effective May 1, 2024).

Per the Rules-MgmtHGR, when data or information on human genetic resources (HGR) is provided or made available for use by foreign organizations, individuals, and institutions, the Chinese entity must notify MOST (now the NHC) in advance and may be required to pass a security review. The notification must report on the following:

• The purpose and use of providing or opening up the use of China’s HGR information to foreign entities
• The HGR data and backup copy of the information
• The basic circumstances of the foreign entities receiving the HGR information
• Risk assessments for the protection of Chinese HGR to foreign entities

This notification is not required during international scientific research that is licensed/recorded, where the Chinese unit provides the foreign party with information on HGR generated by the cooperation, and if the international cooperation agreement has stipulated that it will be used by the two (2) partners.

Note, that the Rules-MgmtHGR adopts a broad definition of “foreign units” that includes foreign organizations and institutions, as well as entities established or under “actual control” by foreign entities or individuals. See the Rules-MgmtHGR and Rules-MgmtHGR-Interp for specific guidelines for determining actual control.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, CHN-37, and the NMPA-No65-2021 recommend establishing a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) 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 EC-Guide indicates that any DSMB reports should be submitted to the EC during follow-up reviews, if applicable.

As delineated in G-SftyRptStds and the NMPA-No65-2021, the sponsor should appoint fulltime staff to monitor clinical trial safety information and manage serious adverse event reporting. Relevant standard operating procedures should be established, and all relevant personnel should be trained. The sponsor is also responsible to ensure staff understand the latest security information, conduct timely risk assessments, provide relevant information to inform participants and interested parties, and quickly report unexpected serious adverse reactions. Annex 3 to NMPA-No50-2018 requires that application materials for Phase I clinical trials focus on participant safety and describe the establishment of a drug safety committee and a pharmacovigilance system based on the clinical trial protocol.

NMPA-No2-2015 states that in large-scale international multicenter drug clinical trials, the establishment of independent data monitoring committees and endpoint determination committees for key indicators is usually considered. For critical clinical trials with relatively large sample sizes and relatively long research times, especially those driven by clinical events, it is necessary to establish an independent data supervision committee and establish clear working mechanisms and procedures. NMPA recommends that for studies in which Chinese patients account for more than 2%, Chinese experts be included in the global core independent data monitoring board. For situations where human factors may affect the determination of research results, such as international multicenter drug clinical trials where imaging evaluation results are the key evaluation endpoints, it is necessary to establish a unified endpoint judgment committee for the main research indicators to uniformly conduct independent evaluation and judgment of the main research indicators.

Multicenter Studies

Per NMPA-No2-2015, for international multicenter drug clinical trials, sponsors should ensure that investigators have the qualifications and ability to undertake the clinical trial. Sponsors should provide unified training for researchers, including training on clinical trial protocols, standard operating procedures, test record forms, computer use, etc. The training should clearly explain and translate various definitions; unify diagnosis, efficacy, and safety evaluation indicators; and ensure the consistency of researchers' understanding of clinical trial protocols and evaluation of relevant indicators.

In accordance with the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37, to carry out multicenter clinical trials, the sponsor must ensure that all centers participating in the clinical trial comply with the trial protocol. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 specifies additional sponsor requirements:

• Provide the same test plan to each center; each center must comply with the same unified evaluation standards for clinical and laboratory data and instructions for filling out the case report form (CRF)
• Ensure each center uses the same CRF to record the test data obtained in clinical trials
• Indicate in the trial protocol if the investigator needs to increase the collection of experimental data, and provide the investigator with an additional CRF
• Develop a written document clarifying the responsibilities of the investigators in each center before the start of the clinical trial
• Ensure communication among researchers in each center

The NMPA-No35-2017 delineates that researchers can conduct Phase I of multi-regional clinical trials (MRCT) of imported investigational new drugs and therapeutic biological products (excluding vaccines) simultaneously in China. Upon completion of a MRCT in China, the marketing application of the imported drug can be submitted immediately and should comply with the DRR. See Submission Content section.

Overview

In accordance with G-ResEthics and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28), 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. Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. THA-14 also states that researchers must have basic knowledge in the field of research.

Additionally, per THA-28 and G-ResEthics, the sponsor must define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the relevant parties participating in the study. 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.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

No information is available regarding foreign sponsor regulatory requirements.

Data Safety Monitoring Board

Although not specified as a sponsor requirement, G-ResEthics, G-AEReptReqs, and THA-28 encourage the establishment of a Data Safety Monitoring Board.

Multicenter Studies

As delineated in G-ResEthics and THA-28, 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 if required, by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA), and are given ethics committee approval
• 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

Insurance

As set forth in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the sponsor is responsible for providing the investigator and clinical trial institution with legal and economic insurance or a guarantee related to the clinical trial, which must be compatible with the nature and degree of risk of the clinical trial. This insurance should not include damage caused by the investigator and the clinical trial institution itself. The International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37) guides sponsors on providing insurance. See CHN-11 for an analysis of clinical trial insurance in China.

Per NMPA-No2-2015, for insurance provided by overseas insurance companies in international multicenter clinical trials, the sponsor should ensure that participants in China can effectively and fully claim compensation, and give priority to protecting the rights and interests of participants.

Compensation

Injury or Death

Per the Measures-Ethics, when research participants suffer research-related damages, they must receive timely and free treatment, and they must be compensated in accordance with laws and regulations and the agreement of both parties. In accordance with the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the EC-Guide, the sponsor must take appropriate measures to ensure that the participants and researchers can be compensated. The sponsor must bear the costs of diagnosis and treatment for the damage or death of the participant related to the clinical trial, as well as the corresponding compensation. Further, the sponsor must provide free trial drugs to participants and pay for medical testing related to clinical trials.

In addition, CHN-37 provides guidance to sponsors on providing compensation to research participants in the event of trial-related injuries or death. The sponsor must explain to participants the compensation and/or treatment available to them in the event of trial-related injuries.

Trial Participation

Per Measures-Ethics, research participants must not be charged research-related fees, and appropriate compensation must be given to the research participants for reasonable expenses incurred in the course of the research process.

