Clinical research in Kenya is regulated and overseen by the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) and the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI).

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

As per the PPA, the CTRules, and the G-KenyaCT, Kenya’s PPB is the regulatory authority responsible for clinical trial approvals, oversight, and inspections. As described in KEN-21, the PPB and its Expert Committee on Clinical Trials (ECCT) evaluate all matters relating to clinical trials and grant permission for clinical trials to be conducted in Kenya. See KEN-20, KEN-21, and KEN-16 for more information about PPB.

Per the PPA and the CTRules, the PPB is authorized to undertake various mandated duties regarding regulation of medicines including (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Advise the government in all matters relating to the safety, packaging, labelling, distribution, and disposal of medicines
• Ensure that all medicinal products manufactured in, imported into, or exported from the country conform to prescribed standards of quality, safety, and efficacy
• Ensure that the personnel, premises, and practices employed in the manufacture, storage, marketing, distribution, and sale of medicinal substances comply with the defined codes of practice and other prescribed requirements
• Grant or revoke licenses for the manufacture, importation, exportation, distribution, and sale of medicinal substances
• Maintain a register of all authorized medicinal substances
• Publish, at least once every three (3) months, lists of authorized or registered medicinal substances and lists of products with marketing authorizations
• Regulate narcotic, psychotropic substances, and precursor chemical substances
• Consider applications for approval and alterations of dossiers intended for use in marketing authorization of medical products and health technologies
• Inspect and license all manufacturing premises, importing and exporting agents, wholesalers, distributors, pharmacies (including those in hospitals and clinics), and other retail outlets
• Prescribe a system for sampling, analysis, and other testing procedures of finished medicinal products released into the market to ensure compliance with the labeled specifications
• Conduct post-marketing surveillance of safety and quality of medical products
• Monitor the market for the presence of illegal or counterfeit medicinal substances
• Regulate the promotion, advertising, and marketing of medicinal substances in accordance with approved product information
• Approve the use of any unregistered medicinal substance for purposes of clinical trials, compassionate use, and emergency use authorization during public health emergencies
• Approve and regulate clinical trials on health products
• Disseminate information on medical products to health professionals and to the public to promote their rational use
• Collaborate with other national, regional, and international institutions on medicinal substances regulation
• Advise the Cabinet Secretary on matters relating to control, authorization, and registration of medicinal substances
• Implement any other function relating to the regulation of medicinal substances

Please note: Kenya is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (KEN-3), 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 KEN-15.

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

As delineated in the STI-Act and G-ECBiomedRes, in addition to obtaining the PPB’s permission to conduct research in Kenya, the principal investigator or the head of a research institution must obtain a favorable opinion from an ethics committee accredited by NACOSTI and a NACOSTI research license prior to initiating a study. NACOSTI’s role is to regulate and ensure quality in the science, technology, and innovation sector, and to advise the Kenyan government on related matters. According to Part II of the STI-Act, NACOSTI has specific research coordination and oversight functions, and it liaises with the National Innovation Agency and the National Research Fund to ensure funding and implementation of prioritized research programs. In addition per the STI-Act and KEN-39, NACOSTI is mandated to register and accredit research institutions in Kenya. The objective of registration and accreditation is to uphold the standard of research in the country and secure public confidence in the national research system. See KEN-32 for more information about NACOSTI’s mandate and functions.

Contact Information

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

According to the G-KenyaCT and KEN-22, the PPB contact information is as follows:

Pharmacy and Poisons Board
P.O. Box 27663 - 00506
Lenana Road Opp. DOD
Nairobi, Kenya

Telephone: (+254) 709 770 100 or (+254) 709 770 xxx (where xxx represents the extension of the officer or office)
Email: info@ppb.go.ke or info@pharmacyboardkenya.org
For Clinical Trials Inquiries: cta@pharmacyboardkenya.org

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

According to KEN-29, the NACOSTI contact information is as follows:

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation
off Waiyaki, Upper Kabete
P. O. Box 30623
00100 Nairobi, Kenya

Phone (landline): (+254) 020 4007000, (+254) 020 8001077
Phone (mobile): 0713 788 787 / 0735 404 245

Email: customercare@nacosti.go.ke or info@nacosti.go.ke

South African Health Products Regulatory Authority

As stated in the MRSA and ZAF-9, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) is the regulatory authority overseeing medicines and clinical research, as well as medical devices and radiation safety. As stated in the MRSA and GRMRSA, SAHPRA is responsible for clinical trial oversight, approval, and inspections in South Africa. The agency grants permission for clinical trials to be conducted in South Africa in accordance with the provisions of the GRMRSA.

Per the MRSA and ZAF-39, the SAHPRA is an independent, state-owned entity established to oversee the regulation of medicines in South Africa. According to ZAF-39, this agency is responsible for:

• The regulation of health products intended for human and animal use
• The licensing of manufacturers, wholesalers, and distributors of medicines and medical devices; radiation emitting devices; and radioactive nuclides
• The conduct of clinical trials in a manner that is compatible with national medicines policy

Per the MRSA, SAHPRA is a state-owned entity within the public administration but outside the public service. It acts through a Board appointed by South Africa’s Minister of the National Department of Health (NDOH). For details on the Board appointments, see ZAF-39 and ZAF-38.

As described in ZAF-39 and the SA-GCPs, SAHPRA is tasked with regulating (monitoring, evaluating, investigating, inspecting, and registering) all health products. This includes clinical trials, complementary medicines, medical devices, and in vitro diagnostics (IVDs). Its mission is to promote access to health products and protect human and animal health in South Africa through science-based regulatory decisions. Per ZAF-36, SAHPRA’s Clinical Trial Committee (CTC), within the Clinical Trial Unit, reviews clinical trial applications and bioequivalence studies for human participants and recommends approval of the conduct of clinical trials. SAHPRA also authorizes the importation of unregistered medicine for the purpose of conducting clinical trials. The SA-GCPs also states that SAHPRA is responsible for the following: ensuring efficient, effective, and ethical evaluation or assessment of health products that meet defined standards of quality, safety, efficacy, and performance; ensuring that the process of evaluating or assessing and registering health products is transparent, fair, objective, and concluded in a timely fashion; ensuring periodic re-evaluation and monitoring of health products; and conducting announced and unannounced inspections.

Other Considerations

Please note: South Africa is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (ZAF-8), 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 ZAF-34.

Contact Information

Per ZAF-35, SAHPRA’s postal address is:

South African Health Products Regulatory Authority
Private Bag X828
Pretoria
0001
South Africa

SAHPRA’s physical address is:

Building A
Loftus Park
402 Kirkness Street
Arcadia, Pretoria
South Africa

As provided in the G-CTA-Electronic and ZAF-36, the following are the SAHPRA Clinical Trial Unit emails:

New clinical trials application alert, responses to new clinical trial applications and related queries: ctcresponses@sahpra.org.za
Protocol amendments, responses to amendments and related queries: ctcamendments@sahpra.org.za
Additional investigators and sites, responses to additional and related queries: ctcinvestigators@sahpra.org.za
Bioequivalence (BE) studies, BE amendments, responses to BE studies and related queries: ctcbeprotocols@sahpra.org.za
Notifications and related queries: ctcnotifications@sahpra.org.za
Individual patient serious adverse events and related queries: ctcsaes@sahpra.org.za
Guidelines, forms, and related queries: ctcguidelines@sahpra.org.za

See ZAF-47 for clinical evaluation and management contacts.

Overview

In accordance with the PPA, the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, and KEN-21, Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB), together with its Expert Committee on Clinical Trials (ECCT), is responsible for reviewing, evaluating, and approving applications for clinical trials using registered or unregistered investigational products (IPs). The G-KenyaCT specifies that the scope of the PPB’s assessment includes all clinical trials (Phases I-IV). As delineated in the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, and KEN-21, the PPB review and approval process may not be conducted in parallel with the ethics committee (EC) review. Rather, EC approval must be obtained prior to applying for PPB approval. As delineated in the STI-Act and G-ECBiomedRes, the principal investigator or the head of a research institution must obtain a favorable opinion from an EC accredited by the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) and a NACOSTI research license prior to initiating a study.

Clinical Trial Review Process

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the PPB, through the ECCT, communicates the decision to approve, request additional information, or reject the application to the sponsor or the representative in writing within 30 working days of receiving a valid application. The G-KenyaCT indicates that in the case of rejection, the applicant may appeal and provide additional information to satisfy PPB requirements. In specific cases, the PPB may decide to refer the matter to external experts for recommendation.

As specified in the G-KenyaCT, each ECCT member, prior to reviewing the application, will declare any conflict of interest in the study and should have no financial or personal interests, which could affect their impartiality. During the protocol review, the reviewers must use the standard criteria (including available clinical and non-clinical data etc.) defined by the PPB. Confidentiality must be maintained during the review. Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the PPB/ECCT’s review must consider:

• The reliability and robustness of the data generated in the clinical trial, taking into account statistical approaches, design of the clinical trial, and methodology, including sample size and randomization, comparator, and endpoints
• Compliance with the requirements concerning the manufacturing and import of IPs and auxiliary medicinal products
• Compliance with the labelling requirements
• The completeness and adequateness of the investigator's brochure

Regarding protocol amendments, the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT stipulate that any new information affecting the conduct/management of the trial, safety of the participants, and manufacture of the IP necessitating changes to the protocol, consent form, and trial sites require immediate submission of the amended documents to PPB for review and approval. Arrangements must be in place to take appropriate urgent safety measures to protect participants against any immediate hazard where new events relating to the conduct of the trial, or the development of the IP are likely to affect the safety of the participants. A copy of a favorable opinion letter from the EC on record must be submitted with the request for approval of a proposed amendment to the PPB. PPB approval must be obtained for all substantial amendments. Minor amendments or administrative changes may be implemented after getting the EC’s approval, but a record of these amendments must be kept for possible inspection by the PPB. See Submission Process and Submission Content sections for additional details on amendment submissions. Also, see the G-KenyaCT for examples of substantial amendments.

In addition, per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor or the representative is required to request approval annually from the PPB at least six (6) weeks prior to the expiration of the previous approval.

Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the PPB may withdraw the authorization to conduct a clinical trial if it finds that the safety of the participants in the trial is compromised or that the scientific reasons for conducting the trial have changed. Additionally, per the CTRules, the PPB may revoke the approval if it determines that the IP has expired or is not usable.

As delineated in the G-KenyaCT, the PPB may inspect clinical trial sites to ensure that the generally accepted principles of good clinical practice (GCP) are met. The objectives of the inspection are to:

• Ensure that participants are not subjected to undue risks and that their rights, safety, and wellbeing are protected
• Validate the quality of the data generated
• Investigate complaints
• Verify the accuracy and reliability of clinical trial data submitted to the PPB in support of research or marketing applications
• Assess compliance with PPB guidelines and regulations governing the conduct of clinical trials
• Provide real-time assessment of ongoing trials

Per CRO-Inspect, the PPB is responsible for inspecting clinical trial and bioequivalence study sites that generate data for registration of medicines. The PPB requires that these sponsor and contract research organization sites comply with applicable good practices, including GCP, good laboratory practice (GLP), and good documentation practices. Based on risk assessments, the PPB will determine compliance with generally accepted good practice through inspections and, where appropriate, document reviews. In addition, see Cert-Emrgcy for information about GCP and good manufacturing practice certifications during emergencies.

Special Circumstances and Public Health Emergencies

The CTRules delineates that the PPB may, in special circumstances, authorize the conduct of a clinical trial under fast-track procedures or non-routine procedures. PPB may recognize and use clinical trial decisions, reports, or information from other competent authorities authorizing fast-track clinical trials. The special circumstances may include:

• A public health emergency
• The rapid spread of an epidemic disease
• Any other circumstance as may be determined by the PPB

The G-KenyaCT outlines PPB’s scope of assessment of a clinical trial application during a public health emergency. The PPB will conduct an expedited review and liaise with relevant stakeholders (including relevant ECs and other oversight bodies) to facilitate a holistic review of an application in a fast-track manner. The following prioritization criteria must be applied in the selection of applications for expedited review:

• Epidemiology of the emergency
• Morbidity and mortality associated with the emergency and/or condition under study
• Supporting scientific data/information available for the IP at the time of submission
• Feasibility of the implementation of the trial design within the context of the emergency
• Benefit impact of the intervention and/or trial design

In addition, PPB’s assessment will consider the following:

• The research does not compromise the response to an outbreak or appropriate care
• Studies are designed to yield scientifically valid results under the challenging and often rapidly evolving conditions of disasters and disease outbreak
• The research is responsive to the health needs or priorities of the disaster victims and affected communities and cannot be conducted outside a disaster situation
• The participants are selected fairly and adequate justification is given when particular populations are targeted or excluded, for example, health workers
• The potential burdens and benefits of research participation and the possible benefits of the research are equitably distributed
• The risks and potential individual benefits of experimental interventions are assessed realistically, especially when they are in the early phases of development
• Communities are actively engaged in study planning to ensure cultural sensitivity, while recognizing and addressing the associated practical challenges
• The individual informed consent of participants is obtained from individuals capable of giving informed consent
• Research results are disseminated, data are shared, and any effective interventions developed or knowledge generated are made available to the affected communities

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

STI-Act stipulates that NACOSTI issues research licenses if it finds that the conduct of the research is beneficial to the country and will not adversely affect any aspect of the nature, environment, or security of the country. The license issued will have NACOSTI’s seal and will indicate the commencement and expiration of the research. In addition, NACOSTI maintains a register of all persons granted a license, which is available for public inspection during normal working hours free of charge.

KEN-31 states that if a research license application does not meet the conditions required under the STI-Act, NACOSTI must reject the application and communicate the reasons to the applicant. Any person may appeal NACOSTI’s decision to the Cabinet Secretary within 30 days of being notified of the decision. For approved research, NACOSTI may conduct an evaluation to assess compliance with the conditions of the license. If the research project has not been completed within the stipulated period, the researcher may apply for renewal of the license and pay the requisite fee. The researcher is expected to apply for renewal by attaching a progress report instead of a proposal. KEN-31 indicates that the duration of the research license is one (1) year.

Overview

In accordance with the GRMRSA, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) is responsible for reviewing and approving all clinical trial applications for an unregistered medicine, and for any new indication or dosage regimen of a registered medicine. The scope of the SAHPRA’s assessment includes all clinical trials (Phases I-IV) and bioequivalence/bioavailability studies. Per ZAF-23, the review and approval of clinical trial applications by SAHPRA and a registered ethics committee (EC) may be conducted in parallel. However, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF recommends that scientific review be completed prior to ethics review, and in cases where scientific review capacity is not available, the EC approval should be delayed until SAHPRA scientific approval has been provided.

ZAF-36 states that the SAHPRA’s Clinical Trial Unit (CTU) provides the legal framework for the review of clinical trials and bioequivalence studies for human participants and recommends approval of the conduct of clinical trials. The unit also authorizes the importation of unregistered medicines for the purpose of conducting clinical trials. As per G-GenInfo, the CTU is responsible for the evaluation of clinical trial applications, clinical trial amendments, and adverse event reports arising from a clinical trial.

Clinical Trial Review Process

Per ZAF-36, the CTU of SAHPRA receives, processes, and evaluates clinical trial applications and any subsequent amendments for approval to conduct a study within South Africa. Researchers must submit a completed application and the prescribed fee on predetermined dates (ZAF-11). The proof of delivery, proof of payments, and cover page must be sent to SAHPRA via email.

As stated in ZAF-36, the CTU completes a preliminary screening of the application and sends an official letter to the applicant with the outcome and follow-up questions on a screening checklist. As indicated in ZAF-23, incomplete documentation or sub-standard submissions will be rejected. Additionally, applications submitted without clinical trial insurance will be rejected. Applicants will be allowed a maximum of two (2) rounds of queries to respond to, and if the responses are not satisfactory, the application will be rejected. Per ZAF-36, if an application is rejected, no response is required; the screening checklist should be used as guidance for resubmission during the next review cycle. Next, the CTU’s Clinical Trial Committee (CTC) (which includes an expert committee of specialists, as needed) reviews the proposed clinical trials pursuant to the schedule on SAHPRA’s website. (See ZAF-11 for 2025 dates). Per ZAF-1, clinical trial reviews will result in one (1) of the following outcomes:

• Category 1A: Approved; no items pending
• Category 1B: Approved; ethics approval pending
• Category 2A: Not approved; for approval by in-house evaluators, 1-2 or more items outstanding as deemed by the committee
• Category 2B: Not approved; for approval by the original evaluator and in-house if a need arises
• Category 3: Not approved; items outstanding to be discussed at the next CTC meeting
• Category 4: Not approved; for referral for specialist opinion
• Category 5: Not approved – technical/scientific deficiencies; applicant to resubmit for the next cycle
• Category 6: Rejected due to administrative and technical items outstanding; applicant to resubmit for the next cycle

If an applicant would like to request a meeting with the CTC, the request should be submitted through the SAHPRA Chief Executive Office pursuant to the procedures in the G-ConsultMtg.

Other Considerations

Per the G-Capacity, SAHPRA will also review clinical trial applications for evidence of plans to build capacity at each study site as well as enhancing research activities and skills of professionals from historically disadvantaged groups. See G-Capacity for detailed information on actions that will comply with this requirement.

In addition, see G-Clin for South Africa's use of a “reliance model” to register medicines based on clinical trial data from other regulatory authorities.

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

Per the PPA and the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor or the representative is responsible for paying a fee to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) to submit a clinical trial application for authorization. The PPB currently requires a non-refundable application fee of $1,000 USD, or the equivalent in Kenya Shillings at the prevailing bank rates.

Payment Instructions

As stated in Annex 2 of the G-KenyaCT, payment is to be made by a bank check payable to the “Pharmacy and Poisons Board” and presented to the PPB’s accounts office upon submitting the application.

Payment can also be made by electronic fund transfer (EFT) to the PPB Bank account, if required. The sponsor or the representative is responsible for all bank charges associated with the EFT. Details of the EFT payment should be obtained from the PPB prior to initiating such a transaction.

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

As delineated in KEN-31, the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) charges a fee that varies depending on the applicant’s status as Kenyan or non-Kenyan, and standing as a researcher (i.e., student, public/private institution, private company). The fees are non-refundable and also apply to research license renewals. Details on additional requirements are provided in the Submission Content section.

• Student, Undergraduate/Diploma: East African Community (EAC) Countries – 100 Kenya Shillings; Kenyan Citizens – 100 Kenya Shillings; Rest of Africa – 200 Kenya Shillings; Non-Africans - $150 USD
• Research (Masters): EAC Countries – 1,000 Kenya Shillings; Kenyan Citizens – 1,000 Kenya Shillings; Rest of Africa – 2,000 Kenya Shillings; Non-Africans - $350 USD
• Research (PhD): EAC Countries – 2,000 Kenya Shillings; Kenyan Citizens – 2,000 Kenya Shillings; Rest of Africa – 4,000 Kenya Shillings; Non-Africans - $400 USD
• Post-Doctoral: EAC Countries – 5,000 Kenya Shillings; Kenyan Citizens – 5,000 Kenya Shillings; Rest of Africa – 10,000 Kenya Shillings; Non-Africans - $500 USD
• Public Institutions: Kenyan Citizens – 10,000 Kenya Shillings
• Private Institutions, Commercial/Market Research, Companies: Kenyan Citizens – 20,000 Kenya Shillings

See KEN-31 for information on service charges.

Payment Instructions

Per KEN-31, NACOSTI has migrated payment services for research licensing to the eCitizen platform (KEN-12). East African citizens have the following payment options on KEN-12 with a Kenya Shillings account: mobile money via Mpesa Express or Paybill Number 222222; or these other available payments via KEN-12:

• Airtel Money
• Kenya Commercial Bank
• Co-operative Bank
• Pesaflow Direct
• National Bank
• RTGS

KEN-31 indicates that non-Kenyans should use the US Dollar account on KEN-12 with these payment options:

• Kenya Commercial Bank (USD)
• Co-operative Bank (USD)
• NBK (USD)
• Equity Cash
• Debit/credit/prepaid card

South African Health Products Regulatory Authority

Per the MRSA, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) is authorized to make regulations to collect fees for its various medicine regulatory functions. As delineated in the MRSA-Fees and ZAF-37, applicants are responsible for paying several non-refundable fees to submit a clinical trial application. MRSA-Fees delineates the following fees:

For a clinical trial application for the authorization of the use of unregistered medicines:

• Clinical trial application (safety and efficacy): South African Rand (R)32 400
• Clinical trial application (bioequivalence study): R30 400
• Clinical trial application (postgraduate study): R10 800
• Any other clinical trial application: R5 000

For amendments to clinical trials:

• Technical amendment applications: R7 000
• Administrative amendment applications: R4 100
• Any other application except for the purpose of performing a clinical trial: R350

For licenses:

• New manufacturing license: R25 200
• New import/export license to the holder of certificate of registration: R15 000
• Renewal of manufacturing license: R22 000
• Renewal of import license to the holder of the certificate of registration: R9 200
• Renewal of export license to the holder of the certificate of registration: R9 200
• Annual retention of all licenses: R4 200

For inspections to assess the quality, safety, and efficacy of medicines:

• Local and international manufacturing sites: R1 600 per hour
• Local and international clinical trial sites: R1 600 per hour

Payment Instructions

Per the G-SAHPRAFees, when making payments, applicants should follow these guidelines:

• Applicants should submit a cover page that identifies the services requested using the template provided in ZAF-37
• Payments should be referenced in accordance with the SAHPRA Fee Categorization Guideline (Annexure A of G-SAHPRAFees)
• If the applicable bank limits reference spacing, follow the sequence listed in Annexure A as far as the limitation allows; spacing and dashes (/) may be omitted
• Fee payments may be transferred directly into the bank account of SAHPRA via an electronic or manual deposit process
• No check payments will be accepted
• For administrative control purposes, applicants should make one (1) payment per service
• Payment should only be made once the application and required dossiers are ready for submission
• Payments do not have to be made upon request of an application number; however, the applications and required dossiers should be submitted within a reasonable time upon receipt of an application number or as specified in the relevant application guidelines
• As soon as the fee payment has been made, the proof of payment and cover page should be attached and sent via email to SAHPRA Finance at pop@sahpra.org.za, and the relevant unit(s) processing the application should be copied on the email.
• If the proof of payment has not been submitted, or no details to identify the payment reference as per the G-SAHPRAFees have been provided, and any further attempts to clear these payments fail after 12 months, any liability for SAHPRA to refund these payments will be forfeited
• If a payment has been received without an application, the applicant will be notified to submit the required application within 14 working days, failing which, the amount will be forfeited
• Requests for refunds should be submitted in line with Annex B in the G-SAHPRAFees
• Payment and pro forma invoice queries and requests can be directed to finance@sahpra.org.za or 012 501 0323
• See the G-SAHPRAFees for details on special requests for extensions to the deadline

Per the G-SAHPRAFees, the bank and account details are as follows:

Account name: South African Health Products Regulatory Authority
Special Name: The Medicines Control Council
Account type: Cheque/Current Account
Account number: 40-5939-2080
Bank: ABSA
Bank Branch Code: 632005
Bank physical address: 240 Vermeulen Street, Pretoria, 0001, South Africa
Swift Code: ABSAZAJJ

Fee payment questions can be directed to finance@sahpra.org.za or 012 501 0470.

Overview

As per the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-30, Kenya requires an independent review of research through a National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)-accredited ethics committee (EC) in one (1) of the local institutions charged with the responsibility of conducting research in human participants. KEN-25 provides a list of the accredited institutional ECs.

Ethics Committee Composition

As delineated in the G-ECAccred, institutional ECs should consist of at least seven (7) members, or an odd number above seven (7). The G-ECBiomedRes states that these members should be multidisciplinary and multisectoral in composition, collectively encompass relevant scientific expertise, balanced age and gender distribution, and include laypersons representing community interests and concerns. Per the G-ECAccred, the composition should meet the following requirements:

• At least one (1) member with knowledge and understanding of Kenyan law
• At least one-third of the members must be female, and one-third must be male
• At least one (1) member who is unaffiliated with the institution
• At least two (2) members must have research expertise and experience, one (1) of whom must be in the health field
• At least one (1) member must be a lay member
• For ECs reviewing clinical research, at least two (2) members must be clinicians, one (1) of whom is currently in active practice or clinical research
• Reflect the regional and ethnic diversity of the people of Kenya

The chairperson must also have some basic training and/or experience in bioethics and leadership. All EC appointments are the responsibility of the institution’s administrative head. See the G-ECAccred and the G-ECBiomedRes for detailed institutional EC requirements.

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

Per G-ECBiomedRes, ECs need to have independence from political, institutional, professional, and market influences. As delineated in the G-ECAccred, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the STI-Regs, institutional ECs must operate within written standard operating procedures (SOPs) which delineate the EC’s process for conducting reviews. Per the G-ECAccred, SOPs should include but are not limited to information on EC scope, responsibility, and objectives, institutions served, committee functions, terms and conditions of member appointment, business procedures including meeting schedules and types of reviews, documentation, recordkeeping, and archiving procedures, quorum requirements, communication procedures, and complaint process and dispute resolution procedures. Per the G-ECAccred and the STI-Regs, these documents must be provided to NACOSTI.

Per the G-ECAccred, the quorum for NACOSTI-accredited EC meetings must be:

• At least 50 percent of the membership must form the quorum
• A lay person must be present in all meetings
• For ECs reviewing clinical research, at least two (2) members must be clinicians, one (1) of whom is currently in active practice or clinical research.

The G-ECBiomedRes also defines quorum requirements:

• The minimum number of members required to compose a quorum (e.g., more than half the members)
• The professional qualifications requirements (e.g., physician, lawyer, statistician, paramedical, or layperson) and the distribution of those requirements over the quorum; no quorum should consist entirely of members of one (1) profession or one (1) gender; a quorum should include at least one (1) member whose primary area of expertise is in a non-scientific area, and at least one (1) member who is independent of the institution/research site

Per G-ECBiomedRes, EC member terms of appointment should be established that include the duration of an appointment, the policy for the renewal of an appointment, the disqualification procedure, the resignation procedure, and the replacement procedure. A statement of the conditions of appointment should be drawn up that includes the following:

• A member should be willing to publicize their full name, profession, and affiliation
• All reimbursement for work and expenses, if any, within or related to an EC should be recorded and made available to the public upon request
• A member should sign a confidentiality agreement regarding meeting deliberations, applications, information on research participants, and related matters

Regarding training, EC members should have initial and continued education regarding the ethics and science of biomedical research. The conditions of appointment should indicate the availability and requirements of introductory training, as well as on-going continuing education. This education may be linked to cooperative arrangements with other ECs in the area, country, and region.

For detailed institutional EC requirements and information on other administrative processes, see the G-ECAccred and the G-ECBiomedRes. See KEN-17 and KEN-26 for examples of accredited EC submission and review guidelines.

Overview

As stipulated in the NHA, ethics committees (ECs) in South Africa are governed by the National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC), which is a statutory body established under the NHA. NHREC determines guidelines for the functioning of ECs and registers and audits ECs, among other functions. Further, according to the NHA and ZAF-52, NHREC gives direction on ethical issues relating to health and develops guidelines for the conduct of research involving humans and animals. As delineated in the NHA, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, and the SA-GCPs, all ECs are required to register with the NHREC in order to undertake the ethical review of a clinical study.

The NHA and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF require that every institution, health agency, and health establishment at which research is conducted establish an EC or have access to an independent EC that is registered with the NHREC. Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, researchers without affiliation to an institution or organization with an EC should approach a registered EC to request it to review their health research protocols.

Ethics Committee Composition

As delineated in the SA-GCPs and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, an EC must consist of members who collectively encompass the qualifications and experience required to review and evaluate the scientific, medical, and ethical aspects of all proposed research studies. Further, per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ECs should be independent, multidisciplinary, multi-sectoral, and pluralistic. In general terms, membership should include the following:

• As many disciplines, sectors, and professions as possible, appropriate to the remit of the specific EC
• Members from diverse age groups and academic or professional ranks
• Ethnically and culturally diverse members and an appropriate mix of genders
• Lay persons
• Researchers who do not conduct human participant research or animal use research

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that subject to institutional requirements, a chairperson could be appointed or elected at the first meeting of a newly constituted EC. Alternatively, the chairperson could be appointed by the institutional leadership for a period of three (3) to five (5) years, renewable once, if so specified in the terms of reference. The chairperson must have experience in research methodology and research ethics, should have at least two (2) years’ experience as an EC member and should have leadership experience. If the chairperson is an external appointee, the institution must provide the chairperson with the necessary support and authority to perform the role. The chairperson should be assisted by at least one (1) deputy chairperson, who is elected by the EC members and assists the chairperson and serves as the role of chairperson when necessary.