Insurance

ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd specify that financing and insurance information should be included in the study protocol and protocol summary. If not included in the protocol and research project summary, a financial/insurance agreement should be attached separately in the application package as one (1) of the documents that the ethics committee (EC) considers approved or certified (e.g., Patient Information Sheets, etc.). G-ResEthics also states that the sponsor should provide insurance or indemnify the investigator/institution against claims arising from the trial, except for claims that arise from malpractice and/or negligence, if required by applicable regulatory requirements.

Compensation

Injury or Death

As specified in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, G-ResEthics, G-CT-DIPApp, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28), the sponsor or the designated contract research organization (CRO) is responsible for providing information related to compensation in the event of trial-related injuries or death to research participants and/or their legal heirs. ClinImprtOrdr further states that payment of compensation (if any) will be determined on a monthly basis to participants involved in the research. (See THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.)

Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. The sponsor must also inform the participants of any available medical treatment in the event of trial-related injuries. MCEthics further indicates that medical practitioners are responsible for harm or damage because the research studies involving the participant were not the fault of the participant.

Trial Participation

As per G-ResEthics, Phase I trial participants should be compensated for travel, loss of work, or other expenses incurred while participating in the trial.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Per the DRR, the management of drugs used in clinical trials must comply with the clinical trial quality management regulations specified in NMPA-GCP-No57-2020. As stated in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the NMPA-No65-2021, the sponsor must establish quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) systems for the clinical trial. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37) specify that the quality management system for clinical trials should cover the entire process of clinical trials, including the design, implementation, recording, evaluation, result reports, and filing of clinical trials. NMPA-No65-2021 reiterates that sponsors must establish a quality management and pharmacovigilance system for investigational products (IPs). This system must collect safety information, monitor risk, identify and control safety problems in a timely manner, proactively take necessary risk control measures, and evaluate the effectiveness of risk control measures to protect participant safety.

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, quality management includes effective trial plan design, data collection methods and procedures, and information collection necessary for decision-making in clinical trials. The QA and QC methods for clinical trials should be consistent with the inherent risks of clinical trials and the importance of the information collected. Sponsors should ensure the operability of all aspects of clinical trials and avoid over-complication of trial procedures and data collection. The trial protocol, case report form (CRF), and other related documents should be clear, concise, and consistent. During an inspection by the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA), both the research and management teams should send personnel to participate.

The sponsor must conduct quality management based on risk. The key links and data that protect the rights and safety of participants and ensure the reliability of clinical trial results must be clearly defined when the sponsor formulates the trial plan. Risk should be considered from two (2) levels: 1) system level, such as facilities and equipment, standard operating procedures (SOPs), computerized systems, personnel, and suppliers; and 2) clinical trial level, such as trial drugs, trial design, data collection and recording, and the informed consent process. The risk assessment should consider the possibility of errors under existing risk control; the impact of the errors on the protection of participants’ rights and safety; and the extent to which the errors have been monitored. Control measures to reduce risks should be embodied in the design and implementation of the test plan, the monitoring plan, the contract with parties, SOPs, and various trainings. During clinical trials, quality management should be recorded and communicated with relevant parties in a timely manner to promote continuous improvement of risk assessment and quality. The sponsor must regularly evaluate the risk control measures based on new knowledge and experience during the clinical trial period to ensure the effectiveness and applicability of the current quality management. In addition, the sponsor’s quality management system must meet the following requirements:

• The sponsor is responsible for formulating, implementing, and updating the SOPs related to clinical trial QA and QC systems
• The entire process of clinical trials and laboratory testing must be carried out in strict accordance with the quality management SOPs, and each stage of data processing has QC to ensure that all data are reliable and the data processing process is correct
• The sponsor must sign a contract with all relevant parties, including investigators and clinical trial institutions, to clarify the responsibilities of each party
• The contract signed by the sponsor and the relevant parties must indicate that the sponsor and the NMPA can access the clinical trial site to consult the source data, source documents, and reports

To standardize the submission of drug clinical trial data, meet the drug registration application data requirements, and improve the efficiency of drug review, the NMPA-No16-2020 provides guidance on the content and format of clinical trial data. The guidance is based on the data submission requirements of international regulatory agencies, including the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC). In addition, the NMPA-No74-2020 has details on the management of records and data that must be provided to the NMPA during clinical trials in China. It indicates that data refers to the information generated during drug development, production, operation, and use, including text, values, symbols, images, audio, pictures, maps, barcodes, etc.

Per the NMPA-No2-2015, for international multicenter clinical trials when the main efficacy and important safety evaluation indicators are laboratory evaluation indicators, it is recommended to establish a central laboratory for unified testing. The laboratory should have the corresponding clinical laboratory qualifications. Where a regional central laboratory is established, the quality control consistency verification between laboratories must be carried out regularly to ensure the consistency and reliability of experimental results.

The NMPA-No48-2018 presents quality management guidelines for Phase III clinical trials using innovative drugs. The guide addresses information the sponsor should provide to the NMPA related to the active pharmaceutical ingredient and its production, considering participants’ safety, drug characteristics, dosage form and route of administration, development stage, target population, and severity of the disease.

Finally, the NMPA has issued the following quality management and technical guidelines for conduct during clinical trials. See each of these documents, for additional details:

• NMPA-No29-2024 – guidelines for pharmaceutical research and changes to biological products during clinical trials
• Risk-Prcdr – procedures for safety information assessment and risk management during clinical trials
• DctrlzCTs-Rare – technical guidelines for decentralized clinical trials using rare disease drugs
• GeneCTs-Rare – technical guidelines for clinical trials of gene therapy products for rare diseases
• PatientCtr-Risk, PatientCtr-Imp, and PatientCtr-Design – technical guidelines for patient-centered drug clinical trials, including design and risk assessment
• NMPA-No15-2023 – technical guidelines for clinical trials of chemical compound drugs
• NMPA-No34-2022 – guidelines for protocol changes during drug clinical trials
• NMPA-No32-2022 – guidelines for clinical trials of topically administered local effective drugs
• NMPA-No31-2022 – guidelines for conduct of research with in vivo gene therapy products
• NMPA-No30-2022 – guidelines for conduct of research involving immune cell therapy products
• NMPA-No29-2022 – guidelines for conduct of research with in vitro gene modification
• NMPA-No27-2022 – guidelines for conduct of research involving specific human immunoglobulins
• NMPA-No22-2021 – a research and development model to guide researchers in managing pharmaceutical changes of innovative drugs
• NMPA-No17-2022 – guidelines for clinical pharmacological research of biosimiliars
• NMPA-No4-2022 – guidelines for research of human bioavailability of bioequivalence of innovative drugs
• NMPA-No71-2021 – guidelines for research of drugs for rare diseases
• NMPA-No68-2021 – guiding principles for writing the clinical risk management plan
• NMPA-No66-2021 – guiding principles for multiplicity issues during drug clinical trials, which refers to multiple testing problems that can lead to errors and inappropriate interpretation of trial results
• NMPA-No63-2021 – guidelines for drug clinical trial data management and statistical analysis plan
• NMPA-No62-2021 – guidelines for the application of patient-reported outcomes in drug clinical development
• NMPA-No59-2021 – guidelines for analyzing the effectiveness of clinical studies of drugs
• NMPA-No50-2021 – guidelines for long-term follow-up for clinical research of gene therapy products
• NMPA-No6-2021 – guidelines for sponsors in adopting and implementing an adaptive design to improve the success and quality of the research results
• Chngs-MktChem – technical guidelines for pharmaceutical change research of listed chemicals
• Chngs-MktChemBio – technical guidelines for clinical changes in marketed chemicals and biological products
• NMPA-No21-2021 – technical requirements of pharmaceutical research and evaluation of overseas listed and domestic unlisted chemicals
• NMPA-No54-2020 – technical guidelines for clinical trials of improved chemical drugs
• Chngs-MktBio – technical guidelines for pharmaceutical change research of marketed biological products

Per the VaccineLaw, during the research and development phase for vaccines, the sponsor must establish a biosafety management system that strictly controls biosafety risks, strengthens biosafety management of pathogenic microorganisms (e.g., bacterial strains), protects the health of operators and the public, and safeguards against bacterial toxicity. The use of pathogenic microorganisms, such as strains, is legal and legitimate. The strains and cell strains used during research and development must have clear histories, biological characteristics, and generations. Detailed documentation and archives must be established to ensure that the source is legal, clear, and traceable; if the source is unknown, then it cannot be used.

As delineated in MgmtHumanGen, for international cooperative projects using human genetic resources (HGR), the sponsor must ensure the participation of the Chinese partner. During the study period, the Chinese partner and its researchers must fully participate in the research. All records and data information in the research process, and all backup documentation, must be accessible to the Chinese partner. Both the foreign and Chinese parties have the right to use the information developed with the HGR.

Monitoring Requirements

As per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the purpose of monitoring is to ensure the rights and interests of participants in clinical trials, to ensure that the data in trial records and reports are accurate and complete, and to ensure that trials comply with the agreed protocol and relevant regulations. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37 require the sponsor to establish a systematic, prioritized, risk-based method to monitor clinical trials. NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 directs the sponsor to formulate audit procedures and an inspection plan with a special emphasis on protecting the rights and interests of participants, ensuring the authenticity of data, and managing risks in clinical trials. On-site supervision and centralized supervision should be conducted based on the combination of risks of clinical trials. The audit procedures must establish objectives, methods, frequency, and format content of audit reports. All problems observed and discovered by the auditors during the inspection process must be recorded in writing. The sponsor may conduct special inspections in addition to routine inspections. The sponsor selects a person independent of the clinical trial to serve as an inspector. Inspectors must have received corresponding training and inspection experience and be able to effectively perform inspection duties.

As indicated in NMPA-No2-2015, for international multicenter clinical trials, the sponsor or the contract research organization (CRO) entrusted by the sponsor must conduct supervision of each clinical trial center, the monitoring report must be archived, and the sponsor must periodically review the monitoring work. The sponsor or the CRO must formulate an audit plan and have a unified audit report template and audit result reporting system.

Further, NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 states that researchers and clinical trial institutions must agree to supervision and inspection organized by the sponsor and the NMPA. The sponsor must provide an inspection report or certificate when requested by the NMPA. In accordance with the DRR and CHN-8, NMPA’s Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) will make a risk-based decision on whether to conduct an inspection of a clinical trial, based on the level of drug innovation and the past verification history of the clinical trial site. See NMPA-No56-2023 for NMPA’s management measures that standardize the supervision and inspection of institutions conducting drug clinical trials. In addition, NMPA-No22-2022 indicates that sponsors have the main responsibility for pharmacovigilance inspections during the conduct of a clinical trial. See NMPA-No22-2022 for key considerations during routine and causal inspections, evaluation criteria, risk factors, inspection methods, and other inspection implementation guidance.

The NMPA-No28-2020 further clarifies the link between on-site inspection of drug registration and the pre-market good manufacturing practice (GMP) compliance inspection. Based on the innovation and risk characteristics of an IP, the pre-market GMP compliance inspection will be conducted by the appropriate level regulatory authority (i.e., the CDE, province, autonomous region, or municipality). See the NMPA-No28-2020 for detailed inspection requirements.

Also, see the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37 for additional guidance on audits and inspections. See NMPA-No11-2022 for guiding principles on use of risk-based statistical evaluation methods for centralized monitoring of drug clinical trials.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 mandates that researchers, clinical trial institutions, and sponsors abide by the trial protocol, SOPs, and relevant laws and regulations. If non-compliance is found, the sponsor must take immediate measures to correct them and ensure the clinical trials are in compliance. The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37 state that when an important compliance problem is discovered that may have a significant impact on the safety and rights of participants or the reliability of clinical trial data, the sponsor must conduct a root cause analysis in a timely manner and take appropriate corrective and preventive measures.

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 specifies that if the trial protocol is violated or there is a serious quality problem, the sponsor must hold the relevant personnel accountable and send a written report to the NMPA at CHN-58. When it is found that the investigator or clinical trial institution has serious non-compliance problems, the sponsor must terminate the investigator or clinical trial institution from continuing to participate in the clinical trial. The sponsor should also send a written report to the NMPA. At the same time, sponsors and researchers should take corresponding emergency safety measures to protect the safety and rights of participants. A sponsor who terminates or suspends clinical trials early must immediately notify the investigator, clinical trial institutions, and the NMPA, and explain the reasons.