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the composition of ECs should promote optimal human participant welfare, research integrity (including data robustness and scientific validity), defendable significance of proposed research questions (including translatability of scientific findings into practice, where applicable), as well as legal, professional, and regulatory compliance. All EC members should have documented proof (i.e., evidence) of research ethics training, refreshed at least once. EC membership should consist of:

• A minimum of nine (9) members with a quorum being a simple majority; where the number of members is more than 15, the quorum may be 33%
• At least one (1) layperson
• At least one (1) member with knowledge of, and current experience in, the professional care, counselling, or health-related treatment of people, (e.g., a social worker, nurse, psychologist, or medical practitioner)
• At least one (1) member with professional training and experience in qualitative research methodologies
• Members with professional training and experience in quantitative research methodologies
• A member with expertise in biostatistics
• A member with expertise in research ethics
• At least one (1) member who is legally qualified and has extensive knowledge of family law, health law, and research ethics

Terms of Reference, Review Procedures, and Meeting Schedule

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, when appointing EC members, institutions should be mindful of the need for ECs to develop institutional memory among the membership as well as to ensure succession planning. Members of ECs should be appointed formally for periods of three (3) to five (5) years, renewable once, after which the member should step down for at least one (1) term. Appointments should overlap so that no more than half the committee membership is new at any one appointment time. ECs should have standard operating procedures (SOP) that specify meeting attendance expectations, possible sanctions if attendance is poor, expectations for promptness of reviews, preparation for meetings, agenda, minutes, etc. ECs must define the review timelines in their SOPs. The appointment letter should describe the essential expectations of membership. ECs should provide induction training for new members that includes discussion of the role of EC members, the code of conduct, expectations of integrity, and confidentiality. Each EC should also have terms of reference that include the delegated and inherent authority as well as the scope of the EC's authority, its responsibilities, its relationship to non-affiliated researchers, its accountability responsibilities, and the mechanisms for reporting and remuneration, if any, for members. See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for a sample terms of reference.

In addition, per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, EC members are expected to familiarize themselves with the institutional documentation, as well as the national and relevant international research ethics guidelines, and should have documented proof of such familiarity, e.g., an assessment of training certificate, not a mere attendance certificate. See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for additional training requirements. The SA-GCPs stipulate that EC members who review clinical trial proposals should have research ethics training and good clinical practice training, evidenced by certificates issued in the last three (3) years.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that it is important for ECs to have clear SOPs that clarify the expectations about EC members’ review responsibilities. For EC meetings, the quorum should be a simple majority, and where the number of members is more than 15, the quorum may be 33%.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, institutions must have a Code of Conduct for EC members, which details the conduct and integrity expectations of members, including regular and punctual attendance at meetings, diligent performance of responsibilities, maintenance of confidentiality, and management of potential conflicts of interest. The induction process for new members should require that they sign the Code of Conduct to indicate they know and understand the expectations. (See A2.6 Code of Conduct for REC members sample.) Institutions must also ensure there is a formal appointment letter for EC members that sets out the term of office and the assurance that members are indemnified from personal liability against claims that may arise in the course of ordinary business of the EC.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ECs should correspond primarily with the principal investigator (PI) or a delegated signatory, and not with the sponsor unless dictated by specific circumstances. EC members should disclose information that may lead to potential, actual, and perceptions of conflict of interest. EC members should not review or make decisions about research protocols in which they are involved personally (including as supervisor of a student) or financially. When such a protocol is to be discussed, the member concerned must declare the potential conflict and offer to recuse themselves from the meeting for that time. Should the member be permitted to remain for the discussion at the discretion of the chairperson (e.g., to facilitate clarifications), the member must leave the meeting for the duration of the final decision-making discussion concerning the application in question. EC members and ad hoc reviewers must not use the ethics review process to impose personal biases, professional jealousy, or territorial protection conduct about an applicant's protocol, including about research methods or the topic. If applicants pay fees for the ethics review service, this must not negatively affect the rigor of reviews, the integrity of the process, or the capacity to monitor the research that the EC approves. The EC should be alert to whether an advocate for special interest groups of participants proposed for specific research would add value to the review process for informed responsible decision-making in the context. The EC should be alert to the potential for poor consent processes in the absence of appropriately translated materials and the availability of interpreters.

Regarding archiving and record keeping, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that ECs should keep written records of all research protocols received for review, including information sheets, consent forms, and relevant correspondence, in the form in which they were approved. Electronic records are acceptable, provided the signatures, especially on the finally approved documentation, are properly documented and included in the record. EC records must provide a reliable and authoritative record of the business of the EC that will stand up to scrutiny in the event of queries, conflict, and audit. The record should include at least the following:

• Name of PI
• Protocol identification number
• Title of the project
• Date of approval or rejection
• Duration of approval period (maximum 12 months, renewable)
• Conditions of approval, if applicable
• Whether approval was expedited
• Copy of the signed final protocol or protocol approved
• Whether and how consultation occurred
• Records of adverse events
• Records of amendments
• Reports of adverse and serious adverse events and action taken
• Other relevant information such as complaints from participants

Per the SA-GCPs, the EC should retain all relevant records for a period of at least three (3) years or as per institutional requirement, whichever period is longer, after completion of the trial and make them available upon request from the applicable regulatory authority.

Overview

According to G-ECBiomedRes, the primary scope of information assessed by the institutional 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. The G-ECAccred further states that the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) accredits ECs in order to uphold the standard of ethics review in the country; develop public confidence and trust in the national research system; facilitate equitable access to research and human health records in health facilities; and facilitate coordination and collaboration among ECs. See the G-ECAccred and the G-ECBiomedRes for detailed ethical review guidelines.

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

As per the G-KenyaCT and KEN-21, the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB)’s review and approval of a clinical trial application is dependent upon obtaining approval by an accredited institutional EC. Consequently, the PPB and EC reviews may not be conducted in parallel.

As set forth in the G-ECBiomedRes, ECs must be constituted to ensure an independent and competent review and evaluation of all ethical aspects of clinical trials. ECs must review research involving human participants to ensure they meet these ethical principles:

• Respect for persons, including respect of autonomy, protection of vulnerable groups, and protection of privacy and confidentiality
• Beneficence
• Justice, which in research means equitable distribution of the benefits and the burdens

For additional details on the principles and benchmarks for ethical review, see G-ECBiomedRes.

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, expedited review may be permitted for protocols involving no more than minimal risk to research participants.

The G-ECBiomedRes indicates that all ECs should carry out regular monitoring of approved protocols involving human participants. In case of any adverse events, the EC should report this immediately to Kenya’s National Bioethics Committee (NBC).

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, with collaborative research projects, the collaborating investigators, institutions, and countries must function as equal partners with safeguards to avoid exploitation of local researchers and participants. An external sponsoring agency should submit the research protocol to their country’s EC, as well as the Kenyan EC where the research is to be conducted. Further, this research must be responsive to the health needs of Kenya and reasonably accessible to the community in which the research was conducted. Consideration should be given to the sponsoring agency agreeing to maintain health services and faculties established for the purposes of the study in Kenya after the research has been completed. Such collaborative research must have a local/Kenyan co-principal investigator.

Overview

Per the SA-GCPs, clinical trials should be conducted in accordance with all ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (ZAF-44) and consistent with good clinical practice and other applicable regulatory requirements. In accordance with the NHA, the SA-GCPs, and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ethics committees (ECs) must evaluate the ethical and scientific rigor of all research studies to be conducted in the country. An EC’s primary responsibilities are to (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Review protocols to ensure that research involving human participants has scientific merit and will promote health, and prevent or cure disability and disease; in addition, ensure the research has social merit in light of South Africa’s research priorities or is otherwise justified
• Ensure clinical trials are governed by the ethical principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, distributive justice (equity), and respect for persons (dignity and autonomy)
• Uphold the key norms for ethical research with human participants including relevance and value; scientific integrity; stakeholder engagement; fair selection of participants; informed consent; ongoing respect for enrolled participants; and researcher competence and expertise
• Grant approval for research where the protocols meet the ethical standards of the institution, agency, or establishment
• Determine whether and why randomization is relevant, and how this is addressed
• Evaluate the appropriateness of the inclusion/exclusion criteria and the recruitment process in the South African context
• Ensure the feasibility of obtaining meaningful results with the lowest possible risk of harm for participants and whether the risk of harm is appropriately weighed against anticipated benefits for participants or the class of persons from which they are drawn; high risk of harm may be justifiable where the anticipated benefit is of high importance to increase relevant knowledge and appropriate mitigating measures are in place to minimize harm to participants; and attention must be given to harms and benefits beyond the life of the trial itself, especially in respect to early phase studies and (pharmacovigilance) surveillance for chronic and life-threatening conditions
• Protect the welfare of certain classes of participants deemed to be vulnerable (See the Informed Consent topic for additional information about these populations).

Role in Clinical Trial Approval Process

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the SA-GCPs, and the NHAParticipants, the principal investigator (PI) or the sponsor must submit a clinical trial application to both the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and a registered EC for review and approval before a study may commence. Per ZAF-23, the review and approval of clinical trial applications by SAHPRA and a registered EC may be conducted in parallel. However, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF recommends that scientific review be completed prior to ethics review and, in cases where scientific review capacity is not available, the EC approval should be delayed until SAHPRA scientific approval has been provided. Further, where site permissions are required, e.g., from Provincial Health Research Committees (PHRCs) or superintendents, to conduct research in health care facilities, ECs must delay granting full approval until these permissions are received. This is to prevent research from beginning before the facility knows it will happen.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF indicates that after the deliberative review process, the EC should approve, require amendment to, or reject a research protocol. In considering a research protocol, the EC may seek assistance from experts who have no conflicts of interest. EC decisions should be recorded in writing and appropriately documented in the minutes. A decision to approve should include the conditions (e.g., the duration of the approval, the reporting requirements, etc.). Reasons for a decision to require an amendment or to reject a research protocol should be recorded and provide sufficient feedback to the applicant. Outright rejection should be avoided if a researcher can be advised to improve the protocol. Researchers should be encouraged to address the concerns and improve their protocols. In addition, feedback should include the expected return date to minimize delays to finalize the approval process. The maximum time for a return date should not exceed six (6) months. Should the applicant exceed the stipulated return date without communication to the EC, the application should be removed from the agenda, and a new application must be submitted. ECs should require researchers to report immediately if a project is terminated or suspended before the anticipated date of completion. ECs should require researchers to report immediately anything that might warrant reconsideration of ethical approval of the protocol, including but not limited to:

• Serious or unexpected adverse effects on participants
• Proposed changes in the protocol
• Unforeseen events that might affect continued ethical acceptability of the project

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, to prevent unnecessary duplication of work, ECs may, at their own discretion, recognize the review and approval of a research protocol granted by another registered South African EC. Reciprocal recognition means that two (2) or more registered ECs decide to recognize each other’s review. This arrangement may involve formal agreements between the ECs explaining how the workload and responsibilities are shared and the basis on which recognition occurs. Alternatively, the committee may decide to use reciprocity recognition on a case-by-case basis. ECs that recognize reciprocal review agree on the nature of the documents to be filed at each office. The expectation is that ECs should communicate with each other, through their chairpersons, and agree on a way forward regarding review of a multi-site protocol when it is desirable to avoid duplication of effort. The possibility of reciprocal recognition of reviews should occur in a collaborative, harmonious manner, bearing in mind that each EC retains the responsibility of protecting the safety, rights, and interests of participants enrolled in the studies it has approved. For more details on reciprocal review, see the G-EthicsHR-ZAF.

The SA-GCPs requires the EC’s approval of the following before the clinical trial may begin: protocol and any amendments; case report form, if applicable; informed consent form(s); any other written information to be provided to the participants; advertisement for participant recruitment (if used); participant compensation; and any other documents given approval/favorable opinion.

The SA-GCPs mandate that the sponsor receive confirmation of EC review from the investigator(s) or institution(s). The sponsor must receive the following information prior to the trial’s commencement:

• The name and address of the relevant EC registered with National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC), with its documented approval
• If EC approval is conditional on required modifications, a copy of the modification(s) made and the date the final approval was granted by the EC
• Documentation and dates of any EC re-approvals/re-evaluations

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF and ZAF-20, if there is an amendment to the protocol, the sponsor must notify the EC and get its approval. This approval should be sent to the SAHPRA using the Application for Protocol Amendment to an Approved Trial (ZAF-20).

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ECs have the right to monitor the research it approves. The frequency and type of monitoring should reflect the degree and extent of risk of harm to participants. Monitoring types include passive and active measures. Active monitoring requires a site visit. Passive monitoring is generally paper, using reports and other information. A site visit is expected for investigation of adverse events, serious adverse events for high-risk research, as well as other occurrences that prompt concerns for ECs. The EC should ensure that appropriate feedback is given to the PI, with an opportunity to address any identified gaps within a negotiated timeline. ECs may recommend and adopt any additional appropriate mechanism for monitoring, including random inspection of research sites, welfare monitoring sheets, data and signed consent forms, and records of interviews. ECs should ensure information and consent materials indicate that such monitoring may take place. Further, ECs should request regular, at least annual, reports from PIs. See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for more details including the report requirements.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that where circumstances indicate that a project is non-compliant with the approved protocol and the interests of participants are at risk of harm, the EC may withdraw approval, after due process has been followed. A clear process should be followed that permits swift but proper investigation and decision-making to ensure protection of participants. The investigation should include interaction with the researchers and other interested parties to ensure a fair and transparent process. If the decision is to withdraw approval, the EC should inform the PI and other interested parties, including the institutional authorities, and recommend suspension (temporary stoppage) or termination (permanent stoppage) of the project. It should also recommend remedial action where appropriate. In the case of suspension, the PI must comply with the recommendations and any special conditions imposed by the EC.

Expedited Review

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, expedited review applies, in principle, only to research that poses no more than minimal risk of harm. Generally, expedited review means that no fewer than two (2) EC members review the protocol and that deliberation in the full committee meeting is foregone, unless the reviewers believe there are issues that the EC should discuss. The nature of research that may be expedited should be described in the procedures. The outcomes of the expedited review process must be reported to the full committee, at least by being noted on the agenda, so that the record is complete.

Rapid Review

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, rapid review process permits rapid but thorough processing of ethics review applications in circumstances that require accelerated preparation for a research study or project, for example when there is a national or localized emergency. The EC should carefully assess the nature of the research to determine the appropriate review process, bearing in mind that not all research during a major incident is necessarily urgent. Careful ethical reflection is essential, notwithstanding any perceived urgency. All the usual ethical norms and standards must be considered. The EC should have a review standard operating procedure (SOP) that allows a combination of rapid but thorough review and reciprocal recognition of review (see above) by other registered ECs. The SOP might stipulate that a small group of reviewers (3-5 persons) with appropriate expertise reviews the protocol. The deliberations and outcome of the process must be documented in minutes and reported to the full EC at its next meeting.

Joint Review

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF allows joint reviews wherein two (2) or more ECs review a multi-site research protocol together. The sites may be within South Africa or may include sites elsewhere on the African continent. A joint review is not the same as a reciprocally recognized review (described above). A joint review entails members of the ECs concerned communicating virtually or face-to-face to discuss their respective reviews and queries and come to conclusions. The joint review process permits efficiency of reviews, facilitation of capacity building, development of trust, and avoids unnecessary repetition of administrative work. When deliberations are completed and a decision to approve has been reached, each EC uses its own approval SOPs and processes. Joint review does not exempt any of the ECs involved from their responsibilities, including monitoring and looking after the interests of participants at their sites. The PIs concerned are responsible for informing their institutional EC of the fact of multi-site research, as well as the names of the other ECs with jurisdiction over other research sites. This information enables the chairs of the ECs to arrange a joint meeting of the ECs involved to review, deliberate on, and approve the protocol concerned simultaneously. Joint reviews involving South African and other African ECs can be used in a similar manner to facilitate the ethics review and approval processes. A memorandum of understanding is recommended between the ECs involved that outlines the process, the expectations, and the responsibilities.

Foreign Research Collaboration

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF indicates that where international research (multi-country studies) is conducted exclusively online or the online platform is used to recruit study participants, and the PI neither lives or works in South Africa, an exemption from ethics review and approval is possible. This is on the proviso that the PI can demonstrate to a local registered EC that permission has been obtained from the website owners and that a notice of research intent is posted on the relevant website. In addition, the PI must comply with the privacy policies and terms of website use, and with personal data protection requirements in the POPIA. (See the Personal Data Protection section for more information).

Artificial Intelligence

Per G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ECs must consider the following ethical considerations when reviewing protocols that involve the use of artificial intelligence (AI):

• Transparency in the context of AI necessitates openness and clarity at every phase of the research
• Researchers should explain how interpretable these models are, how this interpretation is communicated to a user, and to what extent interpretation is possible
• Responsibility and accountability—Researchers should have a sufficient understanding of the AI model/technology and take responsibility for its use. Information on technical engineering perspectives should be made available for the ECs conducting the review. The ethical and responsible use and deployment of AI tools remain the responsibility of the PI to ensure the protection of research participants’ data
• Equity and fairness—AI tools must be designed and implemented equitably and without unfair discrimination against any individual or group. Special attention should be given to vulnerable and historically underrepresented populations. Researchers should actively involve diverse participant groups in the design and testing phases to ensure fairness and representation. Additionally, algorithms should be assessed regularly for bias, and any discovered discrepancies should be promptly addressed and rectified
• Benefit sharing, with particular attention to the needs and contributions of low-income communities, should be considered. Evidence of fostering equitable and collective sharing of the benefits and burdens of research must be presented to the EC
• Safety risks and well as vulnerabilities to attack (security risks) should be addressed, prevented, and eliminated throughout the lifecycle of an AI system
• Researchers must prioritize safety in the implementation of AI-enabled systems, with thorough assessments of the risk of harm and strategies for mitigation

See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for detailed guidance on the above AI considerations.

As per the G-KenyaCT, G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-30, Kenya requires an independent review of research through a National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)-accredited ethics committee (EC) in one (1) of the local institutions charged with the responsibility of conducting research in human participants. The EC fee to review a clinical trial application will vary depending on the institution. See KEN-25 and KEN-38 for lists of NACOSTI-accredited institutional ECs. For an example of institutional fee requirements charged by the Scientific and Ethics Review Unit (SERU) at the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI), see KEN-27.

As indicated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ethics committees (ECs) may independently decide whether to charge fees for a protocol review for external researchers. Researchers without affiliation to an institution or organization with an EC should approach a registered EC to request it to review their health research protocols. If the EC is willing to review external applications, a fee for service may be levied.

Overview

As set forth in the STI-Act and KEN-32, the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) is the central body responsible for the oversight, promotion, and coordination of research. NACOSTI’s role is to regulate and ensure quality in the science, technology, and innovation sector, and to advise the Kenyan government on related matters. As per the G-ECAccred, NACOSTI has delegated the task of reviewing research proposals for ethical clearance to accredited institutional ethics committees (ECs) to ensure that research conducted in the country observes high research ethics standards.

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, Kenya's National Bioethics Committee (NBC) advises NACOSTI on research ethics. In addition, NBC offers dispute resolution if an applicant is dissatisfied with the decision of an EC. Finally, the NBC must terminate research at any stage if it is found to be harmful to the participants.

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

As per the STI-Regs and the G-ECAccred, NACOSTI is responsible for accrediting institutional ECs. Per the G-ECAccred, the application requirements for accreditation are:

• A completed application form (KEN-10 or Annex III of the G-ECAccred)
• Copy of the standard operating procedures (SOPs)
• Copies of abridged curriculum vitaes (CVs) (no more than four (4) pages) for each member of the proposed EC (including the training attended)
• Profile of the organization/institution detailing the areas of competence (no more than four (4) pages)

Upon creating an account in NACOSTI’s Kenya National Research Information System (KENRIS) (KEN-23), users can perform the following functions:

• Researchers: Apply for researcher registration, register and track applications, and maintain research profile
• Research Institutions: Apply for new research institution registration, maintain/update data, and submit annual reports
• Institutional ECs: Apply for accreditation, preview and track accreditation proposals, submit annual reports, and maintain/update data

Per the G-ECAccred, NACOSTI issues a certificate of accreditation to accredited institutional ECs, which is valid for three (3) years from the date of NACOSTI’s notification. All accredited ECs must submit annual reports to NACOSTI by July 31st for review and monitoring. Applications for renewal of accreditation should be made six (6) months before expiry of the accreditation period. Failure to renew accreditation or failure to maintain the appropriate standards for continuity of accreditation will mean that the accredited status of the EC will lapse at the end of the current accreditation period. Accreditation must be terminated if the accredited committee fails to maintain the required standards. For re-accreditation review purposes, ECs must provide the SOPs under which they will operate. The SOPs are not required as part of the annual reporting process, unless they have been amended, but are required to be stated/included for the re-accreditation review process (every three (3) years). See the G-ECAccred for additional details on the accreditation process.

See the Site/Investigator Selection section for more information on the sponsor and site’s registration and application requirements.

Overview

As stipulated in the NHA, ethics committees (ECs) in South Africa are governed by the National Health Research Ethics Council (NHREC), which is a statutory body established under the NHA. NHREC determines guidelines for the functioning of ECs and registers and audits ECs, among other functions. The NHREC was created by the Minister of Health to provide ethical oversight of clinical research and to safeguard the rights and welfare of human participants involved in clinical studies. According to ZAF-52, NHREC gives direction on ethical issues relating to health and develops guidelines for the conduct of research involving humans and animals. Further, NHREC upholds the principle that research involving human participants is based on a moral commitment to advancing human welfare, knowledge, and understanding, and to exploring cultural dynamics, especially in large-scale trials conducted in developing countries. Of fundamental importance is the duty to conduct scientifically sound research while acting in the participant’s best interests and respecting and protecting the participant’s autonomy.

As delineated in the NHA, the SA-GCPs, and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the NHREC’s core responsibilities center on promoting, ensuring, and monitoring compliance by ECs. According to the G-EthicsHR-ZAF and ZAF-52, the functions of the NHREC include:

• Determine guidelines for the functioning of ECs
• Register and audit ECs
• Set norms and standards for conducting research on humans and animals including clinical trials
• Adjudicate complaints about the functioning of ECs
• Refer to the relevant statutory health professional council matters involving the violation or potential violation of an ethical or professional rule by a health care provider
• Institute such disciplinary action as prescribed
• Advise the national department and provincial departments on any ethical issues concerning research

Registration, Auditing, and Accreditation

As delineated in the NHA, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, and the SA-GCPs, all ECs are required to register with the NHREC in order to undertake the ethical review of a clinical study. Registration information is available on the NHREC webpage (ZAF-12), and a list of ECs currently registered with NHREC is available at ZAF-13. The application to register an EC is at ZAF-53. ZAF-54 states that the EC registration is recorded and publicly listed by the NHREC.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the criteria for the NHREC registration assessment and the eligibility audit for ECs are based on the G-EthicsHR-ZAF and other internationally recognized guidelines. Members of the NHREC undertake the assessment and auditing to ensure that ECs comply with capacity and operational requirements. After the first pre-registration audit, guidance and recommendations for improvement are provided with specific timelines for improvements. Before the registration is completed and a registration number is issued, NHREC conducts a follow-up audit to ensure that required revisions have been completed. Voluntary deregistration can occur when an EC is no longer active and closes. A critical part of the ongoing quality assurance review process is the EC annual report form (ZAF-54).

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that the NHREC conducts a comprehensive quality assurance assessment and administrative audit of ECs on a five (5)-year cycle to check compliance with the various administrative and record-keeping standards. When an EC persistently fails to comply with expected standards, the NHREC must enforce the standards, e.g., to suspend operations until compliance is achieved or, in extreme cases, to revoke registration of the committee. If an EC is suspended, the NHREC informs the EC of the suspended registration status and outlines the steps to be taken to rectify matters so that a registered status may be reinstated. Capacity evaluation and enhancement for ECs is also an important function of the NHREC. During the period of suspension, the EC concerned may not review new protocols for health research and may not permit another registered EC to review on their behalf. Instead, they should refer applicants to another registered EC. An assessment of the implications for harm to participants will determine whether ongoing monitoring of approved studies is acceptable to the NHREC. Failure by the EC to respond to the required measures to reverse the status of suspended registration can lead to registration being revoked. In this case, a new application for registration is required.

Overview

In accordance with the PPA, the STI-Act, the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, KEN-21, and KEN-16, Kenya requires the sponsor or the representative to obtain clinical trial authorization from the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB)’s Expert Committee on Clinical Trials (ECCT) and an independent ethics review through a National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)-accredited ethics committee (EC) in a local institution. In addition, the STI-Act and KEN-31 specify that applicants must obtain a research license from NACOSTI prior to initiating a study. The G-KenyaCT also states that the PPB review and approval process may not be conducted in parallel with the EC review. EC approval must be obtained prior to applying for PPB approval.

Regulatory Submission

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

As described in the G-KenyaCT and KEN-16, the sponsor or the representative is expected to submit the clinical trial application electronically via the PPB online system (KEN-16). The clinical trial application form is available in KEN-16. Per the G-KenyaCT, in the event of a multicenter clinical trial, the sponsor should only file one (1) application to the PPB. According to KEN-34, all application documents should be signed, dated, and version referenced, if applicable, and should be in English. See Annex 7 of the G-KenyaCT to view a flowchart of the submission and approval process.

Per the G-KenyaCT, upon receipt of a clinical trial application, the PPB’s Clinical Trial Division of the Product Safety Department screens the application package for completeness. When an application for a clinical trial is accepted, an acknowledgement of receipt will be issued with a reference number for each application. This PPB/ECCT reference number must be quoted in all correspondence concerning the application in the future. This will be communicated through email to the applicant or through KEN-16.

Per the G-KenyaCT, sponsors (applicants) can request pre-submission meetings with the PPB to discuss pertinent issues prior to making a formal submissions. The request must be made via KEN-16 or in an official letter and include the following information:

• Background information on the disease to be treated
• Background information on the product
• Quality development
• Non-clinical development
• Clinical development
• Regulatory status
• Rationale for seeking advice
• Proposed questions and applicant’s positions

In addition, per the G-KenyaCT, the letter must be addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of the PPB and sent to admin@pharmacyboardkenya.org and copied to cta@pharmacyboardkenya.org. The request for a meeting should propose two (2) different dates for the meeting at least three (3) weeks away.

Per G-KenyaCT, any new information that affects the conduct/management of the trial; safety of the participants; and manufacture of the product necessitating changes to the protocol, consent form, and trial sites, etc. will require immediate submission of the amended documents to the PPB for review and approval. Minor amendments or administrative changes may be implemented after getting the EC’s approval, but a record of these amendments must be kept for possible inspection by the PPB.

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

Per KEN-31, an application for a NACOSTI research license should be submitted online via the Research Information Management System (RIMS) (KEN-24).

Ethics Review Submission

Each institutional EC has its own required submission procedures, which can differ significantly regarding the application format and number of copies. See KEN-17 for an example of a NACOSTI-accredited EC’s guidelines.

Overview

As delineated in the SA-GCPs, the sponsor and the investigator must obtain approval from the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and a registered ethics committee (EC) to begin a clinical trial in South Africa. Per ZAF-23, the review and approval of clinical trial applications by SAHPRA and an accredited EC may be conducted in parallel. As indicated in ZAF-20, the same process applies to the review and approval of an amendment to the protocol. However, note that the G-EthicsHR-ZAF recommends that scientific review be completed prior to ethics review and, in cases where scientific review capacity is not available, the EC approval should be delayed until SAHPRA scientific approval has been provided.

Regulatory Submission

Per ZAF-36, researchers must submit a completed application (ZAF-23) and the prescribed fee to SAHPRA on predetermined dates (ZAF-11) and obtain proof of delivery. The proof of delivery, proof of payments, and cover page must be sent to SAHPRA via email. The G-CTA-Electronic delineates the electronic submission and communication process in SAHPRA’s Clinical Trial Unit (CTU). For new clinical trial applications (excluding bioequivalence studies), upon submission at SAHPRA Reception, applicants are requested to alert the CTU via e-mail at ctcresponses@sahpra.org.za and include a copy of the proof of delivery, proof of payment, and proof of insurance. In the subject of the e-mail, the applicant should provide the application type, protocol number, SAHPRA predetermined cycle (see ZAF-11), and email number in case of multiple emails (e.g., “email 1 of 5”). Note that the submission email must include organized zipped folders for various sections of the clinical trial application. Individual site documents for each staff member must be uploaded into one (1) document and labelled with the staff name and arranged in folders according to the site which they belong to.

Per G-CTA-Electronic, to respond to SAHPRA’s screening checklist or to CTU’s expert committee review, the applicant must submit all responses by e-mail to ctcresponses@sahpra.org.za and include labelled attachments to the required documents. In the subject of the email, the applicant should provide the type of application, protocol number, and SAHPRA database tracking number. Responses to the CTU’s expert committee recommendations can be in MSWord or PDF formats. All other accompanying documents should be in PDF format v1.4, 1.5, 1.6, or 1.7 and legible with the Acrobat Reader search plugin or any other freeware viewer. PDF files should be saved as “Optimized” to reduce the size and allow faster opening when viewed online. The use of additional software to navigate and work with the files is not acceptable. If PDF files are not produced from an electronic source document but from scanned paper, readability and file size should be balanced; the following is recommended: resolution 300 dpi (photographs up to 600 dpi), avoid grayscale or color where possible, use only lossless compression techniques. The file must be searchable (OCR scanned). In addition, the maximum size of documents allowed per e-mail is 5 MB. As per arrangement with CTU, in case of a big file of documents and documents that need to be couriered, the waybill should indicate the type of application, protocol number, and SAHPRA database tracking number.

As delineated in the G-CTA-Electronic, for bioequivalence studies, the application and accompanying documents should be emailed to ctcbeprotocols@sahpra.org.za. The clinical trial application form should be in MS Word format and all other accompanying documents in PDF, as described above. As per arrangement with CTU, in case of a big file of documents and documents need to be couriered, the waybill should indicate the type of application, protocol number, and SAHPRA database tracking number. The email subject should include the application type, protocol number, and SAHPRA database tracking number. See the G-CTA-Electronic for specific examples of labeling the emails.

Per the G-CTAPHEmerg, during a public health emergency, applicants should use the modified clinical trial application form in G-CTAPHEmerg. This form recognizes the constraints on the availability of information posed by the emergency. SAHPRA may accept clinical trial applications with reduced information together with a commitment to update and complete the required information as soon as possible. However, all documents submitted must be organized with zipped folders according to the checklist in G-CTAPHEmerg and correctly labelled to ensure easy validation by SAHPRA (See the Submission Content and Emergencies sections for more details).

The G-CTA-Electronic provides instructions on submitting protocol amendments during the conduct of clinical trials, for additional investigators and sites during the conduct of clinical trials, bioequivalence studies, notifications and notification studies, and individual serious adverse events. The applicant must submit to SAHPRA the application for amendment to an approved trial (ZAF-20), as well as notify and get EC approval. (Also see Site/Investigator Selection and Safety Reporting sections for information about these submittal processes.)

The G-CTA-Electronic and ZAF-23 state that the clinical trial application must be sent to SAHPRA in a submission email (per directions above). However, ZAF-1 provides the following address for delivery of clinical trial applications to SAHPRA Reception:

South African Health Products Regulatory Authority
SAHPRA Reception – 2nd floor
Loftus Park, Building A
402 Kirkness St, Arcadia
Pretoria, 0007
South Africa

Per ZAF-1, upon receipt of the clinical trial application at SAHPRA Reception, an acknowledgement of receipt in the form of a stamp and signature will be issued. The waybill from a courier company does not suffice as proof of delivery. SAHPRA’s CTU requires a document, referred to as the ‘stamp page,’ which includes the SAHPRA trial reference number, protocol number, and study title. This document will then be date-stamped and signed by SAHPRA’s Administrative Department and returned as proof.

As per the GRMRSA, all applications and supporting data submitted to the SAHPRA should be presented in English. Original documents that are not in English must be accompanied by an English translation.

Ethics Review Submission

Each EC has its own required submission procedures, which can differ significantly regarding the number of copies to be supplied and application format requirements. Refer to each EC’s website for specific submission procedures.

Regulatory Authority Requirements

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

As per the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, and KEN-34, the following documentation must be submitted (signed, dated, and version referenced) to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Cover letter
• Study protocol
• Proof of study registration in the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (KEN-19)
• Patient information leaflet and informed consent form (ICF)
• Investigators brochure (IB) and package inserts
• Investigational Medicinal Product Dossier (IMPD), including stability data for the investigational product (IP)
• Adequate data and information on previous studies and phases to support the current study
• Good manufacturing practice (GMP) certificate of the IP from the site of manufacture issued by a competent health authority in the manufacturer’s jurisdiction of origin
• Certificate of analysis of the IP
• Pictorial sample of the IPs, including the labeling text
• Signed investigator(s) curriculum vitae(s) (CV(s)), including that of the study pharmacist (the CV should include the current workload of the principal investigator (PI))
• Evidence of contractual agreement between the relevant parties
• Evidence of recent good clinical practice (GCP) training of the core study staff
• Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) information, including the charter, composition, and meeting schedule
• Detailed study budget
• Financial declaration by the sponsor and PI (KEN-2 and Annex 5 of the G-KenyaCT)
• No conflict of interest declaration by the sponsor and PI
• Signed declarations by the sponsor, PI, and the monitor that the study will be carried out according to the protocol and applicable laws, regulations, and GCP requirements (KEN-1 and Annex 4 of the G-KenyaCT)
• Indemnity cover for PI, investigators, and study pharmacist
• Clinical trials insurance cover for the study participants
• Copy of favorable opinion letter from local ethics committee (EC)
• Copy of current practice licenses for the investigators and study pharmacist
• Copy of approval letter(s) from collaborating institutions or other regulatory authorities, if applicable
• For multicenter/multi-site studies, an addendum for each of the proposed sites including, among other things, the sites’ capacity to carry out the study (e.g., personnel, equipment, laboratory)
• A signed statement by the applicant indicating that all information contained in, or referenced by, the application is complete and accurate, and is not false or misleading (Annex 4 of the G-KenyaCT)
• Payment of fees
• Statistical analysis plan
• A signed checklist (KEN-34 and Annex 2 of the G-KenyaCT)

Per the G-KenyaCT, a request for approval of an amendment must include a summary of the proposed amendments; the reason for the amendment; the impact of the amendment on the original study objectives; the impact of the amendments on the study endpoints and data generated; and the impact of the proposed amendments on the safety and wellbeing of study participants.

KEN-35 describes the submission content for requesting annual approval from the PPB.

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

Per the STI-Regs and KEN-31, non-Kenyan applicants must be affiliated with a Kenyan institution. Per KEN-31, applicants must apply online through National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)’s Research Information Management System (RIMS) website (KEN-24) and upload the following:

• Passport size color photo in JPG or PNG format
• Scanned ID/passport in PDF format
• Introductory letter from relevant institution signed by an authorized officer
• Affiliation letter from relevant local institution for foreigners signed by an authorized officer and valid for one (1) year
• Grant letter from the funding agency to support the amount indicated to fund the research
• PPB clinical trial approval
• Prior Informed Consent (PIC), Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT), or Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) where applicable, for applications to conduct research on genetic resources and derivatives
• Approved research proposal in PDF format
• Certificate of ethical clearance of the research (see list of accredited ECs in KEN-25)
• Evidence of payment as the last page of the uploaded proposal

Per KEN-31, the following conditions apply to the research license:

• The research license is valid for the proposed research, site, and specified period
• Both the research license and any rights thereunder are non-transferable
• NACOSTI may monitor and evaluate the research
• The licensee must inform the relevant County Director of Education, County Commissioner, and County Governor before research commencement
• Excavation, filming, and collection of specimens are subject to further permissions from relevant government agencies
• The research license does not give authority to transfer research materials
• The licensee shall submit one (1) hard copy and upload a soft copy of their final report within one (1) year of completion of the research
• NACOSTI reserves the right to modify the conditions of the research license including its cancellation without prior notice

KEN-31 states that if the research is not completed within the stipulated period, the applicant may apply for renewal of the research license and pay the requisite fee. A progress report should be submitted with the request for renewal instead of a proposal. The progress report must indicate the objectives and activities that have been accomplished, as well as the research work that has yet to be undertaken. KEN-31 further indicates that submissions requesting renewal should be made at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the approval period.

Ethics Committee Requirements

EC requirements vary depending on the specific EC. See KEN-17 and KEN-26 for examples of accredited EC submission and review guidelines.

As set forth in the G-ECBiomedRes, a foreign sponsoring agency must also submit its research protocol for ethics review according to its own country’s standards. This research must be responsive to the health needs of Kenya and reasonably accessible to the community in which the research was conducted.

Clinical Protocol

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). The CTRules the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-14 outline the key elements of a research protocol in Kenya (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• A project title that adequately captures the essence of the study
• The names, addresses, signatures, and updated abridged curriculum vitae of the investigators
• Evidence that the PI has prior training in GCP
• Contact information for the EC and collaborating institutions
• A summary of the project
• Introduction, background, and literature review, including nonclinical data
• Study objectives, rationale, questions, and hypothesis/es
• Study site, design, and methodology
• Ethical considerations
• Role of investigators
• Schedule
• References
• Budget
• Publication policy
• Consent explanation - elements of consent explanations
• ICF with signature provisions for participants and the PIs
• Risks and benefits
• Mode of assessment of the safety and efficacy of the IP
• Mode of collecting, analyzing, and reporting the statistics of the clinical trial
• Source data documents of the clinical trial
• Quality control and quality assurance
• Confidentiality
• Recruitment, selection, treatment, and withdrawal of participants
• Compensation and post-trial access program
• Undue inducement and coercion
• Voluntariness
• Alternative treatment(s) if available
• Storage of specimens
• MTA, where applicable
• Data management and statistical analysis

In addition, per the G-KenyaCT, the protocol should have a clear description of study stoppage rules indicating reasons, who makes the decision, and how the decision will be communicated to the PPB and the EC.

Regulatory Authority Requirements

As per ZAF-23, the following documentation must be submitted to the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA):

• The clinical trial application form (ZAF-23)
• Two (2) cover letters (one (1) signed in PDF and one (1) in MS-Word format)
• Two (2) completed copies of the clinical trial application (one (1) signed in PDF and one (1) in MS-Word format) (ZAF-23 and ZAF-20 (for amendments))
• Checklist
• Protocol
• Patient information leaflets (PILs) and informed consent forms (ICFs); include standardized SAHPRA contact details (Annex 1 of ZAF-23)
• Copy(ies) of recruitment advertisement(s) (if applicable) and questionnaires
• Investigator’s Brochure (IB)/SAHPRA and other regulatory authorities’ approved professional information (Package insert(s))
• Summary of previous trials with the investigational product(s) (IP(s)), if applicable
• Certificate of analysis of the product
• Signed investigator(s) Curriculum Vitae(s) (CV) in SAHPRA format (Annex 2 of ZAF-23)
• Signed declaration(s) by all investigator(s) (Annex 3 of ZAF-23)
• Signed joint financial declaration by sponsor and principal investigator (PI) or national PI (Annex 4 of ZAF-23)
• Signed declaration by applicant and national PI
• Signed declaration by national PI (See page 4 and Annex 3 (ZAF-23)
• Signed declaration by sub-investigators (Annex 5 of ZAF-23)
• CV(s) and signed declaration by regional monitor(s) (Annexes 2 and 6 of ZAF-23)
• Proof of application to register the trial on the South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR) (ZAF-48)
• Active insurance certificate for clinical trial
• Proof of sponsor indemnity for investigators and trial site(s) (Annex 7 of ZAF-23)
• Active Good Clinical Practice (GCP) Certificates
• Workload forms for investigators (Annex 8 of ZAF-23)
• Proof of registration with professional statutory bodies
• Proof of professional indemnity (malpractice insurance) of trialist(s)
• Ethics committee (EC) approval letter or copy of letter submitted to EC
• Study budget
• Electronic copies of key peer reviewed publications following International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations to support the application (if applicable)
• Proof of payment (bank validated)
• Certificate of good manufacturing practice (GMP) for manufacture of the IP(s) (including placebo and comparator)
• Evidence of accreditation/certifications of the designated laboratories
• Data Safety Monitoring Board charter and composition (where applicable)

See ZAF-36 for additional information on submissions. For phase IV trials of approved products, the applicant must notify SAHPRA following the instructions provided in ZAF-17.

ZAF-20 delineates the contents and requirements for submitting an application for protocol amendment to an approved clinical trial.

Per the G-CTAPHEmerg, SAHPRA states that during a public health emergency, new and experimental treatments may become necessary and clinical trials are essential to provide the evidence to develop appropriate policies for patient treatments. Under these circumstances, there may be limited information available. However, applications need to contain a certain minimum of information to enable a meaningful evaluation and regulatory decisions. To address this, SAHPRA provides an information grading system in the G-CTAPHEmerg wherein required information is labelled. Applicants must attempt to provide the information listed below and justify when this is not available. The required information is graded as follows:

• Essential – Application will not be considered without this
• Important – Necessary information that must be provided later and must be justified if not available
• Not essential – May be omitted from this preliminary application

All incomplete information must be explained, justified, and provided to SAHPRA as a complete application (ZAF-23), when available. This means that repeat evaluations of an application may be necessary.

Ethics Committee Requirements

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, each EC has its own application form and clearance requirements that can differ, but ECs must ensure that the submission content includes the following:

• A description of the essential ethical elements: an explanation of the proposed research in plain language, information about potential participants (age range, vulnerabilities, etc.), and ethical implications of the research
• Indication of whether it is a sub-study or parent study; each sub-study must be reviewed
• Adequate consideration of participants’ welfare, rights, beliefs, perceptions, customs, and cultural heritage
• All documents and other material to be used to inform potential participants, such as information sheets, consent forms, questionnaires, advertisements, videos, dramatizations, and letters
• A description of the readability level to ensure that plain language is adapted to the anticipated literacy levels in the participant documentation
• Evidence of community engagement and plans for ongoing consultation, as appropriate
• Plans to implement benefit sharing, as appropriate to the context
• Monitoring schedules, the responsible persons, and their contact numbers
• Disclosure of any researcher conflicts of interest, financial interests, or information that may result in perceptions of conflict of interest
• A data management plan (See the Personal Data Protection section for more details)

See ZAF-22, ZAF-45, and ZAF-49 for example EC applications, which share some or all of following (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Cover letter
• Completed EC-specific application form
• Protocol
• Protocol synopsis
• PIL(s) and ICF(s) and process for obtaining informed consent
• Separate assent form required for minors under the age of 18 (See Children/Minors section for additional information)
• IB and package insert(s) (if applicable)
• SAHPRA approval letter or letter of application and notification
• Approval letter from institution’s scientific committee (if applicable)
• Copy of completed clinical trial application signed by all participating investigators
• All questionnaires and diaries to be used in the study
• Advertisement(s) (if applicable)
• Trial site information (address, telephone numbers, PI names, etc.)
• Trial payment schedule and budget schedule per site/draft financial contract and additional funding details
• Proof of submission fees payment
• Current investigator(s) CVs
• GCP training certificates for PIs and subinvestigators
• Information on registration with SANCTR (ZAF-48)
• Declaration of trialists (PI and sub-investigators) in SAHPRA format
• Insurance certificate

Further, per the MTA-Human, all the providers and recipients of human biological material for use in research or clinical trials under the auspices of ECs must use the “Material Transfer Agreement of Human Biological Materials” in MTA-Human. The agreement must be signed by the research institution’s authorized representative and the EC. (For additional details, see Specimens topic.)

Clinical Protocol

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, it is strongly recommended that a report on the scientific review should accompany the protocol in the EC application. If a separate scientific review capacity is not available, the EC must ensure that the science is satisfactorily explained in the protocol. As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the SA-GCPs, and ZAF-23 the clinical protocol should contain the following information (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• General information
• Background information
• Study rationale and motivation
• Trial objectives, purpose, and endpoints (with justifications)
• Scientific design and methodology
• IP information
• Participant eligibility, selection, and withdrawal; inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Selection of study population and sampling
• Community and stakeholder engagement
• Recruitment and enrollment
• Risk/benefit analysis
• Reimbursements and inducements for participants
• Informed consent
• Participant treatment
• Participants’ interests in privacy and confidentiality
• Efficacy assessment
• Safety assessment
• Statistics
• Direct access to source data/documents
• Research procedures and quality control/quality assurance
• Data and safety monitoring plan
• Data handling/recordkeeping
• Statistical measures
• Financing/insurance
• How data records (written, audio or visual) are to be secured, the length of time for which they will be retained, and who will be responsible for storage and/or final disposal
• An explanation on why particular identifying information is required for the study that purports to collect data anonymously
• Measures in place to assess whether notifiable activities might occur amongst participants, e.g., abuse of minors or notifiable diseases

Per the SA-GCPs, the protocol must also provide details on ethical and administrative issues, including how the following matters are addressed:

• Compliance of multi-center/national trials with all South African regulatory requirements
• The trial design must be customized appropriately for the local setting to ensure that local realities are considered and appropriately integrated into the design
• For multi-national trials, whether a reasonable proportion of significant project team members, including scientists and health care professionals, are South African researchers, including those from previously disadvantaged backgrounds
• If South Africa is selected as a clinical trial site but the country of origin or other high-income countries are not, an explanation and reason for this with a clear ethical justification

For detailed information on protocol elements, please refer to ZAF-23 and the SA-GCPs.

Overview

Based on the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB)'s review and approval of an application to conduct a clinical trial is dependent upon obtaining ethics approval from a National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)-accredited ethics committee (EC). Therefore, the PPB and EC reviews may not be conducted in parallel. In addition, the STI-Act and KEN-31 specify that all applicants must obtain a research license from NACOSTI prior to initiating a study.

Regulatory Authority Approval

Pharmacy and Poisons Board

Per the G-KenyaCT, sponsors (or applicants) can request pre-submission meetings to discuss pertinent issues prior to making a formal submission. The request must be made via the PPB online system (KEN-16) or in an official letter addressed to the Chief Executive Officer of the PPB and sent to admin@pharmacyboardkenya.org and copied to cta@pharmacyboardkenya.org. The request for a meeting should propose two (2) different dates for the meeting with the proposed dates being at least three (3) weeks away. (See Submission Process section for details on the content of request.)

Per the G-KenyaCT, upon receipt of a clinical trial application, the PPB’s Clinical Trial Division of the Product Safety Department screens the application package for completeness, which takes five (5) days. If accepted, an automatic system-generated reference number will be issued for each application. If additional information is needed, the sponsor will have 10 days to respond. The PPB aims to respond to applications within 30 working days. The sponsor or the representative must reference the PPB/Expert Committee on Clinical Trials (ECCT) number in all future application-related correspondence. The application is then evaluated by the ECCT and PPB staff according to their respective standard operating procedures. The PPB/ECCT’s decision to approve, request additional information, or reject the application is communicated to the sponsor or the representative in writing within 30 days of receiving a valid application. If additional information is requested, the sponsor has 90 days to respond after which the PPB has 15 days to issue a final decision. In certain cases, the PPB may refer the application to external experts for their recommendation.

Per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor or the representative is also required to request approval annually from the PPB at least six (6) weeks prior to the expiration of the previous approval. Refer to the Checklist for Submitting a Request for Annual Approval (KEN-35) for relevant documentation requirements.

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation

Per KEN-5 and KEN-31, the timeline for NACOSTI’s license application process is 30 days.

KEN-31 states that if a research license application does not meet the conditions required under the STI-Act, NACOSTI must reject the application and communicate the reasons to the applicant. Any person may appeal NACOSTI’s decision to the Cabinet Secretary within 30 days of being notified of the decision.

Ethics Committee Approval

The EC review and approval process timeline will vary by institution.

Overview

Based on ZAF-23 and the SA-GCPs, the review and approval of clinical trial applications by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and an accredited ethics committee (EC) may be conducted in parallel. The applicant must notify each regulatory body of the other’s approval once it has been received. However, note that the G-EthicsHR-ZAF recommends that scientific review be completed prior to ethics review and, in cases where scientific review capacity is not available, the EC approval should be delayed until SAHPRA scientific approval has been provided. Also, where site permissions are required, e.g., from Provincial Health Research Committees (PHRCs) or superintendents, to conduct research in health care facilities, ECs must delay granting full approval until these permissions are received to prevent research from beginning before the facility knows it will happen.

Regulatory Authority Approval

In general, per ZAF-36, SAHPRA’s Clinical Trial Unit (CTU) aims to process new applications and issue a screening checklist within three (3) weeks of receipt. After that, the expert Clinical Trials Committee (CTC) recommendations will be sent within 10 weeks of the submission due date. There are cases where this turnaround time might be prolonged, such as an unfamiliar investigational product which may be referred to external reviewers or other SAHPRA committees for input.

Per ZAF-1, during the preliminary screening, the CTU screens the application and sends an official letter to the applicant with the outcome and follow-up questions on a screening checklist. The applicant receives the screening checklist within 15 working days after application submission. The applicant must respond within seven (7) working days after receipt of the screening review.

Next, the CTC reviews the proposed clinical trials. ZAF-11 provides the dates of the 2025 CTC meetings and the SAHPRA submission due dates. It is advisable to submit clinical trial applications before these due dates. Once the reviewer approves the application, the CTC presents the committee’s/reviewer’s recommendations to the SAHPRA. ZAF-1 states that applicants receive a response within 10 working days from the CTC meeting, and they must send an answer within seven (7) working days after receipt of comments. If an applicant would like to request a meeting with the CTC, the request should be submitted through the SAHPRA Chief Executive Office pursuant to the procedures in the G-ConsultMtg.

Ethics Committee Approval

Review timelines vary per each EC’s procedures. The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that ECs must define the review timelines in their standard operating procedures.

Overview

In accordance with the PPA, the STI-Act, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, KEN-21, and KEN-16, a clinical trial can only commence after the sponsor or the representative receives authorization from Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB), and ethics committee (EC) approval from an institutional EC that has been accredited by the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) prior to initiating a study. ECs are accredited pursuant to the requirements delineated in the G-ECAccred. The G-KenyaCT specifies that the PPB review and approval process may not be conducted in parallel with the EC review. In addition, the STI-Act and KEN-31 state that all applicants must obtain a research license from NACOSTI prior to initiating a study. No waiting period is required following the applicant’s receipt of these approvals. Regarding notifications, KEN-31 requires the licensee to inform the relevant County Director of Education, County Commissioner, and County Governor before commencement of the research. Further, the licensee must disclose to NACOSTI, the institutional ECs, and the relevant national agencies any findings that are of national strategic importance.

As per the PPA and the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor or the representative is required to obtain an import license for the shipment of an investigational product to be used in the trial. (See the Manufacturing & Import section for additional information).

As stated in the G-KenyaCT, Kenyan clinical trials should be conducted in compliance with the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14).

Clinical Trial Agreement

Prior to initiating the trial, the G-KenyaCT requires that the sponsor agree with investigator(s) on the definition, establishment, and assignment of responsibilities specified in the protocol. These responsibilities include conduct of the trial in compliance with KEN-14 and the approved protocol; data management; unblinding of treatment codes; statistical considerations; and preparation of the final clinical report. The sponsor, in a written document, may agree to transfer all related activities of the clinical trial to designated research institutions. However, all responsibility for the trial lies with the sponsor. Prior to the initiation of the clinical trial, the agreement between the sponsor and investigators should be in writing as part of the protocol submitted for PPB approval or in a separate agreement. The sponsor and investigators must sign and date the protocol of the trial to confirm the agreement.

Clinical Trial Registration

As per the G-KenyaCT, all clinical trials taking place in Kenya must be registered in the PPB’s Online Clinical Trials Registry System (KEN-16). The principal investigator is required to log in and set up an account to register a study.

In addition, as required by KEN-34, all clinical trials taking place in Kenya must be registered in the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (KEN-19).

Overview

In accordance with the GRMRSA, the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, and the NHAParticipants, a clinical trial can only commence in South Africa once an applicant receives approval from the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and from a registered ethics committee (EC). There is no waiting period required following the applicant’s receipt of these approvals. Note that the G-EthicsHR-ZAF recommends that scientific review be completed prior to ethics review and, in cases where scientific review capacity is not available, the EC approval should be delayed until SAHPRA scientific approval has been provided. Also, where site permissions are required, e.g., from Provincial Health Research Committees (PHRCs) or superintendents, to conduct research in health care facilities, ECs must delay granting full approval until these permissions are received to prevent research from beginning before the facility knows it will happen.

The trial must be conducted in compliance with the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, and the GRMRSA. Also, per the SA-GCPs, all clinical trials must be conducted in a laboratory complying with Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). See ZAF-2 for the World Health Organization (WHO)’s handbook on GLPs.

Per the SA-GPPs, pharmacists must be involved in clinical trials, including for example, assisting in the development of protocols, overseeing medicine supplies, monitoring administration protocols, and maintaining registries. According to the SA-GCPs, the sponsor must also define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the investigator prior to initiating the study.

Clinical Trial Agreement

According to the SA-GCPs, all parties involved in the conduct of a trial should be familiar with guidance in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (ZAF-27) and other international guidelines. All clinical trials should be conducted in accordance with all ethical principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki (ZAF-44). Before the trial begins, a sponsor must prepare a written agreement. The agreement must be signed by the sponsor and the PI, and any other parties involved (e.g., institutions and contract research organizations) with the trial to confirm the contract terms. Both the sponsor and the PI must commit to providing safety information between each other. The sponsor should also obtain the investigator's agreement to:

• Conduct the trial in compliance with the SA-GCPs, the SAHPRA requirements, ZAF-27, and the EC approved protocol
• Comply with data recording/reporting procedures
• Permit monitoring, auditing, and inspection
• Retain the trial-related essential documents until the sponsor informs the investigator(s) and institution(s) that these documents are no longer needed

In addition, per the SA-GCPs, the financial aspects of the trial should be documented in the agreement. A declaration must be signed by the sponsor and PI stating that sufficient funds are available to complete the study. The sponsor is also responsible for securing agreements to ensure direct access to all trial-related sites, source data/documents, and reports for the purpose of monitoring and auditing by the sponsor, and inspection by domestic and foreign regulatory authorities.

Clinical Trial Registration

According to the SA-GCPs, NHAParticipants, and ZAF-32, the PI or the sponsor must enter the trial information in the South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR) (ZAF-48). The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that solely the sponsor must register all South Africa-based trials on SANCTR, and if the trial has no commercial sponsor, the PI must register the trial. According to the SA-GCPs, the National Department of Health (NDOH) then issues a unique SANCTR National Register Number. ZAF-32 has instructions for registering either online or via email.

ZAF-48 states that SANCTR fulfills the requirements of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) publication mandates and has a formal partnership with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (ZAF-50), which is recognized by the WHO.

Governance

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF explains that research, especially that using state or provincial facilities and resources, should link to health care system priorities, and findings should be integrated into policy planning and management of health programs. PHRCs were established to liaise with researchers to ensure that the greatest health needs of each province are being addressed. As such, they perform a gate-keeping role by managing access to health facilities. While they accept ethics approval granted by a registered EC, they need to consider applications to use their facilities to manage potential interference with or interruption of services. It is thus important that PIs respect this role of the PHRCs. Some provinces have also registered provincial ECs, and these committees are important in areas of the country where other ECs are not active.

Safety Reporting Definitions

According to the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of Kenya’s safety reporting requirements:

• Adverse Event (or Adverse Experience) (AE) – Any untoward medical occurrence in a participant in a clinical investigation study or intervention product, and which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the treatment
• Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) – All noxious and unintended responses to a clinical trial study or interventional product related to any dose or all unintended noxious responses to a registered medicinal product which occurs at doses normally used in humans for prophylaxis, diagnosis, or therapy of diseases or for modification of physiological function
• Serious Adverse Event (SAE) – Any untoward medical occurrence that at any dose: results in death, is life threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability/incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly/birth defect
• Suspected Unexpected Serious Adverse Reaction (SUSAR) – A serious adverse reaction that is not identified in practice, severity, or frequency by the referenced safety information

Safety Reporting Requirements

Investigator Responsibilities

Per G-KenyaCT, the investigator must ensure that all SAEs are reported promptly to Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) within the mandated timelines, as described below. Proper protection procedures or treatments should be administered to trial participants with SAEs.