Further, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 states that when a clinical trial is completed or terminated early, the sponsor must submit a clinical trial report to the NMPA. The clinical trial summary report must comprehensively, completely, and accurately reflect the clinical trial results. The safety and effectiveness data of the clinical trial summary report must be consistent with the clinical trial source data. The Measures-Ethics indicates that for research that has been approved for implementation, researchers must promptly submit reports on suspension and termination to the EC.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

As stated in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, and G-ResEthics, 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 and the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH)'s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28). Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28.

G-ResEthics and THA-28 explain that the sponsor is required to obtain 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.

G-ResEthics and THA-28 further specify that the sponsor must also obtain the investigator(s) and the institution(s) agreement to:

• Conduct the trial in compliance with THA-28, applicable regulatory requirement(s), and the protocol agreed to by the sponsor and approved by the ethics committee (EC)
• Comply with data recording and reporting procedures
• License monitoring, auditing, and inspection
• Retain essential documents until the sponsor informs them that they are no longer needed

Any agreements should be made in writing and the sponsor should sign the protocol, or a separate agreement.

Pursuant to G-ResEthics and THA-28, QC should be applied to each stage of data handling to ensure that all data are reliable and have been correctly processed. In addition, per THA-28, the sponsor should focus on trial activities essential to ensuring participant protection and the reliability of trial results. The quality management system should also use a risk-based approach that includes:

• During protocol development, identify processes and data that are critical to ensure participant protection and the reliability of trial results (Critical Process and Data Identification)
• Identify risks to critical trial processes and data (Risk Identification)
• Evaluate the identified risks against existing risk controls (Risk Evaluation)
• Decide which risks to reduce and/or which risks to accept (Risk Control)
• Document quality management activities and communicate to those involved in or affected by these activities (Risk Communication)
• Periodically review risk control measures to ascertain whether the implemented quality management activities are effective and relevant (Risk Review)
• In the clinical study report, describe the quality management approach implemented in the trial and summarize important deviations from the predefined quality tolerance limits and remedial actions taken (Risk Reporting)

ClinImprtOrdr states that the trial must be conducted in accordance with the Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) principles.

Monitoring Requirements

G-ResEthics and THA-28 note that the sponsor may choose to perform a clinical trial audit as part of its QA system. The purpose of the audit should be to evaluate trial conduct and compliance with the protocol, SOPs, and other applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor should ensure that the auditors are qualified by training and experience, and the auditor’s qualifications should be documented. The sponsor must also ensure that the audit is conducted in accordance with the SOPs, the auditor observations are documented, and data are available as needed for the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA). No specific timeframe is provided for the audit process.

Per ClinImprtOrdr, the sponsor and investigator must facilitate the Thai FDA’s monitoring of the clinical trial to ensure compliance with GCP and GLP, safety reporting, and progress reporting requirements.

In addition, per THA-28, 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 onsite monitoring, a combination of onsite 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). See THA-28 for detailed information on the sponsor’s role in developing monitoring systems.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

G-ResEthics and THA-28 state that if a trial is prematurely terminated or suspended, the sponsor should promptly inform the investigators/institutions and the regulatory authority(ies) of the termination or suspension and the reason(s) for the termination or suspension. The sponsor or the investigator/institution should also promptly inform the EC and provide the reasons for the study’s termination or suspension.

G-CT-DIPApp also specifies that in the event of the premature discontinuance of a trial, the Thai FDA must be notified no later than 30 working days after the date of discontinuance. G-CT-DIPApp further notes that a corresponding notification letter referring to the related approved import license along with supplemental documents as indicated in Appendix 13 is needed, and a corresponding notification letter along with supplement documents as indicated in Appendix 14 is needed. (Note: Appendices 13 and 14 as referenced in G-CT-DIPApp are only available in the ClinImprtOrdr.) As stated in ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, at the conclusion or termination of a clinical trial, a summary report must also be submitted within 60 days after the closeout of the last study site. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd further explain that details of remaining medicines to be destroyed and evidence supporting the destruction or return of the study drugs should also be included (Appendix 20 in ClinImprtOrdr and Appendix 16 in ClinSampleProd each contain a sample notification form required to be completed when terminating a research project). (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.)

Per G-CT-DIPApp, after the import license is granted, the applicant must also notify the Thai FDA when the clinical trial has been discontinued in its entirety or at any clinical trial site for reasons not related to the safety of clinical trial, or if the trial has been discontinued prematurely.

Electronic Data Processing System

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the sponsor must meet the following requirements in electronic data processing during clinical trials:

• Select qualified personnel to supervise data processing, data verification, statistical analysis, and the writing of trial summary reports
• Use an electronic data management system that passes reliable system verification and meets the pre-set technical performance to ensure the integrity, accuracy, and reliability of the test data, and to ensure that the system is always valid for verification during the entire test process
• Have complete standard operating procedures (SOPs) that cover the setup, installation, and use of electronic data management; the SOPs must describe the verification, functional testing, data collection and processing, system maintenance, system safety, testing, change control, data backup, recovery, and system emergency plans
• Ensure the SOPs cover the responsibilities and training of sponsors, researchers, and clinical trial institutions when using computerized systems
• Prescribe in advance the method of data modification
• Ensure that the data conversion process is consistent with the original data and visibility is maintained during the process
• Ensure the security of the electronic data management system, and that unauthorized personnel cannot access it; keep a list of persons authorized to modify data; electronic data is backed up in time; clinical trials designed by blind methods are always blinded, including data entry and processing

In accordance with NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, when the information system of a clinical trial institution has the conditions for establishing a clinical trial electronic medical record, the researcher should use it first, and the corresponding computerized system should have complete authority management and audit trails, which can be traced to the creator or modifier of the record. Researchers must supervise the data collection. They must ensure that all clinical trial data are obtained from clinical trial source documents and trial records, and are accurate, complete, readable, and timely. The source data should be attributable, legible, original, accurate, complete, consistent, and durable. The modification of the source data must be explained and transparent. Relevant medical records should be included in the outpatient or inpatient medical record system. During the processing of clinical trial information, care must be taken to avoid illegal or unauthorized access, disclosure, dissemination, modification, damage, or loss of information. The record, processing, and preservation of clinical trial data must ensure the confidentiality of records and participant information. In the contract with the investigator and the clinical trial institution, the sponsor should clarify the retention time, cost, and handling of the documents.

Per the NMPA-No2-2015, international multicenter clinical trials must adopt a unified data processing center for data query, verification, storage, and analysis.

The NMPA-No74-2020 has additional guidance and requirements for the sponsor’s electronic system.

In addition, as per the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37), when using electronic trial data processing systems, the sponsor must ensure that the electronic data processing system conforms to the sponsor’s established requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance. Per CHN-37, the sponsor should base their approach to validate such systems on a risk assessment that takes into consideration the intended use and the potential of the system to affect participant protection and reliability of trial results. In addition, the sponsor should maintain SOPs for the systems that cover system setup, installation, and use. The responsibilities of the sponsor, investigator, and other parties should be clear, and the system users should be provided with training. Refer to CHN-37 for additional information.

Records Management

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37, the sponsor must retain the clinical trial data related to the sponsor and participating parties in the clinical trial. The transfer of data ownership must comply with the requirements of relevant laws and regulations. The sponsor must send written notification to the investigator and clinical trial institution about the requirements for preserving clinical trial records and when the trial-related records are no longer needed. At the beginning of a clinical trial, the investigator, clinical trial institution, and sponsor must establish archive management of the necessary documents. At the end of the clinical trial, an inspector must review and confirm the necessary documents of the investigator, clinical trial institution, and sponsor, and these documents must be properly kept in their respective clinical trial archives. Clinical trial documents must be retained for at least five (5) years after the trial drug is approved for marketing or after the termination of the clinical trial.

In addition, the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 emphasizes that clinical trial essential documents are important to the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA)'s inspection of the clinical trial. Sponsors, investigators, and clinical trial institutions must confirm that they have appropriate storage conditions for preserving the essential documents. SOPs for document management should be formulated. The source data or its certified copy must be kept complete and readable during the retention period. In addition, the sponsor must ensure that the investigator can always consult and enter data in the case report form (CRF) reported to the sponsor during the trial. The data should not be controlled by the sponsor alone. The photocopies used as source documents should meet the requirements for certified copies. The NMPA-No37-2020 details the essential documents required for clinical trials to prove compliance with the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020. The NMPA-No74-2020 contains additional requirements on record management during a clinical trial.

Electronic Data Processing System

Per G-ResEthics and THA-28, when using electronic trial data processing systems, the sponsor must ensure that the electronic data processing system conforms to the sponsor’s established requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance, and that standard operating procedures are maintained for using these systems. Per THA-28, the sponsor’s approach to validate such systems should be based on a risk assessment that takes into consideration the intended use and the potential of the system to affect participant protection and reliability of trial results. Refer to G-ResEthics and THA-28 for detailed information on electronic trial data systems. ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd also note that sponsors should ensure that research facilities are prepared for inspections by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA) by ensuring that research participant source data and case report forms are stored in electronically based data collection systems.

Records Management

As set forth in G-ResEthics and THA-28, sponsor-specific essential documents should be retained until at least two (2) years after the last approval of a marketing application in an International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) region, until there are no pending or contemplated marketing applications, or at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of an investigational product’s clinical development. The sponsor should inform the investigator(s) and the institution(s) in writing when trial-related records are no longer needed.

In addition, THA-28 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.

Responsible Parties

For requirements on personal data protection, the PIPL delineates that personal information processors are organizations or individuals who independently determine the purpose and method of processing personal information during personal information processing activities.

Data Protection

Per the PIPL, the personal information processor must ensure the safety of the personal information processed, including following principles of openness and transparency, disclosing personal information processing rules, and clearly indicating the purpose, method, and scope of processing. The PIPL applies to the processing of personal information in China for people located within the country. In addition, the PIPL and the DataSec-Regs apply to data processing activities conducted outside of China involving personal information of people located in China under the following circumstances: (1) where the processing is for the purposes of providing products or services to individuals located in China, (2) where the processing is for analyzing and evaluating the behavior of individuals located in China, or (3) other circumstances stipulated by laws and regulations.

Per the PIPL, the processing of personal information should have a clear and reasonable purpose and should be directly related to the purpose of processing with the least impact on personal rights and interests. The personal information processor must follow the principles of lawfulness, fairness, necessity, and good faith when processing personal information, and must not process personal information through misleading, fraudulent, coercive, and other methods. The collection of personal information must be limited to the minimum scope for the purpose of processing, and personal information must not be collected excessively, while following the principles of openness and transparency. The personal information processor must disclose processing rules and clearly indicate the purpose, method, and scope of processing. When handling personal information, the data quality must be guaranteed, and any inaccuracy and incompleteness of personal information must not adversely affect personal rights and interests. For additional data protection details see the DataSec-Regs, which supplements the PIPL.

The PIPL states that for sensitive personal information, which includes medical health information, the personal information processor must adopt additional protective measures, including informing participants of the necessity of processing sensitive personal information and the impact on personal rights and interests. Unless otherwise provided by laws and administrative regulations, the retention period of personal information must be the shortest time necessary to achieve the processing purpose. Also see the Id-SPI for guidance on identifying sensitive personal information.

Further, the DataSec-Regs states that where a network data processor provides or entrusts other network data processors to process personal information and important data, they must agree to the following:

• The recipient of network data must fulfill its obligation to protect network data security and process personal information and important data in accordance with the agreed purpose, method, scope, etc.
• If two (2) or more network data processors jointly decide on the purpose and method of processing personal information and important data, they must agree upon their respective rights and obligations.