Sponsor Responsibilities

As indicated in the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor should report to the PPB and all relevant institutions, all SAEs and SUSARs occurring during the course of the trial. The G-KenyaCT specifies that the sponsor should expedite reporting all SAEs to the PPB and the ethics committee (EC), and the sponsor and investigators should immediately undertake appropriate and necessary measures and treatment to protect the trial participants. The CTRules delineates that where a sponsor conducts a clinical trial on the same health product or active pharmaceutical substance in another country, the sponsor must submit a report of any SUSAR or SAE that occurs in the other clinical trial to the PPB. Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, a sponsor must submit an initial report of an fatal or life-threatening SUSAR or SAE as soon as it occurs but, in any case, not later than seven (7) days after the occurrence of the event. The G-KenyaCT indicates that if the initial report is incomplete, the sponsor must submit a completed report based on the initial information within an additional eight (8) days. As required in the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, a report of the occurrence of a SUSAR or SAE must specify whether the SUSAR or SAE is related to the clinical trial.

As indicated in the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, other important considerations and timelines include the following (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• The sponsor must notify all the investigators involved in ongoing clinical trials of the investigational product (IP) of all SAEs and SUSARs within 15 calendar days
• Any IP-related SAE must receive immediate medical attention and be reported to the PPB
• The SAE report form must be completed (including lab results) and submitted to enable causality assessment
• All fatal cases must be accompanied by a formal autopsy report, and a verbal autopsy report should be submitted in those exceptional cases where a formal autopsy is not possible
• Any frequent IP related AE/ADR must receive immediate medical attention and be reported to the PPB within seven (7) days
• The sponsor must submit a report on a SUSAR that is not fatal or life-threatening within 15 days after the occurrence of the event
• The principal investigator (PI) is required to submit follow-up information as soon as it becomes available
• All additional information should be clearly marked as updated and must include the Protocol Number and Participant Number
• Foreign regulatory decisions that affect the safety or use of the product under study must be reported to the PPB within seven (7) days through a detailed report
• Literature reports that have implications for the safety of the IP must be submitted within 15 days with a detailed report and a copy of the publication
• New information or notification of change in nature, severity, or frequency of risk factors for the product under study or conduct of trial must be submitted within 15 days

Other Safety Reports

The G-ECBiomedRes indicate that ECs should monitor research, and will report to the National Bioethics Committee upon notification of an AE.

The CTRules and the G-KenyaCT state that the sponsor must also submit a safety report to the PPB once a year throughout the clinical trial, or upon request. The purpose of the annual safety report is to briefly describe all new safety information relevant to one (1) or more clinical trial(s), and to assess the safety conditions of the participants enrolled in these trial(s). The safety report must include a log of SAE and SUSAR events. The SAE and SUSAR log should include the following:

• Patient Identification
• Age
• Date of recruitment into the study
• Type of SAE or SUSAR
• SAE or SUSAR start and end dates
• Reason for reporting the event as an SAE or SUSAR
• Relation to IP
• SAE or SUSAR outcome

Note that the PPB may require more frequent reporting of the safety reports depending on the nature of the clinical trial being implemented. When this is the case, the PPB must communicate the required frequency to the PI and sponsor in writing.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

As per the G-KenyaCT and KEN-16, all SAEs and SUSARs must be reported to the PPB via the Pharmacovigilance Electronic Reporting System (PvERS) (KEN-6).

Safety Reporting Definitions

In accordance with the SA-GCPs and the G-SafetyRpt, the following definitions provide a basis for a common understanding of South Africa’s safety reporting requirements:

• Adverse Event/Experience (AE) – Any untoward medical occurrence that may present during treatment with a medicine, but which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with this treatment
• Adverse Drug Reaction or Adverse Reaction (ADR) – A noxious and unintended response to a medicine in humans or animals, including lack of efficacy, and which occurs at any dosage and can also result from overdose, misuse, or abuse of a medicine
• 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 patient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, or is a congenital anomaly or birth defect
• Unexpected Adverse Drug Reaction – One in which the nature, specificity, severity, and outcome is inconsistent with the applicable product information (i.e., with the approved package inserts for registered medicines, the investigator’s brochure, or other product information for unregistered medicines being used)

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF defines SAE as an unforeseen harmful event related to the study (e.g., injury/death due to an experimental intervention), thereby negatively affecting the research participants and requiring an intervention.

Per the G-EmergencyProc, all clinical trial sites must have an emergency standard operating procedure that should be available for inspection by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA). In addition, each clinical trial site should have adequately trained investigators to manage medical emergencies. Further, there must be an emergency 24-hour contact number for trial participants who experience an unexpected AE.

Safety Reporting Requirements

Investigator Responsibilities

As specified in the SA-GCPs, the principal investigator (PI) must inform the sponsor immediately, or within the time specified in the protocol, of any serious and/or unexpected AEs occurring during the study. The initial reporting form and any relevant follow-up information should be sent to the sponsor. The G-SafetyRpt directs the investigator to report AEs to the sponsor in a manner defined in the protocol. Per the SA-GCPs, AEs and/or laboratory abnormalities identified in the protocol as critical to safety evaluations must be reported to the sponsor in accordance with the reporting requirement and within the time periods specified in the protocol. In the case of participant deaths, the PI must supply the sponsor, the ethics committee (EC), and SAHPRA with any additional information, as requested. The initial and follow-up reports must identify the affected participants by the participant identification code.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, researchers are expected to provide appropriate information to the EC to facilitate monitoring, including alerts. If an EC conducts a site visit, the evaluation should include inspecting documentation of AEs and SAEs. In addition, ECs should request regular, at least annual, reports from PIs on matters including a list of all AEs in the past 12 months.

Sponsor Responsibilities

As delineated in the GRMRSA, the sponsor is required to report all expected or unexpected SAEs/SADRs on an expedited basis to all concerned parties, including the investigator(s) and institution(s), the SAHPRA, and the ECs. Pursuant to the G-SafetyRpt, the sponsor is required to submit the following safety reports to SAHPRA:

• Reports of SUSARs occurring in the clinical trial using the SAHPRA SAE form (ZAF-19), CIOMS form (ZAF-15), or Annex B of G-SafetyRpt
• Reports of all SUSARs and trends occurring with the investigational product (IP) in South Africa
• Six-month progress report
• Annual Development Safety Update Reports (DSURs) that include information gathered from all clinical experience with the IP, whether in South Africa or elsewhere
• Final Progress Report
• Final Study Report

The SA-GCPs states that the sponsor is responsible for performing an ongoing safety evaluation of the IP and must promptly provide written notification to the investigator and SAHPRA of findings that may adversely affect the safety of participants or the conduct of the trial, and/or change the EC's approval to continue the trial. The commitment to provide safety information must be included in the clinical trial agreement signed between the sponsor and the investigator.

The G-SafetyRpt delineates the following reporting timeframes:

• The sponsor should initially report all fatal or life-threatening SAEs in local reports within seven (7) calendar days after first knowledge, using CIOMS format (ZAF-15)/SAHPRA SAE form (ZAF-19). The follow-up report should be submitted within an additional eight (8) calendar days.
• All fatal or life-threatening SAEs in foreign reports should initially be reported within 30 calendar days after first knowledge by the sponsor. The follow-up report should be submitted within an additional six (6) months as part of the progress report. If the SAEs result in premature study closure, the reporting times are shorter—seven (7) days for the initial report and within an additional eight (8) days for the follow-up report. These reports should be in a line listing format. Note that these reporting requirements also cover foreign reports of “special concern,” which is a significant safety issue defined for each clinical trial that requires urgent attention from the regulatory authority. An adverse reaction of special concern from a foreign jurisdiction should be based on the decision of its regulatory authority. A safety issue leading to international regulatory action is considered to be significant at all times and hence reportable.
• Local reports of other serious events (unexpected, not fatal or life threatening) within 15 calendar days of the event and every six (6) months in the CIOMS format (ZAF-15)/SAHPRA SAE form (ZAF-19)
• A line listing of all local reports—serious (unexpected and expected) AEs—and any other issues of special concern outside South Africa should be submitted every six (6) months (using the progress report form in ZAF-18).
• An initial detailed report of new information impacting the risk-benefit profile of the IP or conduct of trial should be submitted within three (3) calendar days; a follow-up report should be submitted within an additional six (6) months.
• An initial detailed report of other major safety concerns (e.g., changes in nature, severity, or frequency of risk factors) should be submitted within 15 days of knowledge of the concern; a follow-up report should be submitted within an additional six (6) months.
• DSURs should be submitted within one (1) year from approval of the study and annually thereafter.

In addition, SAHPRA reserves the right to impose additional reporting timelines on an individual protocol basis, and it may require expedited reporting of AEs of special interest, whether serious or not.

See the G-SafetyRpt for details on the contents of the reports and other safety report requirements.

Form Completion & Delivery Requirements

Per the G-SafetyRpt and ZAF-19, the SAHPRA’s Safety Reporting During Clinical Trials Form (ZAF-19) should be used to complete SAE/ADR reports—for both initial and follow-up safety reports. The G-SafetyRpt indicates that adverse drug reactions occurring during post-marketing studies (Phase 4 and observational studies) should be reported to the Vigilance Unit of SAHPRA, and adverse drug reactions occurring during the use of concomitant and/or comparator medicine in a clinical trial should be reported to the Clinical Trial Unit of SAHPRA. Reportable safety information must be sent to:

• ctcsaes@sahpra.org.za for clinical trials (per ZAF-47, ctcsaes@sahpra.org.za should be used for individual patient SAEs and related queries)
• adr@sahpra.org.za or e2b@sahpra.org.za for post-marketing studies
• section21@sahpra.org.za for reporting of SAEs for medicines used under Section 21

As per ZAF-47, the following is the contact information for pharmacovigilance-related submissions:

• ADR reports in an e2b in an xml format: e2b@sahpra.org.za
• All other ADR reports: adr@sahpra.org.za
• Pharmacovigilance related queries: pvqueries@sahpra.org.za
• Documentation relating to identified safety concerns, responses to recommendations, and Risk Management Plans (RMPs): pvsubmissions@sahpra.org.za

G-CTA-Electronic details the requirements for electronic submission of individual SAEs. All SAEs should be submitted to ctcsaes@sahpra.org.za with a cover letter detailing:

• The title of the study
• The SAHPRA reference number
• Protocol number
• Name of site
• Patient study ID
• Cause of SAE
• Causality and SAE reporting form
• Other applicable information

The email subject line should include the following information: SAE, protocol number, and SAHPRA database tracking number.

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

As stated in the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor and/or the principal investigator (PI) is required to send progress reports to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) on an annual basis, or as may be required, from the date of the trial’s initiation. The progress report should contain the following:

• Current status of the study
• Summary of the participants screened (e.g., failed screenings, participants enrolled, withdrawn, or lost to follow-up, and other challenges)
• Summary of protocol deviations and violations
• Updated investigational product Investigator’s Brochure
• Drug Safety Update Report
• Copy of the latest Data Safety Management Board report
• Copy of favorable opinion from the ethics committee (EC) on record
• Copy of annual practice license for the investigators and pharmacists
• Suspected, Unexpected, Serious Adverse Event (SUSAR) and Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Log

For multisite trials, per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor or the representative must submit a summarized report for all of the sites and include the information listed above.

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). As per KEN-14, the investigator should promptly provide written reports to the sponsor and the institutional EC on any changes significantly affecting the conduct of the trial, and/or increasing the risk to participants.

According to the G-KenyaCT, for annual renewal of the study, the sponsor or the representative must submit a copy of the progress report including the documents listed above. The request must also be accompanied by copies of annual practice licenses for the investigators and pharmacists, and a copy of valid insurance coverage for the participants. All documents must be submitted using the PPB’s Online Clinical Trials Registry System (KEN-16). The sponsor or the representative must receive an acknowledgement of this submission before proceeding with the study. These documents must be submitted to the PPB at least six (6) weeks prior to the expiration of the previous approval.

Pursuant to KEN-14, the investigator should submit written summaries of the trial status to the institutional EC annually, or more frequently, if requested.

Final Report

Per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor must notify the PPB of the end of a clinical trial taking place at a Kenyan site within 15 days. After the trial has been conducted and closed, the applicant must submit an executive summary report of the study within 30 days. This should be followed by a clinical study report within 180 days of the study closure unless otherwise justified. The report must comply with the International Council for Harmonisation's ICH E3 format (KEN-13). The report must include a short but comprehensive summary of the trial’s essential findings and methodology and should also contain a layman’s summary. Additionally, the sponsor must inform the PPB of any results that will be publicly released at least 14 days before release. In addition, upon completion of the trial, as delineated in KEN-14, the investigator is required to submit a final report to the institutional EC summarizing the trial’s outcome.

For multi-site research, the G-ECBiomedRes requires all parties to decide on procedures for drafting a common final report and publication at the onset of the research. Individual sites or institutions must not publish any data until the appropriate authorities accept the combined report.

KEN-31 further indicates that the research license applicant must submit one (1) hard copy and upload a soft copy of the final research report to the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) within one (1) year of the research’s completion.

Interim and Annual Progress Reports

In accordance with the GRMRSA, the person authorized by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) to conduct a clinical trial (i.e., the sponsor) must submit progress reports to the SAHPRA every six (6) months from the application approval date. The SA-GCPs requires the investigator to submit written progress reports to the ethics committee (EC) annually and to the SAHPRA every six (6) months. ECs and the SAHPRA may request reports more frequently. The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that ECs should request regular, at least annual, reports from principal investigators (PIs) on matters including: progress; current enrolment status; whether participant follow-up is still active or completed; record maintenance and security; evidence of compliance with the approved protocol and any conditions of approval; negative reports from monitors or good clinical practice (GCP) inspectors; all adverse events in the past 12 months; and all amendments made in the past 12 months.

Per the GRMRSA, the SA-GCPs, and G-SafetyRpt, the six-month report (ZAF-18) 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):

• SAHPRA database tracking number
• Study title
• Protocol number
• Details of the sponsor
• Progress to date or the outcome in case of completed research
• Whether participant follow up is still active or has been completed
• List of all active trial sites, addresses, and PIs
• Trial information, including date of approval of study, treatment hold (if applicable), and expected date of completion
• Number of participants per site and current enrollment status
• Sponsor comment on progress to date
• Summary of Data Safety Monitoring Board or Safety Committee recommendations and relevant safety data
• Serious adverse events and suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions for all participants per site in South Africa, including identification of previous safety reports submitted to the SAHPRA concerning a similar suspected adverse reaction and an analysis of their connection
• Any safety issues of special concern outside of South Africa
• Line listing of all critical and major protocol violations/noncompliance and resolutions/actions taken at a site or conditions of approval
• PI comment on other major safety concerns
• Signature of the PI
• Signature of the sponsor

Note that the SA-GCPs directs the investigator to promptly provide written reports to the sponsor/applicant, the EC, and where applicable, the institution on changes that significantly affect trial conduct and/or increase the risk of participant harm.

Final Report

The sponsor is required to submit a final progress report to the SAHPRA 30 days following the trial’s completion as stated in the GRMRSA and the G-SafetyRpt. Further, per G-SafetyRpt, a final study report should be submitted within 180 days of clinical trial completion or termination.

In addition, per the SA-GCPs, upon the trial’s end, the investigator must inform the institution (if applicable), the EC, and the SAHPRA and provide them with a summary of the trial outcome and other required reports.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states PIs or research leaders must disseminate research results or findings, whether positive or negative, in a timely, accessible, responsible, and competent manner. This includes reporting back to participant communities where appropriate.

The SA-GCPs specifies that the sponsor must ensure that trial results and outcomes are reported to the investigators, the SAHPRA, and the National Department of Health (NDOH) via the South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR) (ZAF-48) within one (1) year of the study’s completion. The sponsor and the PI are responsible for appropriate dissemination of the trial findings.

As per the G-KenyaCT, a sponsor is defined as an individual, a company, an institution, or an organization who takes legal responsibility for the initiation, management, and financing of a trial. According to the G-KenyaCT, a sponsor, in a written document, may agree to transfer all related activities of the clinical trial to designated research institutions. However, all responsibility for the trial lies with the sponsor. The G-ECBiomedRes indicates that sponsors may be foreign, but must comply with certain conditions including affiliating themselves to institutions recognized in Kenya.

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). In accordance with KEN-14, Kenya permits a sponsor to transfer any or all of its trial-related duties and functions to a contract research organization (CRO) and/or institutional site(s). However, the ultimate responsibility for the trial data’s quality and integrity always resides with the sponsor. Any trial-related responsibilities transferred to a CRO should be specified in a written agreement. The CRO should implement quality assurance and quality control.

As defined in the SA-GCPs, a sponsor is the person or organization responsible for the initiation, management, or financing of a clinical trial. A sponsor can be a pharmaceutical company, the principal investigator (PI), a funding body, or an individual or organization designated by the funding body or academic institution. An applicant can be an individual, company, institution, or organization that acts on behalf of the sponsor to initiate and manage the trial as its local representative. In the case of an international sponsor, a local applicant designated by the sponsor is responsible for initiation and management of the trial in the local context.

Per the SA-GCPs, a sponsor may transfer any or all trial-related duties and functions to a contract research organization (CRO). However, the sponsor is always ultimately responsible for the study data quality and integrity. Further, per the G-Monitor, the sponsor is solely responsible for adequate oversight of clinical trial conduct, including the justification for and selection of monitoring methods. Any trial-related responsibilities transferred to and assumed by a CRO should be specified in writing. The sponsor retains those responsibilities not specifically transferred to and assumed by a CRO.

Overview

The G-KenyaCT, which requires sponsors to follow the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), states that the sponsor is responsible for selecting the investigator(s) and the institution(s) for the clinical trial and for ensuring that the investigator(s) are qualified by education, training, and experience.

Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, investigators must also meet the following requirements (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Provide evidence of their qualifications and experience through an up-to-date curriculum vitae (CV)
• Have a current practice license from the relevant regulatory authority
• Be familiar with the characteristics and appropriate use of the investigational product (IP) as described in the protocol, current investigator’s brochure (IB), in the product information, and in other information sources
• Have a clear understanding and willingness to obey the ethical, good clinical practice (GCP) and legal requirements in the conduct of the trial
• Permit monitoring and auditing of the trial and inspection by the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) or appointed representatives
• Keep a list of appropriately qualified persons to whom the investigator has delegated significant trial-related duties
• The principal investigator (PI) must be an appropriately qualified and competent person having practical experience within the relevant professional area and who is responsible for the conduct of the clinical trial at a clinical site
• The PI must have a degree in medicine, pharmacy, pharmacology, toxicology, biochemistry, dentistry, or a related discipline from a university recognized in Kenya
• The PI must have a valid practice license from the relevant regulatory authority
• The PI must have a valid professional indemnity cover
• The PI must be a citizen of Kenya or a permanent resident in Kenya
• A PI must have had previous experience as a co-investigator in at least two (2) trials in the relevant professional area
• Have adequate time and resources to carry out the study (See Annex 6 of the G-KenyaCT for the PPB’s recommended format to document the investigator’s workload)

Further, the G-KenyaCT states that sponsors must ensure that investigators have had formal training in GCPs with proof that a GCP course was attended within the last two (2) years. If training has not been completed, it is the responsibility of the sponsor to organize this training prior to initiating the study. The investigators will need to provide evidence of having obtained this training. As delineated in KEN-14, 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 IB. Furthermore, the sponsor must sign an agreement or contract with the participating institution(s). Additionally, the sponsor must define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the relevant parties participating in the study. (See the Submission Content section for additional information on clinical trial application requirements.)

Institutional Registration

The STI-Act and the STI-Regs require research institutions to register with the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) and obtain a Certificate of Registration. For detailed guidance on the vetting and approval process, see the STI-Regs and the G-InstitutionRegistration.

Upon creating an account in NACOSTI’s Kenya National Research Information System (KENRIS) (KEN-23), research institutions can apply for new research institution registration, maintain/update data, and submit annual reports. The application for registration of research institutions is also provided in KEN-11, and the reporting tool for registered research institutions is provided in KEN-36.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

The G-ECBiomedRes requires that with collaborative research projects, the collaborating investigators, institutions, and countries must function as equal partners with safeguards to avoid exploitation of local researchers and participants. An external sponsoring agency should submit the research protocol to their country’s EC, as well as the Kenyan EC where the research is to be conducted. Further, this research must be responsive to the health needs of Kenya and reasonably accessible to the community in which the research was conducted. Consideration should be given to the sponsoring agency agreeing to maintain health services and faculties established for the purposes of the study in Kenya after the research has been completed. Such collaborative research must have a local/Kenyan co-principal investigator.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

The G-KenyaCT indicates that the PPB recommends establishing a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) to monitor trials in the following types of studies:

• Where the endpoint is such that a highly favorable or unfavorable result, or even a finding of futility at an interim analysis, might ethically require the trial to be terminated early
• When there are safety concerns due to the use of a particularly invasive treatment
• Where there is prior information suggesting the possibility of serious toxicity with the study treatment
• Where the participants involved represent a vulnerable population (e.g., children, pregnant women, elderly, terminally ill, or mentally incapacitated)
• When the participants represent a population at higher risk of death or other serious outcomes
• When the study is large, of long duration, and multi-center

KEN-14 states that a DSMB may be established to assess the progress of a clinical trial, including the safety data and the critical efficacy endpoints at intervals, and to recommend to the sponsor whether to continue, modify, or stop a trial.

Per the G-KenyaCT, the DSMB must provide the following documentation to the PPB:

• DSMB composition
• Copy of DSMB charter
• DSMB reports to be submitted to the PPB within two (2) weeks of its deliberations and in the request for annual approval

For multicenter trials, the G-ECBiomedRes requires that centralized data management and analysis should be planned as per G-WHO-DSMB.

Multicenter Studies

Per the G-KenyaCT, for multicenter studies in Kenya, the coordinating investigator should be a Kenyan resident and should assume full responsibility for the trial.

The G-ECBiomedRes requires that multicenter trials conducted simultaneously by several investigators at different sites follow the same protocol. Ideally, these trials should be initiated at the same time at all sites. The sponsor must provide the protocol to the investigators, who will accept the protocol in writing. If approved by the EC of the local host institution, the protocol may be modified to suit the local conditions. Meetings should be organized at the initial and intermediate stages of the trial to ensure uniform procedures at all sites. All sites and parties should also agree on procedures for publication of a final report. Research staff should receive training at every trial site on the uniform procedures. In addition, research staff at all sites should implement standard methods for recruitment and evaluation/monitoring of laboratory procedures and conduct of trial. There must be monitoring to ensure the sites are following the protocol, which must include measures to terminate the participation of some sites, if necessary. Finally, centralized data management and analysis should be planned as per G-WHO-DSMB.

Additional multicenter guidance is delineated in KEN-14:

• All investigators conduct the trial in strict compliance with the protocol agreed to by the sponsor, and, if required, by the PPB, and given EC 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 among investigators is facilitated

Overview

As set forth in the SA-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for using qualified individuals (e.g., biostatisticians, clinical pharmacologists, and physicians), as appropriate, throughout all stages of the trial process. Sponsors should select investigator(s) who are qualified by training and experience and have adequate resources to conduct the proposed clinical trial.

Per the SA-GCPs, all parties involved in the conduct of a trial should be familiar with the guidance in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (ZAF-27) and other international guidelines.

Capacity Building & Training

As described in the G-Monitor, the sponsor should consider previous experience with the investigator or site, workload of the investigator, and resource availability at the study site during investigator and site selection. Per the G-Capacity, clinical trial applications should include evidence and activity plans to build capacity at each study site as well as enhancing research activities and skills of professionals from historically disadvantaged groups. Mandatory training in Good Clinical Practice (GCP) forms a part of capacity building. To support transformation and capacity building, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) states that the sponsor must have a policy on “Capacity Building and Transformation in Clinical Research in SA” in place, and preferentially select sites that are compliant. See G-Capacity, for detailed information on actions that will comply with this requirement.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that researchers must be suitably qualified and technically competent (trained and supervised, in the case of student researchers) to carry out the proposed research. The principal investigator (PI) has primary responsibility to ensure the safety and wellbeing of participants, the scientific integrity of the protocol, research data management, and responsible implementation of that protocol. Competence is demonstrated mainly by academic qualifications, credentials, and scientific and technical competence, as evidenced in previous publications or testimonials. Competence includes research competence, which is assessed in terms of education, knowledge, certification, and experience. In addition, researchers must produce evidence of appropriate research ethics training within the previous three (3) years.

The SA-GCPs prescribes mandatory GCP training with evidence of current (i.e., within three (3) years) GCP training and general research ethics training. To meet the required GCP training, the GCP-Trning indicates that virtual methods are acceptable (Zoom, Teams, etc.) for both basic and refresher training. Virtual training must be done properly, which includes monitoring interactive and active engagement of participants, and using a full-time facilitator (qualified to conduct training) available for the entire duration including questions and answers. To ensure inclusivity and fairness, consideration should be given to those who are unable to attend virtual training, especially in remote areas where internet accessibility remains a challenge. A hybrid model could be considered in this case. The duration of basic GCP training should be in alignment with the prescribed outcomes or unit standards (approximately two (2) days). The training content should be accredited by the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA).

Management of Investigators

According to the SA-GCPs, the sponsor must also define and allocate all study related duties and responsibilities to the investigator prior to initiating the study.

In addition, per ZAF-21, to add or change investigators and/or additional sites to an approved clinical trial, the sponsor must submit a signed application to SAHPRA. See ZAF-21 for details.

Per the G-CTInvestigators, SAHPRA will recognize and approve categories of investigators for trial leadership. The PI must be a South Africa-based scientist, who has sole or joint responsibility for the design, conduct, and delegation of trial responsibilities, analysis, and reporting. The PI is accountable to the sponsor and regulatory authorities. The PI can designate and supervise sub-principal investigator(s) (Sub-PI) of which at least one (1) must be a clinician and registered with the appropriate statutory entity to provide clinical oversight within their scope of practice. Further, the SAHPRA recognizes a category of co-principal investigator (co-PI), which allows for a team consisting of two (2) co-PIs to lead a study at a site. At least one (1) of the co-PIs must be a clinician registered with the appropriate statutory body and qualified to provide clinical oversight within their scope of practice. For multi-center studies, there must be a national PI appointed, who may or may not be a site PI. The national PI must have appropriate experience and expertise in that field and must be responsible for the application to the SAHPRA to conduct the study. The national PI must meet all other requirements to be a PI and sign a declaration accepting the responsibility as national PI and sign off on the clinical trial application. For more information on PI requirements, roles, and responsibilities, see the G-CTInvestigators.

Foreign Sponsor Responsibilities

As required in the SA-GCPs, if South Africa is selected as a clinical trial site but the country of origin or other high-income countries are not, the sponsor must explain the reason(s) why and provide a clear ethical justification. Further, multi-national trials should ensure that a reasonable proportion of project team members are South African researchers, including scientists and health care professionals and those from previously disadvantaged backgrounds.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, all international collaborative health research conducted in South Africa must undergo ethics review and approval by a South African registered EC and comply with the SA-GCPs. In addition, if international collaborators are affiliated with a foreign research institution or university, they must provide evidence of ethics review and approval from their home institution. International researchers are expected to demonstrate sensitivity to and understanding of the local socio-economic and political conditions of the research context, as these may indicate vulnerabilities of potential participants. It is advisable to create appropriate memoranda of understanding (MOUs) and agreements to establish the expectations, roles, and contributions of the various parties, as well as the limitations of the collaborative relationship. An agreement should exist between the host research institution and the collaborating institution(s) regarding all aspects of the research, including management of the research itself; research data management that includes the fate of the data and samples after completion of the study; financial arrangements; approach to research output publications; infrastructure development; allocation of intellectual property rights; and dispute resolution mechanisms. Selection of study participants is expected to be based on distributive justice and fairness. Risk/benefit assessments must be properly conducted to ensure that foreseeable risks of harm are mitigated and that anticipated benefits of participation are distributed fairly.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board

Per the SA-GCPs, the sponsor may establish an independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) to assess the progress of a clinical trial, including safety data and critical efficacy endpoints at intervals, and to recommend to the sponsor whether to continue, modify, or stop a trial. The DSMB must have written standard operating procedures and must maintain written records of all its meetings.

Multicenter Studies

Per the SA-GCPs, if the trial is a multicenter and/or multi-country trial, any differences in trial designs between the South African and other sites must be clearly documented and explained in the trial protocol and/or related documents. In addition, international research groups must comply with South African regulatory requirements, and researchers must adapt the trial design and informed consent procedures to take into account local conditions and characteristics.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that for international multi-site research, at least one (1) PI or co-PI must be physically in South Africa.