Per the PIPL and the DataSec-Regs, to send personal information outside of China, the personal information processor must meet one (1) of the following conditions (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Pass the security assessment organized by the national cybersecurity and information department (See below in Data Security)
• Conduct personal information protection certification by professional institutions in accordance with the requirements of the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC)
• Enter into a contract with the overseas recipient in accordance with the standard contract formulated by the CAC stipulating the rights and obligations of both parties
• Other conditions stipulated by laws, administrative regulations, or national cyberspace administration departments
• Where China’s international treaties and agreements permit providing personal information to foreign recipients
• It is necessary to provide personal information overseas to conclude or perform a contract to which the individual is a part
• To implement cross-border human resources management in accordance with labor rules and regulations formulated in accordance with the law and collective contracts signed in accordance with the law, and providing employees' personal information overseas is necessary
• It is necessary to provide personal information overseas to perform legal duties or obligations
• In an emergency, it is necessary to provide personal information overseas in order to protect the life, health, or property safety of a natural person

The PIPL states that the personal information processor must inform the participant of the name of the foreign recipient, contact information, processing purpose, processing method, and types of personal information. In addition, per the PIPL and the DataSec-Regs, the foreign personal information processor must appoint a representative located in China to be responsible for matters related to personal information protection and report the representative’s contact information to the data protection regulators—the CAC.

The DataScrty requires the personal information processor to manage its data processing activities to ensure data security, promote data development and utilization, protect the legitimate rights and interests of individuals and organizations, and safeguard national sovereignty, security, and development interests. CAC-No11-2022 standardizes requirements for exporting “important data” and personal information to protect the rights and interests of personal information, preserve national security and the societal public interest, and promote the cross-border security and free flow of data. Important data is defined as data that, once tampered with, destroyed, leaked, or illegally obtained or used, might endanger national security, economic operations, social stability, public health, or safety in China. Also see the DataSec-Regs for additional requirements on doing risk assessments and handling and reporting on important data. Personal information processors must conduct security assessments of personal data collected and generated in China before exporting it to overseas data processors. Data export security assessments focus on assessing risks that data export activities may bring to national security, the public interest, or the lawful rights and interests of individuals or organizations. The DataTrsfr-Regs delineates exemptions from the requirements to conduct security assessments, for example in an emergency where it is necessary to provide personal information overseas in order to protect the life, health, or property safety of a natural person. If DataTrsfr-Regs conflicts with CAC-No11-2022, the DataTrsfr-Regs supersede.

When applicable, the DataScrty states that the assessment report must be submitted to CAC through the provincial-level department where the personal information processor is located, and include the following materials:

• Declaration form
• Self-assessment report on data export risks
• Data agreements between the data processor and the overseas recipient

The CAC-No11-2022 states that data export activities that have already been conducted before the implementation of CAC-No11-2022 are noncompliant and must be rectified within six (6) months of the effective date of CAC-No11-2022 (i.e., by March 1, 2023). See the CAC-No11-2022 for additional details on conducting the data export security assessment, the provincial inspections, appeal procedures, and CAC’s review actions and timeline.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

Per the PIPL, personal consent must be made voluntarily and with the participants’ full knowledge of the processing purpose, processing methods, and types of personal information processed. In an emergency, if it is not possible to obtain consent in a timely manner to protect the life, health, property, and safety of participants, the personal information processor must promptly notify the individual after the emergency is eliminated. (Note: consent to data processing is not the same as informed consent to the research described in the Informed Consent topic.) As indicated in the DataSec-Regs, individual consent is defined as specific and unambiguous consent given by an individual for specific processing of their personal information.

The DataSec-Regs supplements the PIPL, adding detailed protection requirements when personal information processing is based on individual consent:

• The collection of personal information must not be collected beyond the scope, and personal consent must not be obtained through misleading information, fraud, coercion, etc.
• When processing sensitive personal information such as biometrics, religious beliefs, specific identities, and medical health the individual's separate consent must be obtained
• When processing the personal information of a minor under the age of 14, the consent of the minor’s parent/legal guardian must be obtained
• Personal information must not be processed beyond the purpose, method, type, or retention period of the personal information that the individual has consented to
• Processors must not frequently seek consent after an individual has clearly expressed their disagreement with the processing of their personal information
• If the purpose, method, or type of personal information processing changes, the individual’s consent must be obtained again
• If laws and administrative regulations provide that written consent must be obtained for the processing of sensitive personal information, such provisions must apply

Responsible Parties

The PDPA defines the “data controller” as the person or juristic person having the power and duties to make decisions regarding the collection, use, or disclosure of the personal data.

Data Protection

Per the PDPA, the data controller must ensure that collected personal data remains accurate, up-to-date, complete, and not misleading. Personal data collection must be limited to the extent necessary in relation to the lawful purpose of the data controller. The data controller’s purpose for collecting data must meet one (1) of the purposes specified in the PDPA in order to be permitted to collect personal data, with the data subject’s explicit consent (see Section 23 of PDPA for details).

PDPA further specifies that personal data includes health and genetic data and requires the data subject’s explicit consent. Permissible personal data collection includes data collected in the interest of public health, such as protecting against cross-border dangerous contagious diseases or epidemics which may be contagious or pestilent, or ensuring standards or quality of medicines, medicinal products, or medical devices, provided there are measures to safeguard the rights and freedom of the data subject, including the confidentiality of personal data. Additionally, in the event that the data controller sends or transfers personal data to a foreign country, the destination country or international organization that receives such personal data must have an adequate data protection standard, and must be carried out in accordance with the rules for personal data protection as prescribed by the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC). See PDPC-Estab and THA-62 for additional information on the PDPC. Refer to the PDPA for a detailed list of permissible data collection purposes.

As set forth in the PDPA, the data controller is responsible for the following duties:

• To provide appropriate security measures for preventing the unauthorized or unlawful loss, access to, use, alteration, correction, or disclosure of personal data; such measures must be reviewed when necessary, or when technology has changed in order to efficiently maintain proper security and safety, and also comply with the minimum standard specified by the PDPC
• In the case of personal data being provided to other persons or legal persons other than the data controller, the data controller must take action to prevent such person(s) from using or disclosing the personal data unlawfully or without authorization
• Establish an examination system for personal data erasure or destruction when the retention period ends, when the personal data is irrelevant or beyond the purpose necessary for which it has been collected, when the data subject has requested to do so, or when the data subject withdraws consent, except where the retention of such personal data is for the purpose of freedom of expression
• Notify the PDPC of any personal data breach without delay and, where feasible, within 72 hours after having become aware of it, unless such breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the rights and freedoms of the persons whose data have been breached

Refer to the PDPA for additional information on data controller responsibilities. See also PDPC-Breach, G-PDPBreaches, THA-15, THA-10, and THA-17 for data controller guidelines on assessing data breach risks and applicable PDPC reporting requirements.

As described in the PDPA, with regard to personal data record management, the data controller must maintain, at least, the following records in order to enable the data subject and the PDPC to monitor in either written or electronic form the following: the collected personal data; the purpose of the collection of personal data; data controller details; personal data retention period; rights and methods for access to the personal data, including the conditions regarding the person’s right to access their personal data and the conditions to access such data; personal data use or disclosure; rejection of or objection to a request for personal data; and details of the appropriate personal data security measures.

Per the PDPA, the data protection legislation states that a data protection officer must be designated in the event the data controller/data processor is deemed a public authority per the PDPC; if the activities of the data controller/data processor in the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data, or the system itself, requires regular monitoring, due to the large quantity of personal data; or, if the core activity of the data controller/data processor is the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data for which the explicit consent of the data subject has not been obtained. See the PDPA for guidance related to data protection officers. See also THA-61 for a detailed guidance on the PDPA.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

The PDPA states that the data controller must not collect, use, or disclose personal data, unless the data subject has given consent prior to or at the time of such collection, use, or disclosure, except in the case where the data controller is permitted to do so by the provisions of the PDPA or any other laws. These cases may include the preparation of historical documents or public interest archives, research, or statistics, or preventing or suppressing a danger to a person’s life, body, or health.

The PDPA specifies that a request for consent must be made explicitly in a written statement or via electronic means unless consent cannot be done by those means. In addition, the data controller must inform the data subject of the purpose for collecting, using, or disclosing the subject’s personal data. The request for consent must be presented in an easily accessible and intelligible form and with statements using clear and plain language that is neither deceptive nor misleading to the data subject. The data controller must also ensure that the data subject’s consent is freely given.

The PDPA further explains that the data subject may withdraw consent at any time. The withdrawal of consent must be as easy as giving consent, unless there is a restriction of the withdrawal of consent by law, or the contract which gives benefits to the data subject. However, the withdrawal of consent must not affect the collection, use, or disclosure of personal data that the data subject has already legally consented to. If the withdrawal of consent will affect the data subject in any manner, the data controller must inform the data subject of the consequences of withdrawal.

In the event that the data subject is a minor who is not sui juris by marriage or has no capacity as a sui juris person under the PDPA, the request for consent from such a data subject must be made as follows:

• In the event that giving consent is not an action that the minor is entitled to exercise independently, the consent of the holder of parental responsibility over the child must be obtained
• Where the minor is below the age of 10 years, the consent must be obtained from the holder of parental responsibility over the child
• In the event that the data subject is incompetent, the consent must be obtained from the custodian who has the power to act on behalf of the incompetent person
• In the event that the data subject is quasi-incompetent, the consent must be obtained from the curator who has the power to act on behalf of the quasi-incompetent person

The above stated provisions also apply to the withdrawal of data consent of the data subject, the notice given to the data subject, the exercise of rights of the data subject, the complaint of the data subject, and any other acts under the PDPA for the data subject who is a minor, an incompetent person, or a quasi-incompetent person.

Refer to the G-PDPConsent for detailed data controller guidance on obtaining consent, and the G-PDPNotif for data controller guidelines on the conditions to be assessed when notifying a data subject of the purpose and details related to collecting their personal data. THA-16 also provides useful information on these guidelines.

Obtaining Consent

In all Chinese clinical trials, a freely given informed consent is required to be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the Measures-Ethics, the RegEthics, and the EC-Guide. In addition, China is implementing the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (CHN-37) as a guidance document. As per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the DAL, the EC-Guide, and CHN-37, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by an ethics committee (EC) and provided to the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) with the clinical trial application. Per the MgmtHumanGen, the ICF must also be provided to the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) (now National Health Commission (NHC)) as part of its application procedures for human genetic resource (HGR) licenses. In addition, per the VaccineLaw, in carrying out a vaccine clinical trial, the investigator is required to obtain a signed ICF from the participant or legal representative/guardian. (Note that per SC-Order777 and NHC-HGRmgt, management of HGR was transferred from MOST to NHC, effective May 1, 2024).

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the Measures-Ethics, and CHN-37 state that the investigator, or a person designated by the investigator, must provide detailed research study information to the participant or the legal representative/guardian. As delineated in the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the Measures-Ethics, and the EC-Guide, the ICF content should be briefly and clearly presented orally or, in a written language, that is easy to understand, and commensurate with the comprehension level of the research participants. The participant and the legal representative/guardian should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate. The Measures-Ethics indicates that ICFs must contain sufficient, complete, and accurate information, and be expressed in language, text, video images, and so forth that research participants can understand. Researchers must explain each item to the research participants in accordance with the content of the ICF.

As per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, CHN-37, and the EC-Guide, none of the oral and written information concerning the research study, including the written ICF, should contain any language that causes the participant or the 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. The investigator should give the participant sufficient time to understand the ICF content, and the participant should make a decision whether or not to agree to participate in the study and sign the form. In psychological research, because informed consent may affect the participant’s response to the question, thereby affecting the accuracy of the research results, the investigator can fully inform the participant and obtain informed consent following the project study’s completion.

Per DctrlzCTs-Rare, for decentralized clinical trials of rare diseases, electronic informed consent may be used. When electronic informed consent is used, the informed consent process needs to be recorded, archived, and traceable. For rare disease participants with limited mobility, researchers can use remote informed consent to more quickly and easily obtain consent and ensure that all participants have the latest version in a timely manner. To use electronic informed consent in these scenarios, researchers must conduct evaluation and verification in advance and provide the participants with instructions and training. Before adopting electronic informed consent, the participants should be fully informed of the scope of data collection, access rights, etc. generated during the electronic informed consent process. During the informed consent process, researchers should ensure data security and the privacy of the participants (including their legal representative/guardian) are protected.