Insurance

As set forth in the G-KenyaCT and the G-ECBiomedRes, the sponsor must provide insurance cover for the study participants and ensure that the clinical trial institution, contract research organization (CRO), and researchers have sufficient insurance cover for the clinical trial. Per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor’s policies and procedures should address the treatment costs for trial participants in the event of trial-related injuries, and the sponsor should submit this information as part of the clinical trial application (see KEN-34). In addition, a no-fault insurance cover must be obtained for all controlled human infection studies. The International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14) guides sponsors on providing insurance. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14.

For all sponsor-initiated studies, insurance coverage must be provided by an insurer registered by Kenya’s Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA), and a valid insurance certificate must be issued by the IRA prior to the trial’s initiation and cover the duration of the study. The insurance certificate must be submitted as evidence to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB). The certificate must be properly executed by an insurance company under a valid insurance policy which makes explicit reference to the proposed study. In addition, the policy must grant coverage for any participant injury that is causally linked to trial activities. The policy must also cover the investigator(s)’ and the sponsor(s)’ liability in the trial, without excluding any damage which may be attributed to negligence. Moreover, self-insurance of the participants by other entities, such as the National Health Insurance Fund, will not be sufficient.

Further, per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor must ensure that the investigators and CROs have professional indemnity insurance coverage for the period of the trial. The host institution must also have in place sufficient insurance to meet the potential liability of its investigators, those acting on behalf of the investigators, and its research members.

Compensation

Injury or Death

As specified in the G-KenyaCT and the G-ECBiomedRes, the sponsor is responsible for providing compensation to research participants and/or their legal heirs in the event of trial-related injuries or death. Per the G-ECBiomedRes, participants are entitled to such financial or other assistance as would compensate them equitably for any temporary or permanent impairment or disability. In the case of adverse events, there should be proper assessment, evaluation, and compensation. The G-ECBiomedRes also indicates that when investigational vaccines contain active or live-attenuated micro-organisms, should participants in the control group contract the disease for which a vaccine is being tested, free treatment must be provided.

In addition, the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14) provides guidance for 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

The G-ECBiomedRes defines compensation to include offers to participants, monetary or otherwise, to offset the time and inconvenience for participating in research.

Post-Trial Access

Per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor must put in place measures to ensure that the study participants have access to successful investigational products for their disease condition before the products have received a marketing authorization in Kenya, especially for the Phase III clinical trials. The G-ECBiomedRes indicates that when investigational vaccines contain active or live-attenuated micro-organisms, post-trial access to the vaccine should be available to the control group.

Insurance

As set forth in the G-Insurance and the SA-GCPs, all clinical trial sponsors and investigators must obtain adequate insurance and indemnity to cover any liability claims during the conduct of a clinical trial, in accordance with the responsibilities described in the SA-GCPs. As delineated in the SA-GCPs and G-Insurance, a sponsor must follow the principles set forth in the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry’s (ABPI) guidelines (ZAF-26 and ZAF-25) to comply with South Africa’s clinical trial insurance requirements. Per the SA-GCPs, research participants should not bear any financial cost to rectify harms that occur as a result of trial participation. The insurer pays the medical costs of necessary treatment to restore the previous position of the participant, if possible, when bodily or other injury is attributable to trial participation. Only bodily injuries of an enduring and disabling character (including exacerbation of an existing condition) and/or death are covered by the insurance. Temporary pain or discomfort or less serious or curable complaints are generally not regarded as trial-related, bodily injury. In the case of an in-utero injury due to the mother’s participation, payment for medical expenses proceeds as though the unborn child is a research participant. For additional details on limitations on liability, dispute resolution, weighting of risk factors, and insurance settlements, see the SA-GCPs. In addition, see the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, which reaffirms these requirements and provides legal analysis of insurance and legal claims.

Per the G-Insurance, the application to conduct a clinical trial must include evidence of comprehensive no fault insurance for serious injury and harm and/or death. In addition, the sponsor must provide indemnification for all investigators and trial sites involved in their clinical studies on compliance with the protocol requirements. In cases where the investigators/site staff were negligent and/or did not comply with the protocol requirements, personal malpractice insurance would apply.

As delineated in the G-Insurance and ZAF-23, an insurance certificate and indemnity must be included in the clinical trial application submitted to the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA). Per the G-Insurance, the sponsor must include details of the insurance, including the following:

• Name and local address of the insurance company, including contact name and telephone number
• Title and protocol number of the clinical trial
• Date of commencement and termination of coverage
• Liability limit – per occurrence and total per occurrence and total for the study. Note that the limit should be adequate enough to cover extended stay in an intensive care unit or hospital
• Date of issuance of the insurance policy and expiry thereof
• Original or electronic signature of the insurer
• Special conditions if any. It is unacceptable to have special conditions which may invalidate or abate the clinical trial cover
• Any additional coverage
• Declaration of compliance with the SA-GCPs and ABPI guidelines on the certificate and in the patient information leaflet
• Where the insurance is not provided by a local company, a local insurance vendor must be identified with full details
• Insurance policy number
• The amount insured

Compensation

Injury or Death

As set forth in the G-Insurance, all clinical trial sponsors and investigators must have adequate insurance to cover any liability claims during the conduct of a clinical trial, in accordance with the responsibilities as described in the SA-GCPs. As delineated in the SA-GCPs and G-Insurance, a sponsor must follow the principles set forth in the ABPI guidelines (ZAF-26 and ZAF-25) to comply with South Africa’s participant compensation and treatment requirements for trial-related injuries. The guidelines state that the sponsor should furnish written assurance to the investigator that the sponsor will agree to pay compensation to participants and/or their legal heirs in the event of trial-related injuries or death. The investigator, in turn, communicates this information to the relevant ethics committee (EC).

The SA-GCPs, the G-Insurance, and ZAF-26 provide several compensation principles to guide sponsors in fulfilling their obligations (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Compensation should be paid when it can be demonstrated that a causal relationship exists between a participant’s injury and their participation in a trial
• Compensation should be paid when the injury results in permanent injury or disability to the participant
• When there is an adverse reaction to a medicinal product under trial, and injury is caused by a procedure adopted to deal with that adverse reaction
• The sponsor/applicant is under strict liability with respect to injuries caused by the investigational product (IP), and research participants should not bear any financial cost to rectify harms that occur as a result of trial participation
• The insurer should pay the medical costs of necessary treatment to restore the previous position of the participant, if possible
• In the case of an in-utero injury due to the mother’s participation, payment for medical expenses proceeds as though the unborn child is a research participant
• In principle, only bodily injuries of an enduring and disabling character (including exacerbation of an existing condition) and/or death are covered by the insurance; temporary pain or discomfort or less serious or curable complaints are generally not regarded as trial-related, bodily injury
• Where there is an adverse reaction to an IP and the injury is caused by a procedure adopted to deal with that adverse reaction, compensation should be paid for such injury as if it were caused directly by the IP
• Payment for medical expenses is made without acknowledgement of any legal liability and is thus to be understood to be an ex-gratia payment
• The provision of insurance cover and payment of medical expenses does not mean that an injured participant may not pursue legal action against the sponsor for loss or harm not covered by the insurance; however, an argument that pain and suffering, loss of income, and other possible claims should be paid for by the sponsor’s insurer is not sound in South African law and will not succeed
• The likelihood of an adverse reaction, or the fact that the participant has freely consented (whether in writing or otherwise) to participate in the trial should not exclude the participant from being eligible for compensation

According to the SA-GCPs and ZAF-26, the amount of compensation to be paid to the participant should be appropriate to the nature, severity, and persistence of the injury. The compensation should also be generally consistent with the amount of damages commonly awarded for similar injuries. The amount paid in compensation should be abated, or in certain circumstances excluded, in light of the following factors (which will depend on the risk level the participant can reasonably be expected to accept):

• The seriousness of the disease being treated
• The degree of probability that adverse reactions will occur and any warning given
• The risks and benefits of the established treatments relative to those known or suspected of the trial medicines

ZAF-26 provides that in any case where the sponsor agrees to pay the participant, but the two (2) parties differ on what is the appropriate level of compensation, it is recommended that the sponsor agree to seek, at the sponsor’s own cost, the opinion of a mutually acceptable independent expert. This opinion should then be made available to the participant(s), and the expert’s opinion should be given substantial weight by the sponsor in reaching a decision on the payment amount.

Additionally, any participant claims pursuant to ZAF-26 should be made to the sponsor, preferably via the investigator. The participant should include details on the nature and background of the claim, which the sponsor should review expeditiously. The review process may be delayed if the participant requests an authority to examine any medical records relevant to the claim.

Trial Participation

As specified in the G-TIECompensation and the SA-GCPs, the sponsor or the designated representative is responsible for providing compensation to research participants. The SA-GCPs state that before the clinical phase of the trial commences, the EC must approve the documentation on participant compensation. Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the SA-GCPs, and the G-TIECompensation, compensation should be based on time, inconvenience, and expenses (TIE). In addition, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF and the SA-GCPs also address researcher requirements to budget for participant travel and other expenses. (See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for detailed information).

The G-TIECompensation guides sponsors of approved clinical trials and proposes a model for minimum compensation that can be paid. It is not intended as an exclusive approach and the SAHPRA reserves the right to request any additional information. In addition, G-TIECompensation is not applicable to Phase I clinical trials, which pose a higher risk for participants and should be compensated on a different scale.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF explains that inducements (also known as incentives) may be offered in justified circumstances (e.g., where recruitment is anticipated to be difficult) to encourage participation and to express appreciation by offering gifts over and above reimbursement of expenses and compensation for time and inconvenience. Inducements are not necessarily cash but may take other forms like data or airtime vouchers, food vouchers, etc. Importantly, an inducement should not unfairly influence an informed choice about whether to participate or undermine a potential participant’s ability to assess the risk of harm. This is especially important for Phase I and First in Humans clinical trials where the circumstances may involve healthy people being offered significant payments over and above those outlined in the TIE method. All inducements should be clearly explained and justified to the EC. If there are community members on the EC, their input may be constructive regarding appropriate inducements.

Post-Trial Access

The G-PostCTAccess guides sponsors on when to consider post-trial or continued access (PTA/CA) to the IP following the trial’s conclusion. Only those participants who derive benefit from the IP will be considered (this excludes participants on standard of care, placebo, and registered medicines). Where appropriate and available, the possibility of PTA/CA should be disclosed to and discussed with potential participants during the initial informed consent process or via a separate consent process. Where appropriate and/or available, details of potential PTA/CA should be included in the clinical trial application form, informed consent form, and patient information leaflet. Additional considerations include the following:

• PTA/CA is not applicable for Phase I and II studies. However, PTA/CA may be necessary for particular diseases (e.g., cancer or rare diseases).
• PTA/CA should be considered for Phase III studies when there is no registered and marketed standard of care in South Africa, provided that data from interim or final analyses shows that access is clinically justifiable.
• PTA/CA is not applicable to Phase IV studies
• A minimum of four (4) years after completion of the study is recommended as the acceptable time period to provide PTA/CA to the participants, unless there are compelling reasons for determining otherwise.
• During the PTA/CA period, the sponsor must ensure monitoring and oversight of participants using the IP.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

As stated in the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor is responsible for 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, the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), the STI-Regs, and other applicable regulatory requirements. 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 the STI-Regs, all persons and research institutions (i.e., sponsors) undertaking research in Kenya must ensure the highest standards and quality of research for the realization of institutional mandates and national priorities.

In addition to complying with KEN-14, the G-KenyaCT indicates QA processes should be developed to ensure:

• Regular and continuous monitoring of the study and the implementation of monitoring reports’ recommendations
• Submission of the study monitoring plan to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) during the initial submission of the application
• The clinical trials research site must have valid registrations and approvals
• Patient safety and confidentiality are not compromised
• Analysis or evaluation of samples is performed in accordance with the protocol and good clinical practice (GCP) principles and, where applicable, the contract/agreement, the work instruction, and associated methods
• Adherence to the laboratories’ policies and SOPs
• Trial data is recorded and reported accurately, legibly, completely, and in a timely manner
• Trial data is archived
• Preparation of a work instruction detailing the procedures that will be used to conduct the analysis or evaluation prior to the initiation of sample analysis or evaluation, as necessary
• Be built or adapted for the purpose
• Have automated equipment for routine hematology, biochemistry, and serology tests
• Have procedures for analyzer calibration and quality control
• Regular maintenance of all the equipment, including point-of-care equipment
• Have a procedure for transporting samples safely and quickly from clinical areas to the laboratory
• Have written procedures for all assays, and to validate the assays
• Reagents and consumables are used within their expiry dates based on a stock control procedure
• Records are kept, including source documents and final reports
• Have a procedure for authorizing and releasing results
• Have a procedure for ‘flagging’ and notifying medical staff of abnormal results
• Have a laboratory information management system, and validate and back up the system
• Protective clothing and safety equipment are provided for staff
• Have a central alarm system for all fridges and freezers
• Have an internal audit program

Per KEN-14, the sponsor should implement a system to manage quality throughout all stages of the trial process, focusing on trial activities essential to ensuring participant protection and the reliability of trial results. The quality management system should 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
• Identify risks to critical trial processes and data
• Evaluate the identified risks against existing risk controls
• Decide which risks to reduce and/or which risks to accept
• Document quality management activities and communicate to those involved in or affected by these activities
• Periodically review risk control measures to ascertain whether the implemented quality management activities are effective and relevant
• 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

Per the G-KenyaCT protocol violations and protocol deviations must be reported to the PPB within seven (7) days of the principal investigator (PI) becoming aware of them. The details to be reported must include:

• Date of the deviation/violation
• Study participant(s) affected
• Name of the treating physician
• Detailed description of the deviation/violation
• Indication whether the study participants were adversely affected by the deviation/violation
• Explanation of why the deviation/violation occurred
• Measures taken to address the deviation/violation
• Measures taken to preclude future recurrence of the deviation/violation

In addition, see G-KenyaCT for information about medical care of trial participants during and following the clinical trial. Also see the Bft-Risk for a standardized approach for evaluating and reporting the balance between the benefits and risks of health products, which includes investigational products (IPs) undergoing clinical trial application.

The CT-Emrgcy provides guidance to sponsors, PIs, and institutions on the conduct of clinical trials during public health emergencies to maximize the safety of research participants, minimize risks to participants and the community, and ensure the integrity of the clinical trials. See CT-Emrgcy for details on a range of issues, including contingency planning, communications with participants, changes to studies, protocol deviations, reporting, and supply of IPs during a public health emergency.

Controlled Human Infection Studies

The G-KenyaCT also provides detailed information on controlled human infection studies (CHIS) requirements to ensure investigator/study personnel compliance with GCP and other QA/QC requirements, including the following:

• The well characterized strain of an infectious agent should be administered at a controlled dose and by a specific route to carefully selected adult volunteers
• The studies require safe and accurate microbiology, good clinical facilities, careful recruitment, and monitoring
• Participants must be monitored for evidence of carriage or infection under medical supervision to anticipate or manage symptoms of disease and adverse events
• The value of the information to be gained should clearly justify the risks and the study must have a risk mitigation plan
• The investigators should be adequately qualified, trained, and experienced in the conduct of CHIS as well as treating patients with the infectious disease being investigated

For the complete list of requirements, see the G-KenyaCT.

The G-ECBiomedRes provides additional considerations when investigational vaccines contain active or live-attenuated micro-organisms:

• The participant to be vaccinated should be given adequate information about the adverse effects.
• Should participants in the control group contract the disease for which a vaccine is being tested, free treatment must be provided.
• Because the risks associated with vaccines produced by recombinant DNA techniques are not completely known, PPB guidelines must be strictly followed.
• Post-trial access to the vaccine should be available to the control group

Monitoring Requirements

As part of its QA system, the G-KenyaCT requires the sponsor to develop an internal audit program. The G-KenyaCT defines an audit as a systematic examination, carried out independently of those directly involved in the trial, to determine whether the conduct of a trial complies with the agreed study protocol and whether data reported are consistent with those on record at the site. Further, 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 An investigator must, upon request from any properly authorized officer or employee of PPB, at reasonable times, permit such officer or employee to have access to, and copy and verify any records or reports made by the investigator.

Per KEN-14, 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).

KEN-31 indicate that the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) may conduct an evaluation, or cause an evaluation to be conducted, of a research study to assess and evaluate compliance with the conditions of the applicable research license.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

The G-KenyaCT states that if a trial is terminated by the PI or the sponsor, the PI or the sponsor must inform the PPB not later than 15 days following the termination date. The co-investigators must also be informed as soon as possible and should be advised in writing of potential risks to the research participants, and they must ensure that patients continue to receive medical care. The PPB must be provided with reason(s) for the termination and its impact on the proposed or ongoing trials with respect to the IP, including issues relating to IP accountability and disposal as well as record(s) maintenance. In addition, the PPB may withdraw the authorization to conduct a clinical trial if it finds that the safety of the participants is compromised or that the scientific reasons for conducting the trial have changed.

According to KEN-14, if it is discovered that noncompliance significantly affects or has the potential to significantly affect participant protection or reliability of trial results, the sponsor should perform a root cause analysis and implement appropriate corrective and preventive actions. Further, the EC should also be informed promptly and provided the reason(s) for the termination or suspension by the sponsor.

Quality Assurance/Quality Control

Per the SA-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for implementing a quality management system to manage quality throughout the design, conduct, recording, evaluation, reporting, and archiving of clinical trials. This quality management system should adopt a risk-based approach for risk identification, evaluation, control, communication, and reporting. The sponsor should focus on trial activities that promote human participant protection and reliability of trial results, which include using qualified individuals, designating qualified medical personnel to respond to trial-related medical questions, and ensuring all aspects of the trial are operationally feasible and avoiding unnecessary complexity, procedures, and data collection. With respect to quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC), the sponsor is responsible for implementing and maintaining QA and QC systems with written standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure that trials are conducted and data are generated, documented (recorded), and reported in compliance with the protocol, good clinical practice, and the applicable regulatory requirement(s).

Per the G-Monitor, the responsibility for adequate oversight of the conduct of a clinical trial, including the justification for and selection of monitoring methods, remains that of the sponsor solely.

Per the SA-GCPs, all parties involved in the conduct of a trial should be familiar with guidance in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (ZAF-27) and other international guidelines. Additionally, the investigator must agree to conduct the trial in compliance with the SA-GCPs, ZAF-27, South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) requirements, and the ethics committee (EC) approved protocol. In the event of an interpretation conflict between the SA-GCPs and an international guideline, the SA-GCPs take precedence.

Monitoring Requirements

In accordance with the SA-GCPs, the sponsor must conduct an independent audit to evaluate trial conduct and compliance with the protocol, procedures, good clinical practice, and the applicable regulatory requirements. The sponsor must appoint individuals who are independent of the clinical trials to conduct the audits and ensure that the auditors are qualified by training and experience to conduct audits properly. The sponsor's audit plan and procedures for a trial audit must be guided by the number of participants in the trial, the type and complexity of the trial, the level of risks to the trial participants, and any identified problem(s). Observations and findings of the auditors must be documented. The sponsor is responsible for obtaining agreement from all involved parties to ensure direct access to all trial related sites, source data/documents, and reports for monitoring and auditing purposes, and inspection by domestic and foreign regulatory authorities.

In addition, per the G-Monitor, the sponsor’s monitoring plan should include planned audits to ensure that monitoring activities are in accordance with the monitoring plan, applicable regulations, guidance, and the sponsor’s plans and policies.

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, researchers are expected to provide appropriate information to the EC to facilitate monitoring, including alerts and investigator brochures.

Premature Study Termination/Suspension

Per the SA-GCPs, if a trial is prematurely terminated or suspended for any reason, the investigator must promptly inform the trial participants and ensure appropriate therapy and follow-up for them. If the investigator, sponsor, institution, SAHPRA, or the EC terminate or suspend a trial, the investigator must promptly inform the other parties with a detailed written explanation for the termination or suspension. The sponsor is also responsible for ensuring that the South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR) (ZAF-48) is updated as well.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF reiterates that if a project is terminated or suspended before the anticipated date of completion, then the researchers must report this immediately to the EC.

Electronic Data Processing System

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). As per KEN-14, 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 KEN-14, 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 standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the systems that cover 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 KEN-14 for additional information.

Records Management

According to the G-KenyaCT, it is the responsibility of the investigator and the sponsor to archive safely all trial-related documentation. All Kenyan trial site-related documentation must be archived within the country and not exported. Additionally, the sponsor/applicant must inform the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB)’s Expert Committee on Clinical Trials (ECCT) in writing prior to destroying any trial documents. The notification must include the protocol number, start and end date, and the license number.

The G-KenyaCT states that study documents must be archived for a minimum of 10 years from the end of the study. Also, records must be made available to the PPB within three (3) days if there is a concern regarding the use of a clinical trial drug and/or a risk to the health of the clinical trial participant. In any other case, records must be provided within seven (7) days of request.

Per the STI-Regs, sponsors should store research findings and information regarding research systems in a designated location with clear labels of the subject area. Research findings must be documented in bound books or documents with the research title, author, year, and other relevant information clearly printed on the cover page. A report of research work by staff and the research institution must be submitted to the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI) within two (2) months after publication or compilation of the research report.

In addition, KEN-14 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.

Electronic Data Processing System

Per the SA-GCPs, the sponsor must ensure that the electronic data processing system conforms to the specific documented requirements for completeness, accuracy, reliability, and consistency of intended performance, and that standard operating procedures for using these systems are maintained. In addition, the sponsor must:

• Ensure that the systems are designed to document data changes without deleting previously entered data (i.e., maintain an audit trail)
• Maintain a security system that prevents unauthorized access to the data
• Maintain a register of persons authorized to make data changes
• Maintain adequate data backup
• Ensure that blinding, if any, is maintained during data entry and processing
• Ensure the integrity and confidentiality of data, including any that describe the context, content, and structure of the data – especially when making changes to computerized systems
• If data are transformed during processing, it must be possible to compare the original data and observations with the processed data
• Use an unambiguous participant identification code that allows identification of all data reported for each participant
• Report any transfer of ownership of the data to the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA)

See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for detailed ethical, legal, and security considerations for database storage and access.

Per the G-Monitor, when developing a study’s monitoring plan, the sponsor should consider how it uses electronic data capture (EDC) systems. EDC systems that are capable of assessing quality metrics in real time will help identify high-risk sites that need more intensive monitoring.

Records Management

As set forth in the SA-GCPs, the sponsor should inform the investigator(s) in writing of the need for record retention, and should notify these parties in writing when the trial related records are no longer needed. The sponsor, or other data owners, must retain all the sponsor-specific essential documents pertaining to the trial for not less than 10 years or until at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of clinical development of the investigational product (IP).

Responsible Parties

For the purposes of data protection requirements, DPA delineates that the sponsor acts as the “data controller” in relation to research data. This is because the sponsor determines the purpose and means of processing personal data. The "data processor" processes personal data on behalf of the data controller. Data controllers and processors must be registered with the Kenya Data Commissioner. Per the DataProtect, an application for registration of a data controller or data processor must be on Form DPR1 (found in the First Schedule of DataProtect) with supporting materials and the required registration fees as specified in the Second Schedule. See the DataProtect for additional details on registration requirements.

Data Protection

Per the DPA, the data controller (sponsor) must ensure that personal data is:

• Processed in accordance with the right to privacy of the data subject
• Processed lawfully, fairly, and in a transparent manner in relation to any data subject
• Collected for explicit, specified, and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a manner incompatible with those purposes
• Adequate, relevant, and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which it is processed
• Collected only where a valid explanation is provided whenever information relating to family or private affairs is required
• Accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date, with every reasonable step being taken to ensure that any inaccurate personal data is erased or rectified without delay
• Kept in a form that identifies the data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which it was collected
• Not transferred outside Kenya, unless there is proof of adequate data protection safeguards or consent from the data subject

The DataProtect, which implements the DPA, requires data controllers and data processors to develop, publish, and regularly update a policy on their personal data handling practices. The policy should include the nature of personal data collected and held, how a data subject may access their personal data, complaints handling mechanisms, the lawful purpose for processing personal data, and requirements for when personal data is to be transferred outside Kenya. Regarding cross-border transfers of data, a data controller or data processor who is a transferring entity must (before transferring personal data out of Kenya) ascertain that the transfer is necessary. This necessity decision should be based on considerations such as data protection safeguards, an adequacy decision made by the Data Commissioner, and if there is consent of the data subject.

Per the DataProtect, data controllers and/or data processors must retain personal data processed for a lawful purpose and only as long as may be reasonably necessary for the purpose for which the personal data is processed. A data controller or data processor must establish a personal data retention schedule with appropriate time limits and periodic reviews. When the retention period has ended, the personal data must be erased, anonymized, or pseudonymized.

See DataProtect for additional details on data protection, including data subject rights, data protection design and principles, notification of breaches, impact assessments, and exemptions.

See Parts IV-VII of the DPA for detailed requirements on data processing, sensitive personal data, exemptions, and transfer of personal data outside of Kenya. The G-ECBiomedRes requires compliance with the DPA.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

Per the DPA, the data controller (sponsor) or data processor must bear the burden of proof for establishing a data subject’s consent to the processing of their personal data for a specified purpose. For the purposes of processing personal data, consent means any manifestation of express, unequivocal, free, specific, and informed indication of the data subject’s wishes by a statement or by a clear affirmative action, signifying agreement to the processing of personal data relating to the data subject. Unless otherwise provided under the DPA, a data subject has the right to withdraw consent at any time. The withdrawal of consent must not affect the lawfulness of processing based on prior consent before its withdrawal.

The DataProtect requires data controllers and data processors to ensure that a data subject has the capacity to consent and voluntarily gives consent. In seeking consent (prior to the processing), the data subject should be informed of:

• The identity of the data controller or data processor
• The purpose of each of the processing operations for which consent is sought
• The type of personal data that is collected and used
• Information about the use of the personal data for automated decision-making, where relevant
• The possible risks of data transfers due to absence of an adequacy decision or appropriate safeguards
• Whether the personal data processed will be shared with third parties
• The right to withdraw consent
• The implications of providing, withholding, or withdrawing consent

Per the DataProtect, this information may be presented to the data subject through a written notice, oral statement, audio or video message. The data controller or a data processor must ensure that the data subject has the capacity to voluntarily give consent that is specific to the purpose of processing.

Children

The DPA indicates that in cases where the data subject is a minor, a person who has parental authority or a guardian may exercise personal data protection rights conferred on the subject. With regard to data processing, the DPA requires that every data controller (sponsor) or data processor must not process personal data relating to a child unless consent is given by the child's parent or guardian and the processing is in a manner that protects and advances the rights and best interests of the child. A data controller or data processor must incorporate appropriate mechanisms for age verification and consent to process personal data of a child, including available technology, volume of personal data processed, proportion of such personal data likely to be that of a child, possibility of harm to a child arising out of processing of personal data, and other factors as may be specified by the Kenya Data Commissioner.

Mentally Impaired

The DPA indicates that in cases where the data subject has a mental or other disability, a person duly authorized to act as the participant’s guardian or administrator may exercise personal data protection rights conferred on the subject.

Responsible Parties

For the purposes of data protection requirements, the POPIA provides that the “responsible party” is a public or private body or any other person that, alone or in conjunction with others, determines the purpose of and means for processing personal information.

Data Protection

Per the POPIA, participants have the right to privacy, which includes a right to protection against the unlawful collection, retention, dissemination, and use of personal information by public and private bodies. This right to privacy is subject to justifiable limitations that are aimed at protecting other rights and interests (e.g., the right of access to information). Additional information on the rights of data subjects is provided in the POPIA.

The POPIA states that the responsible party must protect the constitutional right to privacy by safeguarding personal information when it is processed. The law provides conditions under which personal information may be gathered and processed.

• Accountability – The responsible party must ensure that the conditions and all the measures in the POPIA are complied with at the time the purpose and means of processing is determined
• Processing limitation – Personal information may only be processed in a fair and lawful manner and only with the consent of the data subject
• Purpose specification – Personal information may only be processed for specific, explicitly defined, and legitimate reasons
• Further processing limitation – Personal information may not be processed for a secondary purpose unless that processing is compatible with the original purpose
• Information quality – The responsible party must take reasonable steps to ensure that the personal information collected is complete, accurate, not misleading, and updated where necessary
• Openness – The data subject whose information you are collecting must be aware that you are collecting such personal information and for what purpose the information will be used
• Security safeguards – Personal information must be kept secure against the risk of loss, unlawful access, interference, modification, unauthorized destruction and disclosure
• Data subject participation – Data subjects may request whether their personal information is held, as well as the correction and/or deletion of any personal information held about them

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF reaffirms that data protection measures should be aligned with the requirements of the POPIA, including the conditions for cross-border transfer and sharing of health data. To ensure data processing is lawful, fair, and transparent, researchers should submit a data management plan to the ethics committee (EC), which covers how data will be collected, stored, accessed, shared, and disposed of or retained. The data management plan should indicate how it complies with the POPIA, how data security will be maintained and the processes for possible data breaches. If data-sharing options include the use of open-access databases, the selected databases must meet the minimum legal, ethical, and security requirements. See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for additional guidance and analysis. Also see the Specimen Import & Export section for details on sharing human biological material (HBM) and HBM data.

The POPIA establishes a duty requiring a public or private body to register its Information Officer with the Information Regulator (South Africa). Per the POPIA, the Information Officer is responsible for compliance with lawful processing of information and working with and responding to requests by the Regulator. Per the POPIA-Regs, the Information Officer has further responsibilities to:

• Develop, implement, monitor, and maintain a compliance framework
• Conduct a personal information impact assessment to ensure compliance with the conditions for the lawful processing of personal information
• Develop, monitor, and maintain a manual; and make it available upon request by any person, provide copies of the manual to any person upon request and payment of a fee to be determined by the Information Regulator from time to time
• Develop internal measures and systems to process requests for information or access
• Conduct internal awareness sessions on protection of personal information requirements
• Provide reasonable assistance free of charge to the data subject in objecting to processing of personal information (using Form 1 in the POPIA-Regs) and/or correcting or revising a record of personal information (using Form 2 in the POPIA-Regs)

The POPIA provides that records of personal information for research may be retained longer than is necessary for achieving the purpose for which the information was collected or processed if the responsible party has established appropriate safeguards against the records being used for any other purposes.

For additional guidance on processing personal data, including guidance on “special personal information” (e.g., health history) and personal information of children, see the Information Regulator website.

Consent for Processing Personal Data

Per the POPIA and the POPIA-Regs, personal information may only be processed if the data subject or legal representative/guardian consents to the processing. The responsible party bears the burden of proof for the consent. The data subject or legal representative/guardian may withdraw consent at any time if the lawfulness of the processing of personal information will not be affected.

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, consent to processing of personal information in terms of the POPIA requires a voluntary, specific, and informed expression of will, separate from the consent to participate in research. Special attention should be given to ensuring that computers and electronically stored data are protected from unauthorized access, inadvertent or accidental dissemination in the form of a ‘data dump’, etc. In general terms, a participant should know what personal information is being collected; why it is being collected; what will happen to it; how long it will be retained; whether it will identify the participant; whether it will be shared with others and why; whether it will be shared with third parties inside South Africa and why; and whether it will be sent outside South Africa and why. The participant should agree to these terms. Note that when processing some types of personal information, consent alone is insufficient as stipulated in the POPIA. Necessity must be evident too with special personal information, such as information about a person’s race or ethnic origin, a person’s health or sex life, a person’s inherited characteristics (genetic makeup), biometric information, or children’s personal information.

Consent for Processing Personal Data of Minors

Per the POPIA, there is a general prohibition on the processing of personal information of a minor. However, a responsible party may process personal information concerning a minor if the processing meets one (1) of the following conditions:

• It is carried out with the prior consent of a competent person
• It is necessary for the establishment, exercise, or defense of a right or obligation in law
• It is necessary to comply with an obligation of international public law
• It is for historical, statistical, or research purposes to the extent that the purpose serves a public interest and the processing is necessary for the purpose concerned; or it appears to be impossible or would involve a disproportionate effort to ask for consent and the processing does not adversely affect the individual privacy of the child to a disproportionate extent
• It is of personal information which has deliberately been made public by the minor with the consent of a competent person

As required in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, when personal information about a minor (under 18 years) is to be processed, permission of a parent/legal guardian is required before data collection, even when permission is not required for the specific activity that gives rise to the information (e.g., donating blood). A minor aged 16 years or more may donate blood without parent/legal guardian permission, but the POPIA requires parent/legal guardian permission to process the information.

Obtaining Consent

In all Kenyan clinical trials, a freely given informed consent must be obtained from each participant in accordance with the requirements set forth in the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). (Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in KEN-14.) The informed consent form (ICF) is viewed as an essential document that must be reviewed and approved by a National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI)-accredited institutional ethics committee (EC). The ICF must be provided to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) with the clinical trial application. (See the Required Elements section for details on what should be included in the form.)

The CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, and the G-ECBiomedRes state that the investigator, or the designated representative, must provide detailed research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. Per G-ECBiomedRes, all individual consent must be written and, in no case, should collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual informed consent. The G-KenyaCT and the G-ECBiomedRes 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. 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 the legal rights, or that releases or appears to release the investigator(s), the institution, the sponsor, or the representatives from their liabilities for any negligence. The participant or legal representative/guardian should also be given adequate time to consider whether to participate.

Re-Consent

According to the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, and KEN-14, any change in the ICF due to a protocol modification should be approved by the EC before such changes are implemented. The participant or legal representative/guardian will also be required to re-sign the revised ICF and receive a copy of any amended documentation.

Language Requirements

As stated in the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the ICF content should be presented in either English or Kiswahili, and the local spoken language of the area, where applicable. Copies of the English ICF should be submitted to the PPB and to the EC.

Documenting Consent

The CTRules and the G-KenyaCT state that the participant or legal representative/guardian, and the person who conducted the informed consent discussion should sign and personally date the ICF. Where the participant is illiterate, and/or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, verbal consent should be obtained in the presence of and countersigned by an impartial witness. Before participating in the study, the participant should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF, and any other written information provided during the informed consent process. The participant or legal representative/guardian should also receive a copy of any updates to the signed and dated ICF.

According to KEN-14, where the participant is illiterate and/or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, an impartial witness should be present during the entire informed consent discussion. The witness should sign and date the ICF after the following steps have occurred:

• The written ICF and any other written information to be provided to the participant is read and explained to the participant or legal representative/guardian
• The participant or 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 legal representative/guardian should receive a copy of the signed and dated ICF.

Waiver of Consent

No information is available.

Obtaining Consent

In all South African clinical trials, a freely given, written informed consent is required to be obtained from each participant in accordance with the principles set forth in the NHA, the Declaration of Helsinki (ZAF-44), the SA-GCPs, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (ZAF-27).

As per the SA-GCPs and the G-GPHlthCare, the informed consent form (ICF) and patient information sheet(s) are essential documents that must be reviewed and approved by a registered ethics committee (EC) based in South Africa and provided to the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) with the clinical trial application. (See the Required Elements section for details on what should be included in the form.) The principal investigator (PI), or a person designated by the PI, should provide research study information to the participant or legal representative/guardian. When drafting and presenting the ICF, special consideration must be taken with regard to the participant’s culture, traditional values, intelligence, and education. The informed consent document should be non-technical and understandable to the participant and in a participant’s preferred written language. The ICF content should be briefly and clearly presented, without coercion or unduly influencing a potential participant to enroll in the clinical trial.

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

G-EthicsHR-ZAF explains that an important element of enabling an informed choice is the nature and quality of information made available to the potential participant, such as reading the information sheet and/or dialoguing with the participants, allowing for verbal consent, which is then recorded and transcribed or documented manually in the researchers’ notes. The process should permit sufficient time for consultation between the recruitment step and the time of deciding whether to participate. No person should be required to make an immediate decision. ECs should assess the proposed process for informed consent as well as the information that potential participants will be given and the measures to facilitate understanding. Considerations for assessment include whether:

• The informed consent setting is sufficiently private and appropriate to minimize the possibility of undue influence
• The person conducting the informed consent process is appropriately trained, independent, and bias-free
• The text is in plain language and appropriate to the participants’ level of understanding with translations, as needed

Re-Consent

The G-GPHlthCare-IC states that the participant must be informed of any relevant new findings over the course of the study, and be given the choice to continue to participate or withdraw from the study. Per the SA-GCPs, written informed consent documentation and other participant-related information should be revised when new information that may be relevant to a participant’s consent or willingness to continue to participate in the trial becomes available. Any revisions must be submitted for ethics review and approval before implementation. Communication of the new information to participants must be documented.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the informed consent should be a trust-based process and relationship between the researcher and the participants, groups, and communities that extends over time. Consent must be negotiated and renegotiated as the research continues and develops.

Language Requirements

According to the SA-GCPs, the ICF should be provided in a participant’s preferred written language. The G-GPHlthCare states that the researchers should provide information to the participants in a language that the participant understands and in a manner that takes into account the participant’s level of literacy, understanding, values, and personal belief systems.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that informed consent material must be translated into the language(s) best suited for the population and context of the study. If appropriate, the consent documents can be translated. However, merely translating documents is insufficient to ensure that consent is informed because illiteracy is prevalent in some contexts, language dialects vary substantially across regions, some words and terminology are not easily translated, translated written materials may not be helpful to some participants, and/or professional translators are not content experts so mistranslation may occur. Therefore, it may be more useful to train a research assistant/interpreter who can explain information about the study verbally to potential participants in their language of choice and answer any questions they may have about the study.

Regarding the plain language text, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF indicates that the text should be appropriate to the participants’ level of understanding, which means:

• Translated into the language(s) best suited for the population and context of the study
• Has content, language(s), and procedures that are simplified and modified to accommodate any written or verbal language differences or impairments with which the participant may present
• Free of jargon and unexplained acronyms
• Clear and explains technical terminology

Documenting Consent

As stated in the SA-GCPs and the G-GPHlthCare, the ICF should be signed by the participant and the PI, or the person designated by the PI. If the participant is incapable of giving an informed consent, the legal representative/guardian should sign the ICF. The original signed ICF and patient information sheet(s) should be retained by the investigator and a copy should be given to the participant. The SA-GCPs requires an additional copy of the signed ICF and a source document identifying the study and recording the participation dates should be placed in the participant’s medical records. According to the NHA, the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the G-GPHlthCare, and the G-GPHlthCare-IC, in all cases, written informed consent must be obtained. Where the participant is illiterate and/or the legal representative/guardian is illiterate, verbal consent should be obtained in the presence of and countersigned by a literate witness. The participant or legal representative/guardian, the PI or person designated by the PI, and if applicable, a literate witness must personally sign the ICF. Further, the SA-GCPs states that the participant should indicate willingness to participate by making a mark (either a cross or a fingerprint). The witness signs to affirm that the participant willingly consented to participate. The witness dates the mark and signature.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF indicates that there may be circumstances where alternative forms of obtaining consent are allowed when it is not possible to have written consent. If it is ethically justifiable for the specific circumstances, then verbal consent may be approved. Usually, if verbal consent is permitted, a witness attests that the person did consent to participation after indicating understanding of the information provided. In addition, sometimes the nature of the research requires electronic data collection, or the potential participants may have an impairment that prevents a personal face-to-face consent process with written consent. Alternatives to face-to-face personal consent may not occur without sound justification approved by a registered EC. The justification for an alternate format of consent process must be evidenced by clear descriptions of why an alternative is justified in the circumstances and how the interests of the potential participant are properly protected.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, where electronic consent is proposed, the research protocol must describe in detail the method and process for obtaining consent. Electronic signatures are a functional equivalent of a paper-based signature with the same legal authority if it meets legal requirements including:

• A typed name at the end of an email
• A scanned image of a handwritten signature embedded into a document
• A digital signature

Further, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that in regards to telephonic (verbal) and electronic informed consent, EC reviewers of research protocols must insist on a proper decisive description of how informed consent will be regarded as authentic. The following electronic methods of obtaining informed consent are recommended:

• Telephonic recruitment for research that poses more than minimal risk of harm should be limited to screening for eligibility, followed by face-to-face informed consent, or virtual informed consent via an electronic platform
• Telephonic research surveys are possible for minimal risk studies, and verbal agreement to participate serves as informed consent
• For research that poses more than minimal risk of harm, different electronic platforms could be used for different purposes: a technology (e.g., email) to screen and obtain informed consent and another system to collect data

Waiver of Consent

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, any decision by the EC to grant a waiver of participant or legal representative/guardian consent must be documented and must include the justification for the decision. A waiver of consent to conduct the research can be justified on two (2) grounds: if the waiver will not infringe upon any right of a participant, and obtaining consent is impracticable; or if the rights infringement is minimal and is outweighed by the expected social value of the research, and obtaining consent is impracticable. Any decision by the EC to grant a waiver of participant or legal representative/guardian consent must be documented and must include the justification for the decision. A waiver of consent is not automatic and requires a researcher to apply to the EC for approval to use someone's personal information or personal health information without obtaining consent from the individual. The application must explain why a waiver is requested and how one of the justification criteria above applies. The EC must assess the level of risk of harm associated with a waiver, which refers to the risk of harm flowing from researchers accessing identifiable private information and not to risk of harm concerning the whole research project. An alteration of requirements for informed consent (as opposed to a full waiver) is possible, e.g., when existence of a signed consent form might pose a risk of harm (breach of confidentiality) to the participant in studies involving illegal behavior. The alteration may take the form of permitting unsigned informed consent documentation.

Based on the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), the informed consent form (ICF) should include the following statements or descriptions, as applicable (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Title of the project and that the study involves research and an explanation of its nature and purpose
• The expected duration of the participant’s participation
• The participant’s responsibilities in participating in the trial
• Experimental aspects of the study
• Approximate number of participants involved in the trial
• Trial treatment schedule and the probability for random assignment to each treatment
• Principal investigator(s), institution, and ethics committee (EC) contact information, the person(s) to contact for further information regarding the trial and the rights of trial participants, and whom to contact in the event of trial-related injury
• Any foreseeable risks or discomforts to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant
• Any expected benefits or prorated payment to the participant; if no benefit is expected, the participant should also be made aware of this
• Alternative procedures or treatment that may be available to the participant, including a statement on disclosure of appropriate alternative procedures or courses of treatment that might be advantageous to participants when the research involves non-validated procedures, devices, or therapies
• Compensation and/or medical treatment available to the participant or the family or dependents in the event of a trial-related injury
• Any additional costs to the participant that may result from participation in the research
• The extent to which confidentiality records identifying the participant will be maintained, and if the results of the trial are published, the participant’s identity will remain confidential
• That the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) will be granted direct access to the participant’s original medical records to verify clinical trial procedures and/or data without violating the participant’s confidentiality
• The details on storage and exportation of biological samples, if applicable
• The details on storage and ownership of personal data
• Information about unblinding, if applicable
• The extent of the investigator’s responsibility, if any, to provide medical services to the participant
• That therapy will be provided free of charge for specified types of research-related injury, including the investigators’ responsibilities in this regard
• That participation is voluntary, the participant may withdraw at any time, and refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits, or reduction in the level of care to which the participant is otherwise entitled
• That the participant will be informed about the dissemination of findings and about any publication of the participant’s medical information, including photographs and pedigree charts
• Foreseeable circumstances under which the investigator(s) may remove the participant without consent
• That the participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified in a timely manner if significant new findings develop during the study which may affect the participant’s willingness to continue
• Consent to incomplete disclosure, for example, if it is necessary to inform participants that some information is being withheld deliberately and the reasons for that decision; an offer to disclose the purpose at the conclusion of the study can be made

Note that per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14.

In addition, the CTRules delineates that if the potential participant is a child, the ICF must also contain these elements:

• The pathophysiology of the disease or subject of the clinical trial
• The methods of diagnosis
• The currently available treatment or prevention strategy in the pediatric population
• The incidence and prevalence of the disease or subject of the clinical trial in the overall population and in the pediatric population
• The evidence and assumptions on key differences between the disease or subject of the clinical trial in the overall population and the pediatric population

Based on the informed consent essential elements in the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the G-GPHlthCare, G-PostCTAccess, and the NHAParticipants, the informed consent form (ICF) should include the following statements or descriptions, as applicable (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• The study involves research and an explanation of its nature and purpose, including that it conforms to the protocol
• The procedures to be followed and their purpose and nature
• Why the potential participant has been approached, their responsibilities, and the research-related activities and procedures that the participant is being asked to consent to
• Who the researchers are, the nature of their expertise, and their responsibilities
• The aspects of the clinical trial that are experimental
• Any foreseeable risks or discomforts to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant; information should include the probability and magnitude of the foreseeable risks of harm
• The measures to be taken to minimize risk of harm
• Any benefits to the participant or to others that may reasonably be expected from the research both during and after the research; if no benefit is expected, the participant should also be made aware of this
• A disclosure of appropriate alternative procedures or treatments, and their potential benefits and risks
• The probability for random assignment to each treatment
• Participation is voluntary, the participant may withdraw at any time without explanation or prejudice, and refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits, or reduction in the level of care to which the participant is otherwise entitled
• Compensation and/or medical treatment available to the participant in the event of a trial-related injury
• The planned incentives, if any, to attract the participant and the planned reimbursements, if any, for time, inconvenience, and expenses
• The extent to which confidentiality of records identifying the participant will be maintained, the possibility of record access by the sponsor, the ethics committee (EC), or the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA)
• How the personal information of participants, including confidentiality of data collected during the research, will be protected
• Who will have access to participants' information, biological samples and associated data, including whether samples will be shared with other researchers
• That participants may request that corrections to their information be made or that their information or samples be deleted or destroyed; in cases where withdrawal of samples and information is not possible, the potential limitations and consequences of not withdrawing samples and data from research should be explained
• Instances where a legal obligation to disclose information may arise
• Statement that participants may contact the EC at the contact details provided if they have questions or complaints about their rights and welfare
• The sponsor’s identity
• Potential conflicts of interest of the principal investigator (PI)
• The consequences of a participant's decision to withdraw from the study
• Information about approval from a registered EC and SAHPRA
• Information about the EC monitoring the clinical trial
• The approximate number of participants in the research study, locally and globally
• The expected duration of participation
• Whether feedback about the study will be provided and, if so, how it will be provided
• Whether biological samples will be used for commercial benefit
• Where relevant, whether incidental findings will be shared with participants
• An explanation of whom to contact in the event of research-related injury
• A statement that participants may contact the researcher at the contact details provided if they have questions about the research project
• Foreseeable circumstances under which the investigator(s) may remove the participant without consent
• The research may be terminated early in particular circumstances
• The participant or legal representative/guardian will be notified if significant new findings developed during the study which may affect the participant's willingness to continue
• Information on post-trial or continued access (PTA/CA)
• Whether data and/or samples can be used after the person’s death, especially if it is possible that the person may die during the study
• Description of a measure to probe understanding and comprehension of the information is planned (e.g., a teach-back method), and how it proposes to do so especially for very vulnerable potential participants.

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

Overview

In accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (KEN-33) principles upheld in the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), Kenya’s ethical standards promote respect for all human beings and safeguard the rights of research participants. A participant’s rights must also be clearly addressed in the informed consent form (ICF) and during the informed consent process. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14.

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

As set forth in the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-14, a participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that the participant may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

The Right to Information

As delineated in the CTRules, the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-14, a potential research participant or legal representative/guardian has the right to be informed about the nature and purpose of the research study, its anticipated duration, study procedures, any potential benefits or risks, any compensation for participation or injury/treatment, and any significant new information regarding the research study.

The DPA further indicates that data subjects have a right to:

• Be informed of how their personal data is to be used
• Access their personal data in custody of the data controller (sponsor) or data processor
• Object to the processing of all or part of their personal data
• Correct false or misleading data
• Delete false or misleading data about them

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

As per the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and KEN-14, all participants must be afforded the right to privacy and confidentiality, and the ICF must provide a statement that recognizes this right.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

The G-KenyaCT, KEN-14, and the G-ECBiomedRes state that the participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the sponsor and the investigator(s) to address trial-related inquiries. Further, the G-ECBiomedRes requires that the ethics committee contact information also be provided.

The Right to Safety and Welfare

The G-ECBiomedRes and KEN-14 state that a research participant’s right to safety and the protection of the participant’s health and welfare must take precedence over the interests of science and society. KEN-14 upholds the Declaration of Helsinki (KEN-33). (See the Required Elements and Vulnerable Populations sections for additional information regarding requirements for participant rights.)

Overview

South Africa’s ethical standards promote respect for all human beings and safeguard the rights of research study participants. In accordance with the principles held forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (ZAF-44), the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the G-GPHlthCare, the G-GPHlthCare-IC, the NHAParticipants, and the International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (ZAF-27), a participant’s rights must be clearly addressed in the informed consent form (ICF) and during the informed consent process. Below are the basic rights for participants in clinical research studies. (See the Required Elements and Vulnerable Populations sections for additional information regarding requirements for participant rights.)

The Right to Participate, Abstain, or Withdraw

According to the NHA and the NHAParticipants, everyone has the right to participate in any decision affecting their health or treatment, including research. The participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed that participation is voluntary, that the participant may withdraw from the research study at any time, and that refusal to participate will not involve any penalty or loss of benefits to which the participant is otherwise entitled.

The Right to Information

According to the G-GPHlthCare-IC, a potential research study participant has the right to be fully informed on the nature and purpose of the research study, its anticipated duration, the sponsor and investigator(s), any potential benefits or risks, study procedures, any compensation for participation, injury and/or treatment, and any significant new information regarding the research study. (See the Required Elements section for a more detailed list.)

Per POAIA, a participant may seek access to their clinical trial records, pursuant to their constitutional right of access to any information held by the State or by another person.

The Right to Privacy and Confidentiality

Per the G-GPHlthCare-IC, participants have the right to privacy and confidentiality, and the ICF must provide a statement identifying this right. It is the responsibility of the investigator to safeguard the confidentiality of research data to protect the identity and records of research participants.

The Right of Inquiry/Appeal

Per the G-GPHlthCare-IC, the research participant or legal representative/guardian should be provided with contact information for the investigator(s), and the ethics committee to address clinical trial-related queries, in the event of any injury and/or to appeal against a violation of the participant’s rights. It is also required that the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) address and contact information be provided. (See the Required Elements section for more detailed information regarding participant rights.)

The Right to Safety and Welfare

The SA-GCPs and ZAF-44 clearly state that research participants have the right to safety and well-being, which must take precedence over the interest of science and society. The NHA and the NHAParticipants safeguard the rights of all South Africans including vulnerable populations.

The G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), make provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when the procedure is complicated by emergencies. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with KEN-14. As delineated in the G-KenyaCT and the G-ECBiomedRes, in an emergency, if the signed informed consent form (ICF) cannot be obtained from the research participant, the consent of the legal representative/guardian should be obtained. If the prior consent of the participant or legal representative/guardian cannot be obtained, the participant’s enrollment should follow measures specified in the protocol, and/or elsewhere, to ensure compliance with ethics committee (EC) and the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) requirements. The G-ECBiomedRes requires that the principle of clinical equipoise be applied, which essentially means the participant is not any worse off by enrolling.

During a public health emergency, the G-KenyaCT stipulates that the informed consent of participants must be obtained in individuals capable of giving informed consent. The CT-Emrgcy includes safeguards to protect clinical trial participants during a public health emergency, including the recommendation to reconsent if there are amendments as a result of the emergency.

Per KEN-14, in an emergency, if the signed ICF has not been obtained from the participant or legal representative/guardian, or if an effective treatment is lacking but the investigational product could address the participant’s emergency needs, the clinical trial may be conducted. However, the method used on the participant must be explained clearly in the trial protocol, and the EC must approve the protocol in advance. The participant or legal representative/guardian should be informed about the trial as soon as possible, and consent to continue and other consent should be requested, as appropriate.

The NHA and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF make provisions to protect the rights of a research participant during the informed consent process when the procedure is complicated by medical emergencies. As per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, there are emergency situations that merit use of deferred consent (also called delayed consent). Usually, the circumstances entail a temporary loss of decision-making capacity and a reasonably held prognosis that the person will regain the capacity within a predictable period (e.g., an unconscious patient in the Emergency Unit who is predicted to regain consciousness within hours). Deferred consent should be used only where the likelihood of obtaining personal informed consent after the research has begun is likely. The ethics committee (EC) may approve use of deferred consent if the following conditions are met:

• The proposed research is based on valid scientific hypotheses that support a reasonable possibility of more benefit than that offered by standard care
• The individual has a temporary loss of decision-making capacity
• There is a reasonably held prognosis that they will regain the capacity within a predictable period
• Participation is not contrary to the medical interests of the patient
• When the individual regains capacity to make decisions, they must be informed that they have been enrolled in a research study (i.e., deferred consent must be obtained); if they object to having been enrolled in the study, this counts as a refusal to participate, and they should be asked whether their data already collected must be withdrawn

If death of the participant occurs before deferred consent can be obtained, it should not be assumed that continued use of the data and/or samples is ethical. The deceased’s wishes or those of their proxy or mandate holder should be ascertained.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, during disease outbreaks, potential participants must be assisted to understand the research proposed and the implications of enrollment, despite the situational duress and anxiety. The notion that informed consent is a process does not change because the research is being conducted in pandemic circumstances. Research during a public health emergency must adhere to standard research ethics principles including informed consent.

Per the G-CTAPHEmerg, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) states that during a public health emergency, informed consent and the patient information sheet(s) remain essential documents that must be reviewed and approved by an EC and provided to the SAHPRA with the clinical trial application.

Overview

As per the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), in all Kenyan clinical trials, research participants selected from vulnerable populations must be provided additional protections to safeguard their health and welfare during the informed consent process. Vulnerable populations include those participants with diminished autonomy whose decision to participate in a clinical trial may be unduly influenced by the expectation of benefits associated with participation or by coercion. This may include, but is not limited to, children/minors, pregnant women, neonates, fetuses, medical students, members of the uniformed forces, prisoners, orphans, homeless populations, unemployed, internally displaced persons, economically or educationally disadvantaged persons, marginalized social groups, individuals with terminal illnesses, and the mentally challenged. KEN-14 also includes members of a group with a hierarchical structure, such as medical, pharmacy, dental, and nursing students, subordinate hospital and laboratory personnel, employees of the pharmaceutical industry, members of the armed forces, and persons kept in detention. Other vulnerable subjects include persons in nursing homes, patients in emergency situations, ethnic minority groups, homeless persons, nomads, refugees, minors, and those incapable of giving consent. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14.

Elderly Persons

The G-ECBiomedRes defines an elderly/senior citizen as a person who has attained the age of 65 years. Their physical or mental state may affect their ability to make voluntary decisions regarding their participation in research projects. Such research involving elderly/senior citizens must comply with the following requirements:

• Strict adherence to ethical principles
• The risk-benefit ratio must be favorable to the research participant
• The participants must be protected from gross violation of human rights

Persons in Dependent Groups

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, research involving data collection by superiors on their subordinates involves relationships such as employer-employee, teacher-students, supervisor-staff, sponsor-dependent, and parent-children. This relationship impairs independent consent by the participants leading to complacency. Therefore, research involving the superior/subordinate relationships must fulfill the following requirements:

• The superior must strictly follow ethical principles to avoid undue pressure
• Subordinates must be protected from gross violation of human rights
• The trial design must be based on a need-to-know principle and improve the conditions of the participants

Persons in Low-Resource Communities

The G-ECBiomedRes provides the following requirements related to conducting research on participants in low-resource settings:

• Persons in such settings should not be involved in research that could be carried out reasonably well in developed communities
• The research should be responsive to the health needs and priorities of the community in which it is to be implemented
• Undue inducement to participate in the research must be avoided at all costs

Armed Forces

The G-ECBiomedRes stipulates that research involving the members of the armed forces may be vulnerable because of the conditions of their service, which may affect their ability to make voluntary decisions regarding their participation in research. Such research must be conducted to ensure that:

• Participants are protected from gross violations of human rights
• There is strict adherence to ethical principles
• There is at least one (1) member of the ethics committee approving such research who is an enlisted and authoritative member of the armed forces

Terminally Ill

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, research involving participants who are terminally ill with an incurable medical condition are vulnerable. Their state may affect their ability to make voluntary decisions regarding their participation in research. Such research can only be conducted when:

• The objectives of the project(s) cannot be achieved using another non-vulnerable group
• There is strict adherence to ethical principles
• The risk-benefit ratio should be favorable to the research participant

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

Overview

The NHA, the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the G-GPHlthCare, and the NHAParticipants require special considerations for vulnerable populations, and characterize them by limited education, limited economic resources, inadequate protection of human rights, discrimination due to health status, limited ability to provide informed consent, limited availability of health care and treatment options, or an inadequate understanding of scientific research. Vulnerable populations include children/minors, mentally and physically disabled, pregnant women, substance abusers, prisoners, armed forces, the homeless, the elderly, members of a group with a hierarchical structure, patients with incurable diseases, persons in nursing homes, unemployed or impoverished persons, patients in emergency situations, ethnic minority groups, nomads, refugees, and other vulnerable groups such as persons in dependent relationships. (Note: Each of the items listed above will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements).