Per the MgmtHumanGen, to collect Chinese HGR for a clinical trial, the participant must agree to participate in the clinical trial in writing. Information provided to the participant must be comprehensive, complete, true, accurate, and must not conceal information nor be misleading or deceiving.

For specific consent requirements for human genome editing research, see the Consent for Specimen section.

Re-Consent

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020 and CHN-37 require investigators to use the latest version of the ICF approved by the EC and, if necessary, participants in the clinical trial process should sign an updated ICF again. If new information may affect the participant’s continued participation in the trial, the investigator must promptly notify the participant and the legal representative/guardian and make corresponding records. Per the RegEthics and the Measures-Ethics, the investigator should obtain re-consent under the following circumstances (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• The research plan, scope, and content have changed
• Research using previously collected samples that were used for diagnosis and treatment and were labeled with personal identifiable labels
• Research using human biological samples or related clinical disease history data with subject-identifiable labels from existing biological sample repositories/databases
• The risks related to the research are increased or substantially increased
• The level of civil capacity of research participants has been raised
• Other changes occur during the research

Language Requirements

The NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the Measures-Ethics, the RegEthics, and the EC-Guide require the ICF to be presented in oral or written form in a language that the participant is able to understand.

Documenting Consent

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, the Measures-Ethics, CHN-37, and the EC-Guide, the participant and the legal representative/guardian, and researchers who perform informed consent, should sign and date the ICF. Per the Measures-Ethics, when the research participants do not have the ability to express their consent in writing, the researcher must obtain their oral informed consent and have audio and video recordings and other process records and supporting materials.

Per the NMPA-GCP-No57-2020, CHN-37, and the EC-Guide, if the ICF is not signed by the participant, the relationship should be marked on the form. If the participant and the legal representative/guardian lack the ability to read, an impartial witness must witness the entire informed consent process. 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 the legal representative/guardian
• The participant and the legal representative/guardian, have orally consented to the participant’s involvement in the trial, and has signed and dated the ICF, if capable of doing so

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

Waiver of Consent

The EC-Guide and the RegEthics state that the EC may grant a waiver of informed consent when the following conditions are met (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• The risk that the subject may suffer does not exceed the minimum.
• The exemption from obtaining the informed consent of the subject does not have a negative impact on the participant’s rights and interests.
• The use of human bodily materials or data that can identify the information for research has made it impossible to find the participant, and the research project does not involve personal privacy and commercial interests.
• The biological sample donor has signed an ICF agreeing that the donated sample and related information can be used for all medical research.
• The exemption requires informed consent and does not mean that it is exempt from the review of the EC.

Obtaining Consent

In all Thai clinical trials, a freely given informed consent must be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, G-ResEthics, G-CT-DIPApp, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (THA-28). Per an in-country subject matter expert, Thailand is implementing THA-28. MCEthics further states that a medical practitioner who conducts research studies and human experiments must obtain the consent of the participant and must be ready to protect the participant from harm arising from that experiment.

As per ClinImprtOrdr, ClinSampleProd, G-ResEthics, and THA-28, the informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by an institutional ethics committee (EC) recognized by the Thai Food and Drug Administration (Thai FDA), and provided to the Thai FDA with the drug import license application to conduct a clinical trial. (See the Required Elements section for details on what should be included in the form.) (Note: The ICF is referred to as the Patient Information Sheet in G-CT-DIPApp.) (See also THA-18 and THA-76 for the forms included in the appendices in ClinSampleProd and ClinImprtOrdr.)

G-ResEthics and THA-28 state that the investigator(s) or the representative(s) must provide detailed research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. G-ResEthics and THA-28 also specify that 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 and legal representative/guardian, should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate. THA-11 also explains that patients who seek medical treatment have the right to receive truthful and adequate information about their illness, examination, treatment, advantages and disadvantages from the examination, and treatment from health professionals, in a language that patients can easily understand. Patients can then choose to make decisions about consenting or not consenting to the health professionals treating them, except in cases of urgent and life-threatening emergencies. THA-14 further states that researchers should take pains to explain the objectives and scope of their research to the human participants without deceiving or coercing them and they should not violate their participants’ rights as private individuals. Researchers should respect the rights and dignity of their human participants and enlist their consent prior to any research experiments involving human participants.

As per G-ResEthics and THA-28, 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 to appear to waive 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.

THA-13 provides informed consent documentation guidelines required by the Ethical Review Committee for Research in Human Subjects, Ministry of Public Health (ECMOPH), which is one (1) of the institutional ECs approved by the Thai FDA.

As noted in THA-34, the Central Research Ethics Committee (CREC) does not have its own informed consent documentation guidelines and directs investigators to the ICF template and checklist provided by the Forum for Ethical Review Committees in Thailand (FERCIT) (see THA-46 for document links).

Re-Consent

No information is currently available regarding re-consent requirements.

Language Requirements

As stated in ClinImprtOrdr and ClinSampleProd, the ICF content and accompanying information (Patient Information Sheet) should be presented in the participant’s language, must be submitted in Thai and translated to English, and certify that the text in other languages aligns with the Thai translation. G-CT-DIPApp also indicates that the Patient Information Sheet should be presented in Thai.

Documenting Consent

G-ResEthics and THA-28 state that the participant or legal representative/guardian, and the investigator(s) must sign and date the ICF. Where the participant is illiterate, or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, verbal consent should be obtained in the presence of and countersigned by an impartial witness. The NatHlthAct also indicates that the participant’s consent must be obtained in writing prior to conducting the trial.

Waiver of Consent

As per G-ResEthics, the EC should establish the conditions under which an informed consent discussion and/or signing the ICF can be waived. In these cases, the investigator must explore other means to protect the participant’s confidentiality. For example, if the investigator uses information from a participant’s medical records, the investigator must also ensure that the ICF is kept in the medical record by having the participant sign the form in advance and keep it in the records, or by having the participant sign the ICF later. The EC will then consider waiving the informed consent as long as the investigator provides proof that the participant is informed about the method for collecting the data, and that the participant’s privacy is protected.