The SA-GCPs state that ethics committees (ECs) must pay special attention to protecting participants from vulnerable populations. The ECs may impose additional measures such as imposing additional protective measures for the informed consent process or requiring increased monitoring and interim reporting on the participants’ welfare. As per the NHAParticipants, research with vulnerable participants must comply with the following requirements:

• Involve vulnerable persons only when non-vulnerable persons are not appropriate for inclusion
• Not systematically avoid inclusion of vulnerable participants because it is unfairly discriminatory, and would prevent this population from benefiting from relevant research
• Be responsive to health needs and priorities of vulnerable persons, and
• Provide special attention in the ethical review to ensure research-related risks are assessed and minimized, and appropriate consent procedures are followed

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, where factors usually associated with vulnerability are integral to the research, the protocol should demonstrate how vulnerability will be managed. In cases where the researcher is known to the community and speaks the local language and/or is accepted as part of that community, this may be seen as a positive element for the research context. Special care should be exercised before undertaking research involving participants in such communities, and ECs should ensure that:

• Persons in these communities are not being involved in the research merely because they are expediently accessible, while the research is feasible to undertake in a less vulnerable community
• Research is relevant to the needs and priorities of the targeted community
• Research participants know they will take part in research and that the research will be carried out only with appropriate consent

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

Persons in Dependent Relationships or Hierarchical Situations

As indicated in the SA-GCPs and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, participants whose proposed involvement in research arises from dependent or hierarchical relationships need additional attention, and particular attention should be given to ensuring that their consent is both adequately informed and voluntary. In addition, per the NHAParticipants, research is appropriate when research-related risks of harm are minimized. These types of relationships include, but are not limited to, those who are in junior or subordinate positions in hierarchically structured groups, such as prisoners and prison authorities, older persons and their caregivers, and patients and healthcare professionals.

Persons Highly Dependent on Medical Care

Per G-EthicsHR-ZAF, individuals who are highly dependent on medical care deserve special attention when considering research participation. The gravity of their medical condition may require invasive measures that carry increased risk of harm. The quality of informed consent may be compromised by the effect the medical condition has on the participant’s decision-making or communication abilities. A patient may be reluctant to refuse consent for fear that this may compromise their medical treatment. Adequate provision must be made for informing patients and their relatives about the research to ensure that stress and other emotional factors do not impair their understanding. Their dependency on caregivers should not unfairly affect research participation decisions.

Persons with Physical Disabilities

As described in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, recruitment strategies for research participation should be sensitive to the possibility that persons with visual, hearing, or mobility impairments may wish to volunteer, and, therefore, should ensure that there are no unintended barriers to such participation (e.g., the absence of ramps or a lift for wheelchair-bound potential participants). Research involving participants with physical disabilities should anticipate possible barriers and include measures to minimize them.

Elderly Persons

As per the G-GPHlthCare, research involving elderly persons requires consent to be provided by the participant’s legal representative/guardian on that person's behalf. Because of their vulnerability, the elderly should not be included in research unless the research is necessary to promote the health of this population and unless this research cannot instead be performed on legally competent persons.

Research Involving Collectivities

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, a collectivity is a term used to distinguish some distinct groups from informal communities, commercial, or social groups. Collectivities are persons who participate in research in groups distinguished by common beliefs, values, social structures, and other features that identify them as a separate group; customary collective decision-making according to tradition and beliefs; the custom that leaders express a collective view; and members of the collectivity being aware of common activities and common interests. Research involves a collectivity when property or information private to the group as a whole is studied or used; permission of people occupying positions of authority is required; and participation of members acknowledged as representatives is involved. Among other requirements, research involving collectivities should include measures to ensure an informed consent process for individual participants.

According to the G-KenyaCT, a minor is someone under 18 years of age. As set forth in the G-KenyaCT, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), when the research participant is a minor, informed consent should be obtained from the parent/guardian. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14. The informed consent forms, assent forms, and the patient information sheets should be in a language that the parent/guardian clearly understand. All pediatric participants should be fully informed about the trial and its risks and benefits in a language and terms that they are easily able to understand.

Per the G-KenyaCT, a minor should take part in the informed consent procedure in a way tailored to their age and mental maturity. If capable, the participant should sign and personally date the written informed consent. In addition, consent given by pediatric participants should not be considered valid without prior approval by the ethics committee (EC).

The CTRules, the G-ECBiomedRes, and the G-KenyaCT state that a study may only be conducted on minors if several conditions are fulfilled including (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in all sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Pediatric participants will not be involved in research that might be equally carried out in adults
• The purpose of the research is to generate knowledge relevant to the health needs of children
• The parent/guardian must provide proxy consent and ensure assent has been obtained to the extent of the child’s capabilities. However, if the minor refuses to participate after proxy consent is given, the minor’s refusal must be respected unless there is no other medical alternative from which the minor could benefit
• The risk presented by interventions not intended to benefit the minor is low and commensurate with the importance of the knowledge to be gained
• Interventions that are intended to provide therapeutic benefit are likely to be at least as advantageous to the individual child as any available alternative
• No incentives or financial inducements are given to the participant or parent/guardian except to provide compensation for expenses and loss of earnings directly related to the participation in the trial

Additionally, per the G-KenyaCT, the trial should also address the following considerations:

• Provide useful answers to the study population
• The medicine satisfies a need for the population being studied
• Children are adequately monitored and protected
• If there is no direct benefit to the child, or there is no more than minimal risk to the participant(s)
• Trial results will be published
• End-of-trial treatment provisions will be made

Assent Requirements

As delineated in the G-KenyaCT, before undertaking research involving children, the investigator must ensure that the agreement (assent) of each child has been obtained to the extent of the child’s capabilities, and a child’s refusal to participate or continue in the research must be respected. Assent is defined as a child’s affirmative agreement to participate in research, where the child is below the age of the majority but old enough to understand the proposed research in general, its expected risks and possible benefits, and the activities expected of them as participants. The G-ECBiomedRes provides that in children above seven (7) years and below 18 years where the parent(s)/guardian(s) gives proxy consent, assent must be obtained from the child.

For an example of an accredited EC’s assent requirements, see the Kenyatta National Hospital-University of Nairobi (KNH-UoN) Ethics and Research Committee’s sample minor assent form (KEN-17).

The SA-GCPs and G-EthicsHR-ZAF stipulate that minors are younger than 18 years old and are regarded as vulnerable persons due to their lack of legal capacity. The G-GPHlthCare-IC states that a person over the age of 18 years is an adult and is legally competent to decide on all forms of treatment and medical procedures. However, a minor who is 12 years of age and older is legally competent to consent to a proposed investigation if the minor is of sufficient maturity and is able to understand the benefits, risks, social, and other implications of the research. A minor's refusal to participate in research must be respected.

Per the SA-GCPs, documented permission from the parent/legal guardian must be obtained in advance prior to approaching the minor to request participation. According to the NHA, the SA-GCPs, the G-GPHlthCare, and the G-GPHlthCare-IC, consent for minors to participate in research must be obtained from:

• The parent/legal guardian in all but exceptional circumstances (such as emergencies)
• The minor/child who is competent to make the decision
• Any organization or person required by law (defined in the NHA)
• Where the minor/child is not competent, assent from the minor/child and consent from the parent/legal guardian

According to the NHA, where research or experimentation is to be conducted on a minor for therapeutic purposes, the study may only be conducted when:

• It is in the best interests of the minor
• It is carried out in such manner and on such conditions as may be prescribed
• The consent of the minor’s parent/legal guardian is provided

Where research or experimentation is to be conducted on a minor for non-therapeutic purposes, the NHA, the NHAParticipants, the SA-GCPs, and the G-MinisterConsent state that a study may only be conducted when:

• It is carried out in such manner and on such conditions as may be prescribed
• The consent of the Minister of Health is provided, or, where appropriate, consent from a delegated authority
• The consent of the minor’s parent/legal guardian is provided
• The consent of the minor is provided when the minor is capable of understanding

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF further indicates that the following are minimum conditions for an ethics committee (EC) to approve research with minors:

• Their participation is scientifically essential to the research and investigate a problem of relevance to minors, and the protocol should provide sufficient information to justify why minors should be included as participants
• Minors should only participate in research where such research poses acceptable risks of harm
• Research involving minors must be reviewed appropriately, including pediatric or child research specialists as reviewers
• Registered ECs’ deliberations are properly documented in minutes and recorded and include EC members with appropriate minor research experience
• Minors should participate in research only when the required written permissions from the parent/legal guardian have been obtained
• When a parent/legal guardian gives permission for their minor to choose whether to participate in research, this permission is given based on a detailed description of all diagnostic and therapeutic interventions that will affect the minor in the study
• The informed consent documentation must explain whether results of tests will be made known to minor participants and their parents
• The minor’s interest in confidentiality must be respected
• The minor’s privacy interests are considered
• Research involving minors must respect their evolving capacity to give consent
• Researchers must familiarize themselves with the legal obligations to report minor abuse and neglect

See the NHAParticipants and G-EthicsHR-ZAF for detailed application requirements.

In addition, per the G-MinisterConsent, the Minister of Health may not give consent if any of the following circumstances apply:

• The study objective(s) can also be achieved if conducted on an adult
• The research is unlikely to significantly improve scientific understanding of the minor’s condition, disease, or disorder to such an extent that it will result in significant benefit to the minor(s)
• The reasons for the consent to the research by the parent/legal guardian and, if applicable, the minor, are contrary to public policy
• The research poses a significant risk to the health of the minor
• The risk to the health or well-being of the minor is not significantly outweighed by the potential benefit

For more information on ministerial consent for non-therapeutic health research with minors, see the operational guidelines at the G-MinisterConsent.

Assent Requirements

The SA-GCPs requires the EC to ensure that adequate steps outlined in the clinical protocol are used to obtain a minor’s assent when, in the EC’s judgment, the minor is capable of providing such assent. When the EC determines that assent is required, it must also indicate whether and how such assent should be documented. A minor’s assent should not be assumed simply because of failure to object during the informed consent process. It is necessary for the minor and the parent/legal guardian to be in agreement on participation. The minor’s refusal to participate is final.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the parent/legal guardian does not choose for the minor who has factual capacity to choose, rather, the parent/guardian gives permission for the minor to choose (i.e., to assent to participation). Where a minor is very young (less than seven (7) years old) or is factually incapable of exercising a choice, then the parent/legal guardian chooses whether the minor should participate. When ECs review protocols that involve minors, it is critical to consider whether the required written permissions have been obtained, including assent from the minor in writing preferably (i.e., agreement to participate) if they choose to participate.

See the Personal Data Protection section for requirements on processing personal data of minors.

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). In accordance with KEN-14, informed consent requirements for conducting clinical trials with pregnant or nursing women or fetuses follow the general requirements listed in the Required Elements section. Specifically, the informed consent form should include a statement on the reasonably foreseeable risks or inconveniences to the participant, and when applicable, to an embryo, fetus, or nursing infant.

As per the G-ECBiomedRes, research involving pregnant, lactating, and breastfeeding women may pose compromised long-term outcomes for the child. In addition, potential parent(s) can make decisions on behalf of the fetus(es), embryo(s), and zygote(s).

For fetal, embryo, and zygote(s) cases, research should be limited as follows:

• Cases that present no harm or offer assistance to the life system of the participants
• No procedures should be permitted that are likely to harm them
• A fetus ex-utero and alive, embryo, and zygote must not be involved in research unless it is intended to enhance the life of that fetus, embryo, and zygote or unless the research involves no risk to them

Additionally, the following guidelines must be followed for research involving pregnant, lactating, and breastfeeding women:

• The research carries no more than minimal risk to the fetuses or nursing infants
• Pregnant or nursing women should generally not be clinical trial participants except where such trials are designed to protect or advance the health of the pregnant/nursing women or fetuses/nursing infants, and for which women who are not pregnant or nursing would not be suitable participants
• The justification for such research should be that participants must not be arbitrarily deprived of the opportunity to benefit from investigational drugs, vaccines, or other agents that promise therapeutic or preventive benefits

As per the NHA and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, any research studies involving pregnant women, women who may become pregnant, or fetuses, require additional safeguards to ensure the research conforms to appropriate ethical standards and upholds societal values. The ethics committee (EC) must provide particular attention to these participants due to the potential for additional health concerns that may arise during pregnancy, and the need to avoid unnecessary risk to the fetus.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that any proposed exclusion of women participants must be justifiable in light of research priorities as well as the specific research question under consideration. Systematic class exclusion must be guarded against to avoid unfair participant selection. Additional health concerns arise during pregnancy, including the need to avoid unnecessary risk to the embryo, fetus, or infant; however, automatic exclusion of pregnant women should be avoided to prevent data inequities for pregnant and nursing women. Researchers and ECs should exercise extra caution when women participants are or may become pregnant. Exclusion of women from research may be justifiable to protect the health of the embryo, fetus, or infant and if exclusion is scientifically supportable. The informed consent documents must explain carefully and fully what the effects of the research activities on the embryo, fetus, or infant might be. Usually, research involving pregnant women should be undertaken when:

• The purpose of the proposed research is to meet the health needs of the mother of the embryos, fetuses, or infants
• Appropriate studies on animals and nonpregnant women have been completed
• The risk of harm to the embryo, fetus, or infant is minimal, when procedures or interventions have no potential individual benefit for the women or embryo, fetus, or infant
• The risk of harm is outweighed by the prospect of potential individual benefit, when procedures or interventions have potential individual benefit for the women or embryo, fetus, or infant
• In all cases, inclusion poses the least risk of harm possible for achieving the objectives of the research

The SA-GCPs stipulates that pregnant women, women planning to become pregnant, or breastfeeding women are usually excluded from human clinical trials where a new chemical entity (NCE) or medicines with no information on safety in pregnancy/lactation are investigated for treatment of a particular disease/condition or disorder. However, when safety and other relevant information is available, pregnant or breastfeeding women should be included in clinical trials to ensure that appropriate knowledge about NCEs for this group is developed.

Per the G-ECBiomedRes and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), prisoners are considered vulnerable because incarceration could affect their ability to make a voluntary decision regarding participation in research. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14. A research study involving prisoners should ensure that these prospective participants are informed and given the opportunity to make their own decisions without any interference or reprisals from a higher authority. The ethics committee must also ensure that the study will be independently monitored to assure the dignity and rights of the prisoners involved in the research.

According to the NHA, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, and the NHAParticipants, a prisoner may not, even with consent, participate in any scientific experimentation, research study, or clinical trial except under limited conditions. Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, prisoners are considered a vulnerable class of persons because of the potential effect of incarceration on the voluntariness of the decision to participate in research. Neither coercion nor undue influence is acceptable in the informed consent process. Researchers should pay attention to whether their intended participants are prisoners who are awaiting trial or are convicted as different ethical issues arise for each group. The recruitment strategy design must pay careful attention to how coercion and undue influence will be avoided. Similarly, persons administering questionnaires or conducting interviews must be conscious of environmental factors that may influence voluntariness. The ethics committee (EC) should include, at least on an ad-hoc basis, a member with experience and knowledge of working with prisoners when deliberating on the protocol.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, research should be conducted on prisoners only if:

• Their participation is indispensable to the research
• The research cannot be conducted with non-prisoners
• The research concerns a problem of relevance to prisoners
• Sound informed consent processes can be ensured
• Engagement with relevant role players about the proposed research has occurred

Generally, it is unlikely that independent consent by minor prisoners will be justifiable.

As per the G-ECBiomedRes and the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), an ethics committee (EC) within the relevant institution must approve the participation of adult research participants who are incapable by reason of physical and mental capacity to give consent. Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in KEN-14.

In addition, as delineated in the G-ECBiomedRes, a research study may involve participants with mental incapacities or behavioral disorders under the following conditions:

• Such research could not be carried out equally well with individuals who are in possession of their full mental faculties
• The knowledge gained would be relevant to the health needs of persons with mental or behavioral disorders
• The participant’s consent has been obtained to the extent of the participant’s capabilities, and a prospective participant’s refusal to participate is always respected
• In the case of incompetent individuals, informed consent shall be obtained from a legal guardian or other duly authorized person
• The degree of risk attached to the intervention not intended to benefit the individual participant is low and commensurate with the importance of knowledge to be gained
• Interventions that are intended to provide therapeutic benefit are likely to be at least as advantageous to the individual participant as any alternative

According to the NHA, the SA-GCPs, the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the G-GPHlthCare, and the NHAParticipants, sufficient justification must be provided for any research or treatment involving a participant who has a mental or intellectual impairment or substance abuse related disorder, and the research must be relevant to the mental disability or substance abuse disorder.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, research involving adults with incapacity should be approved only if:

• The research, including observational research, is not contrary to the best interest of the individual
• The risk of harm assessment shows that the research, including observational research, places the incapacitated adult at no more than minimal risk
• The research involves greater than minimal risk but provides the prospect of direct benefit for the incapacitated adult; the degree of risk must be justified by the potential benefit
• The research, including observational research, involves greater than minimal risk, with no prospect of direct benefit for the incapacitated adult, but has a high probability of providing generalizable knowledge (i.e., the risk should be justified by the risk-knowledge ratio)
• Greater than minimal risk must represent no more than a minor increase over minimal risk
• Where appropriate, the person assents to participation (Note that the incapacitated person’s refusal or resistance to participate, as indicated by words or behavior, takes precedence over permission by a proxy)

As delineated in the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, proxy decision-makers for incapacitated adults are not permitted in South African law unless the proxy is a court appointed curator or holds a statutory mandate to make health care decisions for the now incapacitated person pursuant to the NHA. Incapacity may not be assumed but requires independent and objective assessment by appropriately trained persons. If the research participant regains capacity to make decisions, they must be informed that they have been enrolled in a research study. If they object to having been enrolled in the research study, this counts as a refusal to participate, and their data must be withdrawn. If the participant does not object, personal consent may be desirable depending on the length and complexity of the study.

The G-KenyaCT defines an investigational product (IP) as any pharmaceutical product, including a new product or existing product for a new indication, in the form of an active ingredient or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial, including a product with a marketing authorization when used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a way different from the approved form, or when used for an unapproved indication, or when used to gain further information about an approved use.

As delineated in the SA-GCPs and the PIC-S-GMP-Guide (which South Africa adopted pursuant to the SA-GMPs), an investigational product is defined as a pharmaceutical form of an active ingredient or placebo being tested or used as a reference in a clinical trial. This includes:

• A product with a marketing authorization when used or assembled (formulated or packaged) in a different way from the approved form
• When used for an unapproved indication
• When used to gain further information about an approved use

Manufacturing

According to the PPA and the G-KenyaCT, the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) is responsible for authorizing the manufacture of all drug products, including investigational products (IPs) in Kenya. Per the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, an IP must be manufactured in accordance with the requirements of good manufacturing practice (GMP). The CTRules requires a sponsor to immediately notify the PPB in writing when a pharmaceutical or chemical alteration may affect the quality, safety, or efficacy of the IP product during an ongoing clinical trial. The G-KenyaCT states that the sponsor must submit the IP dossier directly to the PPB or may submit it through the principal investigator. The IP dossier must be prepared as per the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), which is required per G-KenyaCT. The manufacture of IPs may be subject to GMP inspection by the PPB in the same way as in the case of marketed drug products. See the G-KenyaCT for detailed chemistry and manufacturing information to be provided to the PPB if the IP has not been registered with the PPB.

KEN-14 also requires IPs to be manufactured, handled, and stored in accordance with applicable GMPs and used in accordance with the approved protocol.

Per the PPA, the PPB is authorized to regulate the manufacturing of medicine, including:

• Ensure that all medicinal products manufactured in, imported into, or exported from the country conform to prescribed standards of quality, safety, and efficacy
• Ensure that the personnel, premises, and practices employed in the manufacture, storage, marketing, distribution, and sale of medicinal substances comply with the defined codes of practice and other prescribed requirements
• Grant or revoke licenses for the manufacture, importation, exportation, distribution, and sale of medicinal substances
• Inspect and license all manufacturing premises, importing and exporting agents, wholesalers, distributors, pharmacies (including those in hospitals and clinics), and other retail outlets

See the KenyaGMP, for PPB’s compilation of recommended World Health Organization GMP guidelines to help comply with GMP requirements and prepare for an inspection, including for manufacture of IPs.

Import

Per the PPA and the ImpExp, the PPB is authorized to regulate the import and export of health products and technologies, including IPs. As per the ImpExp and the G-KenyaCT, to obtain an import permit for a clinical trial, the sponsor or investigator must submit an application online to the Kenya Trade Network Agency’s Kenya TradeNet Single Window System (KEN-28). The following documents must be submitted (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• The proforma invoice or invoice
• The ethics committee favorable opinion letter
• The Expert Committee on Clinical Trials approval letter from the PPB
• Registration of the institution where the research is being undertaken

The G-KenyaCT states that the sponsor must submit to the PPB a copy of the endorsed clinical trial import permit and/or evidence of delivery to the approved investigator(s)/trial center(s) on importation and supply of each consignment of the product. The product must only be supplied to the investigator(s) at the trial site(s) named in the clinical trial import license application for the purpose and use as stated in the said application. Prior PPB notification and approval is required for changes in the investigator, trial site, or protocol. The sponsor must inform PPB of any change in information, or any information received that casts doubt on the continued validity of the data, which was submitted with, or in connection with the application for the import permit. The sponsor must also inform the PPB of any decision to discontinue the trial to which the permit relates and state the reason for the decision. See KEN-8 for additional details on the procedures for obtaining an import license.

Per the CTRules, the import of an IP must comply with the applicable regulatory requirements to ensure integrity and accountability of the products. The PPB may revoke or suspend an import permit if the IP was manufactured in conditions not consistent with GMP; if the clinical trial was discontinued; or if the sponsor provided false information.

Please note: Kenya is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (KEN-3), which may have implications for studies of IPs developed using certain non-human genetic resources (e.g., plants, animals, and microbes). For more information, see KEN-15.

Manufacturing

According to the SA-GMPs and the GRMRSA, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) is responsible for authorizing the manufacture of investigational products (IPs) in South Africa. As delineated in the G-ManuImpExp, a manufacturer’s license for IPs is required for both total and partial manufacture, and for the various processes of dividing up, packaging, or presentation, in accordance with the MRSA. To obtain a license, the application form (ZAF-55) should be emailed to SAHPRA at gmplicensing@sahpra.org.za, accompanied by the following information:

• Proof of payment
• Existing SAHPRA license for renewal and amendment applications
• Cover letter
• Site Master File
• Signed declaration
• SAHPRA inspection resolution
• Intellectual property documentation
• Department of Health premises license
• Registration of responsible pharmacist
• South African Pharmacy Council (SAPC) Record of a Pharmacy
• SAPC Record of a Pharmacy Owner
• Municipal Approval/Zoning Certificate

Per ZAF-55, the license is valid for five (5) years and the application to renew the license must be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration of the current license.

In addition, per ZAF-23, a clinical trial application to SAHPRA must include a certificate of good manufacturing practice (GMP) for manufacture of the IP(s). The SA-GCPs also states that the sponsor must ensure that the IP (including active comparator and placebo, if applicable) is manufactured in accordance with applicable GMP standards.

Pursuant to the SA-GMPs, South Africa adopted the PIC-S-GMP-Guide for the manufacturing of therapeutic goods. The PIC-S-GMP-Guide includes requirements for a Certificate of Analysis to be issued by the manufacturer for all IPs to be used in a clinical trial. For GMP agreements with competent international regulatory authorities, the SA-GMPs states that these agreements do not permit automatic acceptance but may be used to enhance regulatory oversight and compliance. SAHPRA may request additional documentation and/or schedule an inspection to ensure GMP compliance. The following conditions demonstrate GMP compliance:

• The site has been approved by a recognized regulatory authority (RA) within the previous three (3) years
• The dosage form of the IP within the application is within the same dosage form grouping as the dosage form approved by the RA
• The product type applied for is the same as the product type approved by the recognized RA
• The activities applied for by the applicant are the same activities that have been approved by the recognized regulator

Import

The SA-GCPs states that IPs may be imported into South Africa only after approval of the protocol by SAHPRA. Samples of the IP to be imported before trial approval require a SAHPRA license under MRSA. The sponsor must ensure that the IP (including active comparator and placebo, if applicable) is manufactured in accordance with any applicable GMP standards. Per G-ManuImpExp to import an IP, the applicant must submit an application form (ZAF-55) to SAHPRA.

The CTA-Import indicates that there have been delays in the release of IPs at the SAHPRA border control because the import licenses (clinical trial approval letters) have not specified the quantities of study medication authorized for importation. To address this problem, a protocol amendment application (ZAF-20) is required to request the approval of the remaining study medication to be imported for these specific trials. Applicants will be allowed six (6) months from the date of the CTA-Import (i.e., from September 19, 2024) to obtain the necessary approvals.

Per the G-ImprtPorts, SAHPRA’s Regulatory Compliance Unit is responsible for ensuring that health products at ports of entry meet importation requirements under MRSA, including for IPs. Imported IPs must be accompanied by the certificate of registration that proves authorization under the MRSA.

Please note: South Africa is party to the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing (ZAF-8), which may have implications for studies of IPs developed using certain non-human genetic resources (e.g., plants, animals, and microbes). For more information, see ZAF-34.

Investigator’s Brochure

In accordance with the CTRules and the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor must provide an up-to-date investigator’s brochure (IB). An updated IB and Drug Safety Update Report (DSUR) must be submitted whenever available but at least once year as a notification to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) or when there are substantial changes to the previous version.

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). As specified in the G-KenyaCT and KEN-14, the IB must provide coverage of the following areas:

• Physical, chemical, and pharmaceutical properties
• The pharmacological aspects including its metabolites in all animal species tested
• The pharmacokinetics and metabolism including its biological transformation in all animal species tested
• Toxicological effects in any animal species tested under a single dose study, a repeated dose study, or a special study
• Results of clinical pharmacokinetic studies
• Information regarding safety, pharmacodynamics, efficacy, and dose responses that were obtained from previous clinical trials in humans

The G-KenyaCT indicates that the sponsor must also follow the guidance contained in KEN-14.

Quality Management

In accordance with the G-KenyaCT, a good manufacturing practice (GMP) certificate must be provided by a competent authority from the country of manufacture to the PPB in the clinical trial application. At a minimum, the GMP certificate should include the competent authority’s name and contact details, address of the manufacturing site, date of inspection, and validity period. Certificates of Analysis (CoAs) must also be provided to the PPB for all investigational products (IPs) and comparator products. Per KEN-14, the sponsor must maintain a CoA to document the identity, purity, and strength of the IP(s) to be used in the clinical trial.

See the G-KenyaCT for detailed chemistry and manufacturing information to be provided to the PPB if the IP has not been registered with the PPB. In addition, see Cert-Emrgcy for information about good clinical practice (GCP) and GMP certifications during emergencies.

(See Product Management section for additional information on sponsor requirements).

Investigator’s Brochure

In accordance with the SA-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for ensuring an up-to-date Investigator’s Brochure (IB) is available to the investigator; investigators must provide it to the responsible ethics committee (EC). In the case of an investigator-sponsored trial, the sponsor-investigator must determine whether an IB is available from the commercial manufacturer.

The SA-GCPs states that the IB should contain the following sections, each with literature references where appropriate:

• Table of Contents
• Summary: A brief summary (preferably not exceeding two (2) pages) to highlight the significant physical, chemical, pharmaceutical, pharmacological, toxicological, pharmacokinetic, metabolic, and clinical information available that is relevant to the stage of clinical development of the investigational product (IP)
• A brief introductory statement with the chemical name (and generic and trade name for an approved product) of the IP, all active ingredients in the IP, its pharmacological class and expected position within this class (e.g., advantages), the rationale for conducting research with the IP, and the anticipated prophylactic, therapeutic, and/or diagnostic indications. Also include a description of the general approach to be followed in evaluating the IP.
• Physical, chemical, and pharmaceutical properties and formulation parameters
• Pre-clinical studies (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, toxicology, and metabolism profiles)
• Effects of IP in humans (pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, and pharmacodynamics; safety and efficacy; regulatory and postmarketing experiences)
• Summary of data and guidance for the investigator(s)

Quality Management

As defined in the SA-GCPs, the sponsor must ensure that IPs are manufactured in accordance with good manufacturing practice (GMPs), including the requirements in Annex 13 of the PIC-S-GMP-Guide (which South Africa adopted pursuant to the SA-GMPs). (See Product Management section for additional information on IP supply, storage, and handling requirements). As indicated in ZAF-23, the following information must be furnished in the clinical trial application:

• Whether the IP contains an active substance of chemical origin or of biological/biotechnological origin
• IP name(s) and details (e.g., formulation(s) and strength(s))
• Properties of the IP (e.g., mechanism of action)
• Summary of pre-clinical findings (e.g., laboratory, animal, toxicity, or mutagenicity)
• Summary of clinical findings
• Comparator product(s) name(s) and details
• Concomitant name(s) and details including rescue medications
• Registration status of IP, concomitant, and/or comparator medicine(s); include the IB, South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA)-approved principal investigator (PI), and other international professional information (package inserts) if not approved in South Africa, and a Certificate of Analysis (CoA)
• Whether the IP is modified in relation to its original registration for the purpose of the clinical trial
• Estimated quantity of trial material (each drug detailed separately) for which exemption will be required, including for concomitant medicines to be imported
• Explanation for use of imported drugs when the same product is available in South Africa
• Details of receiving the drugs from supplier including storage, dispensing, and packaging of drugs
• Details of intention to register the IP or explain if registration is not envisioned
• Details of the manufacture, quality control, and stability of the IP (including IP destruction process) and include GMP certificate
• Previous studies using this medicine that have been approved by the SAHPRA, including the SAHPRA approval number, study title, protocol number, date of approval, national PI/PI, date(s) of progress report(s), and date of final report

See ZAF-23 for detailed instructions on IP submission requirements.

Per the PIC-S-GMP-Guide (which South Africa adopted pursuant to the SA-GMPs), the release of IPs should not occur until after the authorized person has certified that the relevant requirements have been met. CoAs should be issued for each batch of intermediate or active pharmaceutical ingredient, on request. CoAs should be dated and signed by authorized personnel of the quality unit(s) and should show the name, address, and telephone number of the original manufacturer. See the PIC-S-GMP-Guide for certification requirements.

Per the G-KenyaCT, investigational products (IPs) used in Kenyan clinical trials must be properly labelled. A final copy/version of the labelling must be submitted to the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) for approval and should contain the following minimum information:

• Statement indicating that the product is for “clinical trial purpose only”
• Recommended storage conditions
• Protocol code or identification
• Name, address, and telephone number of the sponsor, contract research organization, or investigator (the main contact for information on the product, clinical trial, and emergency unblinding)
• Pharmaceutical dosage form, route of administration, quantity of dosage units, and in the case of open trials, the name/identifier and strength/potency
• The batch and/or code number to identify the contents and packaging operation
• A trial reference code allowing identification of the trial, site, investigator, and sponsor, if not given elsewhere
• The trial participant identification number/treatment number and, where relevant, the visit number
• The name of the investigator (if not included above)
• Directions for use (reference may be made to a leaflet or other explanatory document intended for the trial participant or person administering the product)
• Period of use (use-by date, expiry date, or re-test date as applicable), in month/year format and in a manner that avoids any ambiguity
• The complete physical address of the manufacturing site

As indicated in the G-KenyaCT, it is recommended that an IP is not re-labeled wherever possible. It is, however, accepted that in certain cases it is necessary to re-label and the PPB will review applications for the extension of expiration dates based on sufficient evidence being provided by the applicant that an extended expiration date is warranted. A written justification and evidence should be provided to the PPB. Any re-labelling of remaining IPs from previously manufactured batches must be performed in accordance with good manufacturing practice (GMP) principles and is limited to an extension of the expiration date where sufficient evidence is available to support such extension. Any request for re-labelling should be accompanied by a certificate of analysis of the product from a PPB-recognized laboratory or World Health Organization (WHO) prequalified laboratories (KEN-18). After approval, the re-labelling must be carried out under the supervision of a pharmaceutical inspector on the ground. In case of use-date extension, an additional label should be affixed to the IP to indicate the new use date and repeat the batch number. It may be superposed on the old use date, but not on the original batch number. PPB will not approve re-labelling of a product if the proposed additional label obscures the original labelling. At all times, the original label should be visible. This operation may be performed onsite by the clinical trial monitor(s) or the clinical trial site pharmacist, in accordance with specific and standard operating procedures. The operation should be checked by a second person. Documented evidence of this additional labelling should be available in the trial documentation and in the batch records. KEN-34 indicates that all documents submitted to the PPB in a clinical trial application should be in English, including a pictorial sample of the IP with the labeling text.

The International Council for Harmonisation’s Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14), which the G-KenyaCT requires following, states that the IP must be coded and labeled in a manner that protects the blinding, if applicable. The IPs must also be suitably packaged in a manner that will prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage.

Investigational product (IP) labeling in South Africa must comply with the requirements set forth in the SA-GCPs, the GRMRSA, MRSA, and the PIC-S-GMP-Guide (which South Africa adopted pursuant to the SA-GMPs). The GRMRSA states that for an IP to be used in a clinical trial, it must be properly labeled in English and at least one (1) other official language, and should appear in clearly legible and indelible letters. As set forth in the PIC-S-GMP-Guide, the following labeling information must be included on both the outer packaging and the immediate container:

• The name, address, and telephone number of the sponsor, contract research organization (CRO), or investigator
• The pharmaceutical dosage form, route of administration, quantity of dosage units, and in the case of open trials, the name/identifier and strength/potency
• The batch and/or code number to identify the contents and packaging operation
• A trial reference code allowing identification of the trial, site, investigator, and sponsor (if not given elsewhere)
• The trial participant identification number/treatment number and where relevant, the visit number
• The investigator name (if not already included above)
• Directions for use (reference may be made to a leaflet or other explanatory document intended for the trial participant or person administering the product)
• “For clinical trial use only” or similar wording
• The storage conditions
• The period of use (use-by date, expiration date, or re-test date as applicable), in month/year format and in a manner that avoids any ambiguity
• “Keep out of reach of children” except when the product is for use in trials where the product is not taken home by the participant

In addition, precautions against mislabeling should be intensified by trained staff (e.g., label reconciliation, line clearance, and in-process control checks by appropriately trained staff).

The SA-GCPs specify that in blinded trials, the IP should be coded and labeled in a manner that protects the blinding. The IP(s) coding system should include a mechanism that permits rapid IP(s) identification in case of a medical emergency but does not permit undetectable breaks of the blinding.

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

Per the PPA, the Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) is responsible for the regulation of investigational products (IPs), including all matters relating to the safety, packaging, and distribution of medicines. The PPB must ensure that all medicinal products manufactured in, imported into, or exported from the country conform to prescribed standards of quality, safety, and efficacy. Further, the PPB must ensure that the personnel, premises, and practices employed in the manufacture and storage of IPs complies with prescribed requirements.

Per the G-KenyaCT, research must be conducted in accordance with requirements set forth in the International Council for Harmonisation's Guideline for Good Clinical Practice E6(R2) (KEN-14). As defined in the G-KenyaCT and KEN-14, the sponsor must ensure the following (Note: Each of the items listed below will not necessarily be found in both sources, which provide overlapping and unique elements):

• Timely delivery of IPs to the investigator(s)
• Records that document shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction of the IPs are maintained
• A system for retrieving IPs and documenting that this retrieval is maintained
• A system for the disposition of unused IPs is maintained
• Steps taken to ensure that the IPs are stable over the period of use
• Sufficient quantities of the IPs used in the trials are maintained

To the extent stability permits, samples should be retained either until the analyses of the trial data are complete or as required by the applicable regulatory requirement(s), whichever represents the longer retention period.

As defined in the G-KenyaCT and KEN-14, the sponsor must also supply the investigator(s)/institution(s) with the IPs, including the comparator(s) and placebo, if applicable. The sponsor or the representative should not supply either party with the IP(s) until approval from the PPB and a favorable opinion letter from the local and national ethics committees (ECs) are obtained. In addition, the G-KenyaCT requires the following supply, storage, and handling processes:

• Analysis or evaluation of samples is performed in accordance with the protocol and, where applicable, the contract/agreement, the work instruction, and associated methods
• Adherence to the laboratories, policies, and standard operating procedures (SOPs)
• Prior to the initiation of sample analysis or evaluation, it is often necessary to prepare a work instruction detailing the procedures, which will be used to conduct the analysis or evaluation
• Have automated equipment for routine hematology, biochemistry, and serology tests
• Have procedures for analyzer calibration and quality control
• Regularly maintain all the equipment, including point-of-care equipment
• Have a procedure for transporting samples safely and quickly from clinical areas to the laboratory
• Have written procedures for all assays, and validate the assays
• Have a stock control procedure to make sure that reagents and consumables are used within their expiry dates
• Keep records, including source documents and final reports
• Have a laboratory information management system, and validate and backup the system
• Provide protective clothing and safety equipment for staff
• Have a central alarm system for all fridges and freezers
• Have an internal audit program

The G-KenyaCT also states that the sponsor must submit to the PPB a copy of the endorsed Clinical Trial Import License and/or evidence of delivery to the approved investigator(s)/institution(s) upon importing and supplying each product consignment. In addition, the IP must only be supplied to the investigator(s)/institution(s) named in the application for the Clinical Trial Import License/Clinical Trial Exemption for the purpose and use specified. The sponsor must inform the PPB in the event of any information changes including:

• Information the sponsor receives that casts doubt on the continued validity of the submitted data
• Information associated with the Clinical Trial Import License

See the G-KenyaCT for additional information on principal investigator requirements relating to the Clinical Trial Import License.

Record Requirements

As per the G-KenyaCT, the sponsor is required to maintain records that document IP(s) shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction. The sponsor must also maintain a system for retrieving IPs and documenting this retrieval, and maintain a system for the disposition of unused IPs.

According to the G-KenyaCT, IP manufacturers or importers must also retain samples for each batch of bulk product, and the packaging components used for each finished batch, for at least two (2) years following the trial. The sponsor should maintain sufficient samples from each batch and keep a record of their analyses and characteristics for reference so that, if necessary, an independent laboratory could reconfirm the same data.

Supply, Storage, and Handling Requirements

As defined in the SA-GCPs, the sponsor is responsible for supplying a sufficient quantity of the investigational product (IP) after the sponsor obtains study approvals from the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) and the ethics committee (EC). The sponsor must ensure that written procedures include instructions and relevant documents for the investigator to follow for handling and storage of the IP for the trial. The procedures must address adequate and safe receipt, handling, storage, dispensing, retrieval of unused product from participants, and return of unused IP to the sponsor (or alternative disposition if authorized by the sponsor and in compliance with the SAHPRA-approved protocol). In addition, the sponsor must:

• Ensure timely delivery of the IP to the investigator
• Maintain records that document shipment, receipt, disposition, return, and destruction of the IP
• Maintain a system for retrieving the IP and then documenting such retrieval (e.g., for deficient product recall, reclaim after trial completion, and expired product reclaim)
• Maintain a system for disposal of unused IP and for its documentation
• Take steps to ensure that the IP is stable over the period of use
• Maintain sufficient quantities of the IP used in the trials to reconfirm specifications, if necessary, and maintain records of batch sample analyses and characteristics; to the extent that IP stability permits, samples should be retained until analyses of trial data are complete or as required by the applicable regulatory requirement(s), whichever is longer
• Provide and maintain a system for retrieving and disposing of trial-related waste (e.g., syringes and needles)

Per the SA-GCPs, the sponsor should determine acceptable temperatures, conditions, times for IP storage, reconstitution fluids/procedures, and devices for product infusion, if any, that comply with the SA-GPPs. The sponsor must inform all parties involved (e.g., monitors, investigators, pharmacists, storage managers) of these determinations.

The SA-GCPs specify that if significant formulation changes are made in the IP(s) or comparator product(s) during the course of clinical development, the results of any studies of the newly formulated product(s) should be made available prior to its use in the clinical trial. Refer to the SA-GCPs for detailed sponsor-related IP requirements.

Regarding packaging, the PIC-S-GMP-Guide indicates that IPs are normally packed individually for each participant in the clinical trial. The number of units to be packaged should be specified prior to the start of the packaging operations, including units necessary for carrying out quality control and any retention samples to be kept. Sufficient reconciliations should take place to ensure the correct quantity of each product required has been accounted for at each stage of processing. During packaging, the risk of product mix up must be minimized by using appropriate procedures and/or, specialized equipment as appropriate and relevant staff training. The packaging must ensure that the IP remains in good condition during transport and storage at intermediate destinations. Any opening or tampering of the outer packaging during transport should be readily discernible. Similarly, the SA-GCPs state that the IPs must be suitably packaged in a manner that will prevent contamination and unacceptable deterioration during transport and storage.

Record Requirements

Per the SA-GCPs, the sponsor, or other data owners, must retain all essential documents pertaining to the trial for not less than 10 years or until at least two (2) years have elapsed since the formal discontinuation of clinical development of the IP. In addition, the sponsor should obtain the investigator’s agreement to retain trial-related essential documents until the sponsor informs the investigator/institution that these documents are no longer needed.

Specimens are not defined in the Kenyan regulations. However, per KEN-26, the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI) identifies biological samples and specimens as including, but not limited to, blood samples, saliva, breast milk samples, mosquito parts samples, biological cultures, tissue and tissue samples, hair samples, human stool, and environmental samples used in human health research.

In South Africa, the NHARegMicroLabs refers to a specimen as a “diagnostic specimen,” and defines it as any human or animal material, including excreta, secreta, blood and its components, tissue or tissue fluids, that is to be used for the purpose of diagnosis, but does not include live infected animals. The NHABiol and the G-EthicsHR-ZAF define “human biological materials (HBM)” as material from a human being, including DNA, RNA, blastomeres, polar bodies, cultured cells, embryos, gametes, progenitor stem cells, small tissue biopsies, and growth factors from the same. The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that blood and blood products are also included pursuant to NHASpecAmend. The NHABloodCells generally refers to substances of human origin as biological substances.

Please refer to the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, the NHABiol, the NHA, the NHABloodCells, the NHATissue, and the NHAStemCell for more specific definitions of selected terms including blood, cultured cells, embryonic tissue, human tissue, plasma, stem cell, and genetic material.

Import/Export

Per the G-ECBiomedRes, biological material must not be imported nor exported without proper justification and authorization, which includes a signed material transfer agreement (MTA) approved by the relevant institutions and deposited with the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI). For exports, a Kenyan investigator must be included in the team that is conducting the research in the recipient country. All biological samples and data collected during research belong to the local participating institutions and country.

In addition, KEN-37 has indicated that Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB) will approve of an export for overseas research if the following requirements are met:

• PPB initial approval letter or annual approval letter
• Ethics committee (EC) approval letter
• MTA
• Study protocol with a summary justification for the participants' sample exportation
• Informed consent form that highlights the areas where study participants are informed about the exportation of their samples

The G-KenyaCT states that in the case of transfer of materials during research involving children, the sponsor or the representative or the principal investigator should provide to the EC an MTA including, but not limited to, the following information:

• Identification of the provider and recipient
• Definition of the trial and how the material will and will not be used
• Maintenance of confidentiality of background of supporting data or information, if any
• Indemnification and insurance

In addition, KEN-26 provides an example of the Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)'s procedures for handling requests to ship biological samples or specimens. KEN-17 also provides an example of an MTA form from the Kenyatta National Hospital-University of Nairobi (KNH-UoN) Ethics and Research Committee.

Import/Export

Per the NHA, the MTA-Human, the NHABloodCells, the NHARegMicroLabs, the NHATissue, and the NHAStemCell, a permit must be obtained from the National Department of Health (NDOH) Director General to import or export human biological material (HBM). Both the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) approval letter and the NDOH import/export permit must be included with each HBM shipment. See also the Submission Content section for information on completing a clinical trial application. (Note that HBM is referred to as a “biological substance” in the older South African regulations (e.g., the NHABloodCells); this summary will hereinafter use HBM to refer to human biological material, specimens, and biological substances.)

As set forth in the NHA, the NHABloodCells, the NHARegMicroLabs, the NHATissue, and the NHAStemCell, the NDOH Director-General, as delegated by the NDOH Minister, is responsible for establishing regulations related to the import and export of HBM. In addition, only the Minister can authorize an institution or hospital to import or export HBM for research purposes.

In accordance with the NHA, the NHABloodCells, the NHARegMicroLabs, the NHATissue, and the NHAStemCell, the NDOH Director-General reviews and approves all import or export requests by an institution or hospital. These requests must be submitted in writing using the application forms that may be obtained by contacting the NDOH Permit Programme at importexportpermit@health.gov.za. The forms also appear as Annexures 1-6 in the NHABloodCells and Form 1 in the NHARegMicroLabs.

Upon review of the application, the Director-General will issue a permit or certificate authorizing the import or export request if the Director-General is satisfied that the submission meets the NHA, the NHABloodCells, the NHARegMicroLabs, the NHATissue, and the NHAStemCell requirements, as applicable. The permit will contain an expiration date for the approved HBM.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, sharing HBM and data about HBM must comply with the POPIA and may not occur unless:

• The recipient is in a country that has similar legal protections for processing of personal information
• For situations where the recipient is in a country that does not have an adequate level of protection, prior authorization has been obtained or there is a code of conduct in place
• The data subject has consented specifically to the intended transborder data sharing
• The transfer is necessary in terms of a contract or for the benefit of the data subject

In addition, per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, ethics committees (ECs) should consider the following during the review process for proposed HBM and HBM data sharing:

• The recipient of such data should have the necessary research approvals to use the data for research purposes
• The recipient should comply with the POPIA requirements, have clear processes to deal with possible data breaches, and must inform the provider and EC should a breach occur
• The recipient must specify the timeframe for storage of the data and its destruction, where relevant
• Any proposed re-use of the data not specified in the protocols should be subject to EC review and approval, as well as approval from the provider
• Intellectual property rights must be specified
• If the HBM and data are shared only for research purposes, such HBM and data cannot be used for commercialization
• The researchers involved in HBM and data sharing must ensure that proper updated records are kept
• Where data alone is shared, a Data Transfer Agreement (DTA) or Data Sharing Agreement (DSA) is necessary

General Import/Export Requirements for HBM

The NHABloodCells states that each HBM to be imported into South Africa must be accompanied by a certificate from the supplier stating that the substance has been exported in terms of the originating country’s applicable laws and regulations.

As per the NHABloodCells and ZAF-7, export permits for HBM may only be issued by the Director-General to a Southern African Development Community (SADC) member state or to a South African citizen, provided that the country’s market requirements have been met. An applicant must also be registered with the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) and operating in South Africa in order to apply for a permit to import or export HBM. The applicant must also provide the Director-General with written information on stock levels for this substance along with the export application.

Applicants to whom a permit has been issued must keep a record of the import or export and submit this information using the register forms listed in Annexures 4, 5, and 6 of the NHABloodCells. The forms must be submitted to the Director-General annually before the end of February, for the preceding calendar year.

Import/Export Requirements for Specific HBM Categories

The NHABloodCells provides details on unique application requirements for specific types of HBM as outlined below:

• Import of tissues being used for therapeutic purposes: application must be accompanied by donor health status
• Export of tissues or gametes: application must include written proof that the donated HBM complies with the NHA requirements
• Import or export of placenta tissue, embryonic or fetal tissue, embryonic, fetal or umbilical stem cells: applications will only be approved with the Minister’s written consent
• Import or export of blood or blood products: applications must be accompanied by a national blood transfusion service certificate and test results. If no documentation is included, the applicant must submit a letter to the Director-General explaining the reason. The Director-General will decide whether tests must be conducted, and the Minister is authorized to determine whether the applicant’s institution can be exempted from these requirements.

Material Transfer Agreement

Per the MTA-Human, all the providers and recipients of HBM for use in research or clinical trials under the auspices of ECs must use the “Material Transfer Agreement of Human Biological Materials” in MTA-Human. The agreement must be signed by the research institution’s authorized representative and the EC. The EC’s obligations are to:

• Review and approve research proposals and protocols that require the transfer of human biological materials
• Review and approve the material transfer agreement (MTA) and ensure it adequately safeguards human biological material and ethical requirements
• Review and approve all secondary use research if the material is to be transferred

The EC must be the last party to sign the agreement after all the provisions of MTA-Human have been satisfied.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF indicates that the MTA covers the transport of HBM between institutions/organizations within the country and cross-border transfers to provide access by the recipient to that material. The MTA should provide guidance on key issues, such as:

• Purpose of the transfer of the HBM
• Obligations of the parties
• Terms and conditions under which HBM may be used
• Whether modifications to the HBM are permissible
• Whether third-party transfers may happen
• What the benefit-sharing arrangements are
• The relevant intellectual property rights
• The indemnity arrangements

Research institutions may tailor the content to suit their individual contexts. Although some MTAs may include clauses governing sharing of data, it is advisable, as part of data management, to enter into separate data sharing agreements to regulate sharing of one (1) or more data sets from the custodian/provider to a third party.

Detailed information is currently unavailable regarding Kenya’s Pharmacy and Poisons Board (PPB)’s requirements for obtaining informed consent from participants prior to collecting, storing, or using their biological sample(s). However, the G-KenyaCT states that for research involving children, the sponsor or the representative or the principal investigator should provide examples of patient information leaflets and informed consent forms (ICF) to the ethics committee (EC) for any proposed archiving of biological specimens for later research, or for genetics research.

The G-ECBiomedRes requires that participants are made aware of the use of personal data through informed consent, including secondary data and biological material in biobanks. The secondary use of data requires approval by an accredited EC. The investigator must obtain consent from the participants for the new study. For situations where this is not practicable, the relevant accredited EC can approve a waiver of individual consent following confirmation that the participants had previously consented to storage of the biological samples/data, and that this data is delinked from personal identifiers. In cases where the sample is stored in a foreign institution, the collaborating EC should also conduct its own deliberation. Researchers sending samples abroad must ensure that consent for transfer of materials was obtained during collection of the samples and that the collaborating EC gave approval.

See KEN-4 for Kenya Medical Research Institute (KEMRI)'s sample ICF that includes guidance on specimens. As another example, see KEN-17 for the Kenyatta National Hospital-University of Nairobi (KNH-UoN) Ethics and Research Committee’s form and guidance on genetic research and biobanking.

See the Required Elements and Participant Rights sections for additional information on informed consent.

In accordance with the NHA, the NHASpecAmend, the NHABiol, and the MTA-Human, prior to removing or withdrawing any human biological material (HBM) from the body of a living person for research purposes, consent must be obtained from that person in writing, before a competent witness. If the person is a minor, the parent/guardian of that person must provide consent. Furthermore, when withdrawing blood, the NHASpecAmend requires written consent from persons older than 16 years. Per the MTA-Human, the sponsor must obtain the completed informed consent form (ICF) from the donors of HBM and data, and submit it with the project protocol to the ethics committee (EC) for approval. Further, the sponsor must submit the ICF for secondary uses of the material to the EC should the need arise. Secondary use is defined as the use of the materials for health research purposes other than the uses determined in the approved protocol.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, collection of HBM specifically for research use requires prospective informed consent, usually from the participant. In exceptional circumstances, where a participant is not able to provide informed consent, proxy consent may be permissible. Different consent models may be used depending on the circumstances. Specific (narrow) consent is the most restrictive and permits use of the HBM for the current research study only and excludes consent to storage of leftover HBM for later use and sharing of data or HBM with other researchers, which means that the HBM (including leftover and waste) must be disposed of at the end of the current study. If further use for additional research is wanted, fresh consent must be obtained before disposal occurs.

G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that tiered (differentiated) consent lets the participant provide consent for the current study and to include consent to a small range of additional options if wanted (e.g., to permit storage of their HBM and associated data for specified future research use, or to permit data sharing, or both, etc.). Broad consent is more flexible than tiered consent but still maintains limitations. It lets the participant provide consent for the current study, and to include consent for storage, and for future research use that is within the scope of the current research. This is permitted even if the precise topic of future research is unclear at present. The nature of possible further usage should be described as fully as possible even if the precise topics are unknown; and the consent document must stipulate that further prior ethics review of any new study is necessary, and that permission may be requested to re-contact the person for fresh consent if the future use is outside the scope of the current consent. Certain persons are specially protected: HBM may not be taken from mentally ill or incapacitated persons; HBM that are not naturally replaceable may not be taken from a minor; no gametes may be taken from a minor; and no fetal HBM, except for umbilical cord progenitor cells, may be collected. These restrictions are absolute, which means that research with the categories of person mentioned requires Ministerial permission. Researchers must provide ECs with appropriate evidence that the necessary permission has been obtained.

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that the research participant has a right to withdraw consent; however, this right is limited with anonymized HBM and data.

The NHABiol specifically states that when taking HBM samples from a child, where the person is younger than 18 years, Part 3, Section 129 of the ChildrensAct must be followed.

Additionally, the NHABiol requires the following consent for the removal or withdrawal of HBM samples to treat a person with mental illness:

• The mentally ill person’s consent, if capable;
• A court appointed curator, spouse, next of kin, parent or guardian, major child, brother, or sister, partner or associate, if the mentally ill person is incapable of giving consent; and
• The head of the health institution in the case of an emergency

Similarly, the NHA and the NHABiol include consent provisions for the donation of human bodies and the tissue of deceased persons. These documents state that any person who is competent to make a will may donate their body or any specified tissue to be used after death for medical and dental purposes, as long as the person signs the will in the presence of at least two (2) competent witnesses. The person may also give consent to a post-mortem examination of their body for research purposes, and may select an institution or person as the recipient. In the absence of a donation as described above, the individual’s spouse, child over 18 years, parent, guardian, or brother/sister over 18 years may donate the person’s body or any specific tissue to an institution or person for research purposes. Please refer to the NHA and the NHABiol for detailed requirements. (See the Required Elements and Participant Rights sections for additional information on informed consent).

The SA-GCPs observe that many HBM samples are collected during clinical interventions for diagnostic purposes, which means the potential for future use of these samples may be presented. Use of human biological materials and their associated data facilitates research in new technologies, which include genetic and genomic research, and cell and gene therapy (CGT). Sponsors and researchers should, therefore, follow the fundamental ethical principles that underpin all research involving human biological materials and their associated data. Research proposals must address specifically the social value of the research especially in the local context; how consent, privacy, confidentiality will be managed; and the potential effect on families, communities, and other groups. Specific concerns include protection of privacy and whether and how incidental findings are to be communicated to the person from whom the sample originates.

In addition, per the NHATissue, tissue banks are required to develop donor record management systems in which the tissue donor register contains the full identity and relationship of the consenting person. The system will also document tissue banking processes, including the process of obtaining informed written consent.

See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for additional details on HBM consent, including for databases, storage, and access.

Human Stem Cell Consent Requirements

The NHAStemCell similarly states that authorized stem cell banks must retain a record of the donor’s written informed consent. Further, no person shall use stem cells or its therapeutic research products for educational purposes unless authorized by the National Department of Health (NDOH) and is compliant with the following requirements:

• Has obtained the donor’s informed written consent even in the case of residual tissue, blood, or blood products
• Is certain the donor has donated voluntarily, and it is properly documented

The NHA also indicates that the NDOH Minister may permit research on stem cells and zygotes that are not more than 14 days old on a written application, and if the applicant documents the research for record purposes, and prior consent is obtained from the donor.

Human Genetic and Genome Research Consent Requirements

The G-EthicsHR-ZAF states that the investigator or institution must obtain consent for human genetic research. Researchers must provide detailed information in the protocol for the EC’s ethics review. When assessing the ethical implications of proposed genetic research, ECs must pay attention to multiple considerations, including the anticipated social value of the research, consent, privacy, confidentiality, as well as the potential effect of the research findings on families, communities, and other social groupings. Because of the types of information that genetic research may reveal, including the range of consequences of this information for participants and their relatives, ECs should consider developing a plan to manage this kind of information. Often, follow-up clinical testing or counselling may be recommended. The proposed plan to manage the information gathered from genetic research should indicate the clinical relevance of the study findings, the implications of the study findings for both participants and those involved in the study, as well as whether and how these findings will be disseminated. This plan must be explained to potential participants.

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, regarding genetic and genome research, specific elements should be incorporated into the separate consent process in addition to the usual information for appropriate informed consent for research participation. Common features of genetic and genomic research that must be explained include what genetic or genomic research means, that indefinite storage and future use and sharing of HBM and derived data is requested, that there are ongoing privacy vulnerabilities for participants as well as for third parties, and that there may be social harms. See the G-EthicsHR-ZAF for detailed requirements.

Waiver of Consent

Per the G-EthicsHR-ZAF, a waiver of consent might be granted for research using archived HBM in circumstances where the HBM is anonymous and the HBM data will also be anonymous and aggregated. However, waivers relating to genetic and genomic research should be approached cautiously, since re-identification of the original source of the HBM may be technically possible despite anonymity of HBM.